[107th Congress Public Law 82]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]
<DOC>
[DOCID: f:publ082.107]
[[Page 813]]
DRUG-FREE COMMUNITIES SUPPORT PROGRAM REAUTHORIZATION
[[Page 115 STAT. 814]]
Public Law 107-82
107th Congress
An Act
To extend the 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. <<NOTE: Dec. 14,
2001 - [H.R. 2291]>>
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. FIVE-YEAR EXTENSION OF DRUG-FREE COMMUNITIES SUPPORT PROGRAM.
(a) Findings.--Congress <<NOTE: 21 USC 1521 note.>> makes the
following findings:
(1) In the next 15 years, the youth population in the United
States will grow by 21 percent, adding 6,500,000 youth to the
population of the United States. Even if drug use rates remain
constant, there will be a huge surge in drug-related problems,
such as academic failure, drug-related violence, and HIV
incidence, simply due to this population increase.
(2) According to the 1994-1996 National Household Survey, 60
percent of students age 12 to 17 who frequently cut classes and
who reported delinquent behavior in the past 6 months used
marijuana 52 days or more in the previous year.
(3) The 2000 Washington Kids Count survey conducted by the
University of Washington reported that students whose peers have
little or no involvement with drinking and drugs have higher
math and reading scores than students whose peers had low level
drinking or drug use.
(4) Substance abuse prevention works. In 1999, only 10
percent of teens saw marijuana users as popular, compared to 17
percent in 1998 and 19 percent in 1997. The rate of past-month
use of any drug among 12- to 17-year-olds declined 26 percent
between 1997 and 1999. Marijuana use for sixth through eighth
graders is at the lowest point in 5 years, as is use of cocaine,
inhalants, and hallucinogens.
(5) Community Anti-Drug Coalitions throughout the United
States are successfully developing and implementing
comprehensive, long-term strategies to reduce substance abuse
among youth on a sustained basis. For example:
(A) The Boston Coalition brought college and
university presidents together to create the Cooperative
Agreement on Underage Drinking. This agreement
represents the first coordinated effort of Boston's many
institutions of higher education to address issues such
as binge drinking, underage drinking, and changing the
norms surrounding alcohol abuse that exist on college
and university campuses.
(B) In 2000, the Coalition for a Drug-Free Greater
Cincinnati surveyed more than 47,000 local students in
[[Page 115 STAT. 815]]
grades 7 through 12. The results provided evidence that
the Coalition's initiatives are working. For the first
time in a decade, teen drug use in Greater Cincinnati
appears to be leveling off. The data collected from the
survey has served as a tool to strengthen relationships
between schools and communities, as well as facilitate
the growth of anti-drug coalitions in communities where
such coalitions had not existed.
(C) The Miami Coalition used a three-part strategy
to decrease the percentage of high school seniors who
reported using marijuana at least once during the most
recent 30-day period. The development of a media
strategy, the creation of a network of prevention
agencies, and discussions with high school students
about the dangers of marijuana all contributed to a
decrease in the percentage of seniors who reported using
marijuana from over 22 percent in 1995 to 9 percent in
1997. The Miami Coalition was able to achieve these
results while national rates of marijuana use were
increasing.
(D) The Nashville Prevention Partnership worked with
elementary and middle school children in an attempt to
influence them toward positive life goals and discourage
them from using substances. The Partnership targeted an
area in East Nashville and created after school
programs, mentoring opportunities, attendance
initiatives, and safe passages to and from school.
Attendance and test scores increased as a result of the
program.
(E) At a youth-led town meeting sponsored by the
Bering Strait Community Partnership in Nome, Alaska,
youth identified a need for a safe, substance-free
space. With help from a variety of community partners,
the Partnership staff and youth members created the Java
Hut, a substance-free coffeehouse designed for youth.
The Java Hut is helping to change norms in the community
by providing a fun, youth-friendly atmosphere and
activities that are not centered around alcohol or
marijuana.
(F) Portland's Regional Drug Initiative (RDI) has
promoted the establishment of drug-free workplaces among
the city's large and small employers. Over 3,000
employers have attended an RDI training session, and of
those, 92 percent have instituted drug-free workplace
policies. As a result, there has been a 5.5 percent
decrease in positive workplace drug tests.
(G) San Antonio Fighting Back worked to increase the
age at which youth first used illegal substances.
Research suggests that the later the age of first use,
the lower the risk that a young person will become a
regular substance abuser. As a result, the age of first
illegal drug use increased from 9.4 years in 1992 to
13.5 years in 1997.
(H) In 1990, multiple data sources confirmed a trend
of increased alcohol use by teenagers in the Troy
community. Using its ``multiple strategies over multiple
sectors'' approach, the Troy Coalition worked with
parents, physicians, students, coaches, and others to
address this problem from several angles. As a result,
the rate of twelfth grade students who had consumed
alcohol in the past month
[[Page 115 STAT. 816]]
decreased from 62.1 percent to 53.3 percent between 1991
and 1998, and the rate of eighth grade students
decreased from 26.3 percent to 17.4 percent. The Troy
Coalition believes that this decline represents not only
a change in behavior on the part of students, but also a
change in the norms of the community.
(6) Despite these successes, drug use continues to be a
serious problem facing communities across the United States. For
example:
(A) According to the Pulse Check: Trends in Drug
Abuse Mid-Year 2000 report--
(i) crack and powder cocaine remains the most
serious drug problem;
(ii) marijuana remains the most widely
available illicit drug, and its potency is on the
rise;
(iii) treatment sources report an increase in
admissions with marijuana as the primary drug of
abuse--and adolescents outnumber other age groups
entering treatment for marijuana;
(iv) 80 percent of Pulse Check sources
reported increased availability of club drugs,
with ecstasy (MDMA) and ketamine the most widely
cited club drugs and seven sources reporting that
powder cocaine is being used as a club drug by
young adults;
(v) ecstasy abuse and trafficking is
expanding, no longer confined to the ``rave''
scene;
(vi) the sale and use of club drugs has grown
from nightclubs and raves to high schools, the
streets, neighborhoods, open venues, and younger
ages;
(vii) ecstasy users often are unknowingly
purchasing adulterated tablets or some other
substance sold as MDMA; and
(viii) along with reports of increased heroin
snorting as a route of administration for
initiates, there is also an increase in injecting
initiates and the negative health consequences
associated with injection (for example, increases
in HIV/AIDS and Hepatitis C) suggesting that there
is a generational forgetting of the dangers of
injection of the drug.
(B) The 2000 Parent's Resource Institute for Drug
Education study reported that 23.6 percent of children
in the sixth through twelfth grades used illicit drugs
in the past year. The same study found that monthly
usage among this group was 15.3 percent.
(C) According to the 2000 Monitoring the Future
study, the use of ecstasy among eighth graders increased
from 1.7 percent in 1999 to 3.1 percent in 2000, among
tenth graders from 4.4 percent to 5.4 percent, and from
5.6 percent to 8.2 percent among twelfth graders.
(D) A 1999 Mellman Group study found that--
(i) 56 percent of the population in the United
States believed that drug use was increasing in
1999;
(ii) 92 percent of the population viewed
illegal drug use as a serious problem in the
United States; and
(iii) 73 percent of the population viewed
illegal drug use as a serious problem in their
communities.
[[Page 115 STAT. 817]]
(7) According to the 2001 report of the National Center on
Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University entitled
``Shoveling Up: The Impact of Substance Abuse on State
Budgets'', using the most conservative assumption, in 1998
States spent $77,900,000,000 to shovel up the wreckage of
substance abuse, only $3,000,000,000 to prevent and treat the
problem and $433,000,000 for alcohol and tobacco regulation and
compliance. This $77,900,000,000 burden was distributed as
follows:
(A) $30,700,000,000 in the justice system (77
percent of justice spending).
(B) $16,500,000,000 in education costs (10 percent
of education spending).
(C) $15,200,000,000 in health costs (25 percent of
health spending).
(D) $7,700,000,000 in child and family assistance
(32 percent of child and family assistance spending).
(E) $5,900,000,000 in mental health and
developmental disabilities (31 percent of mental health
spending).
(F) $1,500,000,000 in public safety (26 percent of
public safety spending) and $400,000,000 for the state
workforce.
(8) Intergovernmental cooperation and coordination through
national, State, and local or tribal leadership and partnerships
are critical to facilitate the reduction of substance abuse
among youth in communities across the United States.
(9) Substance abuse is perceived as a much greater problem
nationally than at the community level. According to a 2001
study sponsored by The Pew Charitable Trusts, between 1994 and
2000--
(A) there was a 43 percent increase in the
percentage of Americans who felt progress was being made
in the war on drugs at the community level;
(B) only 9 percent of Americans say drug abuse is a
``crisis'' in their neighborhood, compared to 27 percent
who say this about the nation; and
(C) the percentage of those who felt we lost ground
in the war on drugs on a community level fell by more
than a quarter, from 51 percent in 1994 to 37 percent in
2000.
(b) Extension and Increase of Program.--Section 1024(a) of the
National Narcotics Leadership Act of 1988 (21 U.S.C. 1524(a)) is
amended--
(1) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (4); and
(2) by striking paragraph (5) and inserting the following
new paragraphs:
``(5) $50,600,000 for fiscal year 2002;
``(6) $60,000,000 for fiscal year 2003;
``(7) $70,000,000 for fiscal year 2004;
``(8) $80,000,000 for fiscal year 2005;
``(9) $90,000,000 for fiscal year 2006; and
``(10) $99,000,000 for fiscal year 2007.''.
(c) Extension of Limitation on Administrative Costs.--Section
1024(b) of that Act (21 U.S.C. 1524(b)) is amended by striking paragraph
(5) and inserting the following new paragraph (5):
``(5) 6 percent for each of fiscal years 2002 through
2007.''.
[[Page 115 STAT. 818]]
(d) Additional Grants.--Section 1032(b) of that Act (21 U.S.C.
1533(b)) is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph
(3):
``(3) Additional grants.--
``(A) In general.--Subject to subparagraph (F), the
Administrator may award an additional grant under this
paragraph to an eligible coalition awarded a grant under
paragraph (1) or (2) for any first fiscal year after the
end of the 4-year period following the period of the
initial grant under paragraph (1) or (2), as the case
may be.
``(B) Scope of grants.--A coalition awarded a grant
under paragraph (1) or (2), including a renewal grant
under such paragraph, may not be awarded another grant
under such paragraph, and is eligible for an additional
grant under this section only under this paragraph.
``(C) No priority for applications.--The
Administrator may not afford a higher priority in the
award of an additional grant under this paragraph than
the Administrator would afford the applicant for the
grant if the applicant were submitting an application
for an initial grant under paragraph (1) or (2) rather
than an application for a grant under this paragraph.
``(D) Renewal grants.--Subject to subparagraph (F),
the Administrator may award a renewal grant to a grant
recipient under this paragraph for each of the fiscal
years of the 4-fiscal-year period following the fiscal
year for which the initial additional grant under
subparagraph (A) is awarded in an amount not to exceed
amounts as follows:
``(i) For the first and second fiscal years of
that 4-fiscal-year period, the amount equal to 80
percent of the non-Federal funds, including in-
kind contributions, raised by the coalition for
the applicable fiscal year.
``(ii) For the third and fourth fiscal years
of that 4-fiscal-year period, the amount equal to
67 percent of the non-Federal funds, including in-
kind contributions, raised by the coalition for
the applicable fiscal year.
``(E) Suspension.--If a grant recipient under this
paragraph fails to continue to meet the criteria
specified in subsection (a), the Administrator may
suspend the grant, after providing written notice to the
grant recipient and an opportunity to appeal.
``(F) Limitation.--The amount of a grant award under
this paragraph may not exceed $100,000 for a fiscal
year.''.
(e) Data Collection and Dissemination.--Section 1033(b) of that Act
(21 U.S.C. 1533(b)) is amended by adding at the end the following new
paragraph:
``(3) Consultation.--The Administrator shall carry out
activities under this subsection in consultation with the
Advisory Commission and the National Community Antidrug
Coalition Institute.''.
(f) Limitation on Use of Certain Funds for Evaluation of Program.--
Section 1033(b) of that Act, as amended by subsection (e) of this
section, is further amended by adding at the end the following new
paragraph:
[[Page 115 STAT. 819]]
``(4) Limitation on use of certain funds for evaluation of
program.--Amounts for activities under paragraph (2)(B) may not
be derived from amounts under section 1024(a) except for amounts
that are available under section 1024(b) for administrative
costs.''.
(g) Treatment of Funds for Coalitions Representing Certain
Organizations.--Section 1032 of that Act (21 U.S.C. 1532) is further
amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(c) Treatment of Funds for Coalitions Representing Certain
Organizations.--Funds appropriated for the substance abuse activities of
a coalition that includes a representative of the Bureau of Indian
Affairs, the Indian Health Service, or a tribal government agency with
expertise in the field of substance abuse may be counted as non-Federal
funds raised by the coalition for purposes of this section.''.
(h) Priority in Awarding Grants.--Section 1032 of that Act (21
U.S.C. 1532) is further amended by adding at the end the following new
subsection:
``(d) Priority in Awarding Grants.--In awarding grants under
subsection (b)(1)(A)(i), priority shall be given to a coalition serving
economically disadvantaged areas.''.
SEC. 2. SUPPLEMENTAL GRANTS FOR COALITION MENTORING ACTIVITIES UNDER
DRUG-FREE COMMUNITIES SUPPORT PROGRAM.
Subchapter I of chapter 2 of the National Narcotics Leadership Act
of 1988 (21 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the
following new section:
``SEC. 1035. <<NOTE: 21 USC 1535.>> SUPPLEMENTAL GRANTS FOR COALITION
MENTORING ACTIVITIES.
``(a) Authority To Make Grants.--As part of the program established
under section 1031, the Director may award an initial grant under this
subsection, and renewal grants under subsection (f), to any coalition
awarded a grant under section 1032 that meets the criteria specified in
subsection (d) in order to fund coalition mentoring activities by such
coalition in support of the program.
``(b) Treatment With Other Grants.--
``(1) Supplement.--A grant awarded to a coalition under this
section is in addition to any grant awarded to the coalition
under section 1032.
``(2) Requirement for basic grant.--A coalition may not be
awarded a grant under this section for a fiscal year unless the
coalition was awarded a grant or renewal grant under section
1032(b) for that fiscal year.
``(c) Application.--A coalition seeking a grant under this section
shall submit to the Administrator an application for the grant in such
form and manner as the Administrator may require.
``(d) Criteria.--A coalition meets the criteria specified in this
subsection if the coalition--
``(1) has been in existence for at least 5 years;
``(2) has achieved, by or through its own efforts,
measurable results in the prevention and treatment of substance
abuse among youth;
``(3) has staff or members willing to serve as mentors for
persons seeking to start or expand the activities of other
coalitions in the prevention and treatment of substance abuse;
[[Page 115 STAT. 820]]
``(4) has demonstrable support from some members of the
community in which the coalition mentoring activities to be
supported by the grant under this section are to be carried out;
and
``(5) submits to the Administrator a detailed plan for the
coalition mentoring activities to be supported by the grant
under this section.
``(e) Use of Grant Funds.--A coalition awarded a grant under this
section shall use the grant amount for mentoring activities to support
and encourage the development of new, self-supporting community
coalitions that are focused on the prevention and treatment of substance
abuse in such new coalitions' communities. The mentoring coalition shall
encourage such development in accordance with the plan submitted by the
mentoring coalition under subsection (d)(5).
``(f) Renewal Grants.--The Administrator may make a renewal grant to
any coalition awarded a grant under subsection (a), or a previous
renewal grant under this subsection, if the coalition, at the time of
application for such renewal grant--
``(1) continues to meet the criteria specified in subsection
(d); and
``(2) has made demonstrable progress in the development of
one or more new, self-supporting community coalitions that are
focused on the prevention and treatment of substance abuse.
``(g) Grant Amounts.--
``(1) In general.--Subject to paragraphs (2) and (3), the
total amount of grants awarded to a coalition under this section
for a fiscal year may not exceed the amount of non-Federal funds
raised by the coalition, including in-kind contributions, for
that fiscal year. Funds appropriated for the substance abuse
activities of a coalition that includes a representative of the
Bureau of Indian Affairs, the Indian Health Service, or a tribal
government agency with expertise in the field of substance abuse
may be counted as non-Federal funds raised by the coalition.
``(2) Initial grants.--The amount of the initial grant
awarded to a coalition under subsection (a) may not exceed
$75,000.
``(3) Renewal grants.--The total amount of renewal grants
awarded to a coalition under subsection (f) for any fiscal year
may not exceed $75,000.
``(h) Fiscal Year Limitation on Amount Available for Grants.--The
total amount available for grants under this section, including renewal
grants under subsection (f), in any fiscal year may not exceed the
amount equal to five percent of the amount authorized to be appropriated
by section 1024(a) for that fiscal year.
``(i) Priority in Awarding Initial Grants.--In awarding initial
grants under this section, priority shall be given to a coalition that
expressly proposes to provide mentorship to a coalition or aspiring
coalition serving economically disadvantaged areas.''.
SEC. 3. FIVE-YEAR EXTENSION OF ADVISORY COMMISSION ON DRUG-FREE
COMMUNITIES.
Section 1048 of the National Narcotics Leadership Act of 1988 (21
U.S.C. 1548) is amended by striking ``2002'' and inserting ``2007''.
[[Page 115 STAT. 821]]
SEC. 4. <<NOTE: 21 USC 1521 note.>> AUTHORIZATION FOR NATIONAL COMMUNITY
ANTIDRUG COALITION INSTITUTE.
(a) In General.--The Director of the Office of National Drug Control
Policy may, using amounts authorized to be appropriated by subsection
(d), make a grant to an eligible organization to provide for the
establishment of a National Community Antidrug Coalition Institute.
(b) Eligible Organizations.--An organization eligible for the grant
under subsection (a) is any national nonprofit organization that
represents, provides technical assistance and training to, and has
special expertise and broad, national-level experience in community
antidrug coalitions under section 1032 of the National Narcotics
Leadership Act of 1988 (21 U.S.C. 1532).
(c) Use of Grant Amount.--The organization receiving the grant under
subsection (a) shall establish a National Community Antidrug Coalition
Institute to--
(1) provide education, training, and technical assistance
for coalition leaders and community teams, with emphasis on the
development of coalitions serving economically disadvantaged
areas;
(2) develop and disseminate evaluation tools, mechanisms,
and measures to better assess and document coalition performance
measures and outcomes; and
(3) bridge the gap between research and practice by
translating knowledge from research into practical information.
(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized to be
appropriated for purposes of activities under this section, including
the grant under subsection (a), amounts as follows:
(1) For each of fiscal years 2002 and 2003, $2,000,000.
(2) For each of fiscal years 2004 and 2005, $1,000,000.
(3) For each of fiscal years 2006 and 2007, $750,000.
SEC. 5. <<NOTE: 21 USC 1521 note.>> PROHIBITION AGAINST DUPLICATION OF
EFFORT.
The Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy shall
ensure that the same or similar activities are not carried out, through
the use of funds for administrative costs provided under subchapter II
of the National Narcotics Leadership Act of 1988 (21 U.S.C. 1521 et
seq.) or funds provided under section 4 of this Act, by more than one
recipient of such funds.
Approved December 14, 2001.
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--H.R. 2291:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
HOUSE REPORTS: No. 107-175, Pt. 1 (Comm. on Government Reform).
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 147 (2001):
Sept. 5, considered and passed House.
Nov. 29, considered and passed Senate.
WEEKLY COMPILATION OF PRESIDENTIAL DOCUMENTS, Vol. 37 (2001):
Dec. 14, Presidential remarks.
<all>