Volume 147, No. 168 covering the 1st Session of the 107th Congress (2001 - 2002) was published by the Congressional Record.
The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS” mentioning the Environmental Protection Agency was published in the Senate section on pages S12552-S12555 on Dec. 6, 2001.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
By Mr. LUGAR (for himself, Mr. Helms, Mr. Hagel, and Mr.
Domenici):
S. 1778. A bill to designate the National Foreign Affairs Training Center as the George P. Shultz National Foreign Affairs Training Center; to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
Mr. LUGAR. Madam President, it is a great honor to rise today to introduce legislation that would name the Department of State's Foreign Affairs Training Center after former Secretary of State George P. Shultz. I am pleased to be joined by Senators Helms, Hagel, and Domenici in honoring this outstanding public servant.
Many of my most productive and enjoyable foreign policy experiences were those involving George Shultz as Secretary of State. Secretary Shultz celebrated the visits of foreign leaders to Washington by inviting hundreds of people to a luncheon or dinner at the State Department. If the guests were, for example, the President of Brazil, Shultz would identify prominent Brazilian business leaders, journalists, and scholars in the United States and a host of comparable Americans with interests in Brazil. He sprinkled the invitation list with members of the Reagan Administration and both houses of Congress. On most occasions, I was invited and introduced to a host of new friends deeply interested in international affairs.
When I became chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in 1985, the Secretary invited me to breakfast about once a month when Congress was in session. He always had a list of Reagan Administration legislative objectives for me to achieve and good suggestions on people and resources needed to accomplish each task.
In a two year period, I chaired extensive hearings on the Philippines, South Africa, and the prospects for democracy in Central America. Though the recommendations of Secretary Shultz, I co-chaired Presidential election observer efforts in Guatemala, El Salvador and the Philippines. These experiences led to considerable post-election interest and diplomacy, especially in the Philippines. These events and the influence of Secretary Shultz played a large role in the context of my book ``Letters to the Next President''.
In recent years, I have been a participant in the Asia Roundtable meetings sponsored by Stanford University and inspired by the leadership of George Shultz and his ability to bring statesmen from each Asian country to his meetings. Similarly, he brings distinguished leaders from all over the world to Stanford University Advisory Committee meetings and I have been the beneficiary of those rich experiences.
My continuing service in the United States Senate has received constant support from Secretary Shultz. His letters and wise counsel during conversations have made a significant difference in my understanding of complex issues. From the years at the State Department dinners to the present, he has introduced me to a legion of friends in many countries, and this network of friends and advisors has been invaluable.
Secretary Shultz decided to back President George W. Bush very early in the Presidential Campaign of 2000 and has offered strong support to President Bush's bold diplomacy and the importance of employing and retaining the best foreign service personnel to achieve our international goals. Naming the National Foreign Affairs Training Center after George P. Shultz will be a fitting tribute to a great public servant who continues to exemplify the hallmark qualities in United States international leadership.
This bill has the full support of the Department of State. In fact, it is at Secretary Powell's request that we are seeking to expedite its consideration. Secretary Powell has invited former Secretary Shultz to visit Washington in January. I understand that Secretary Powell hopes to announce the dedication of the Foreign Affairs Training Center during Shultz's stay in Washington. It is my hope that the Majority and Minority Leader and the Members of the Senate will fine the opportunity to move this important legislation in the near term. Congressman Hyde and Lantos have offered the same legislation in the House and have similar hopes for speedy passage.
______
By Mr. THOMPSON (for himself and Mr. Warner):
S. 1780. A bill to provide increased flexibility Governmentwide for the procurement of property and services to facilitate the defense against terrorism, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Governmental Affairs.
Mr. THOMPSON. Madam President, I rise today to introduce a bill to help Federal agencies fight our Nation's war against terrorism. I am introducing this bill at the request of the President and on behalf of myself as ranking member of the Governmental Affairs Committee and Senator Warner, the ranking member of the Armed Services Committee.
For many years, we have accepted that the Federal Government pays a premium, both in dollars and time spent, for the goods and services it buys solely because of unique requirements it imposes on its contractors. While the Federal procurement system has been streamlined and simplified over the last several years, much red tape and barriers to ``commercial-style'' contracting still exist. This is due in part to trying to maintain the proper balance between an efficient procurement system and accountability when spending taxpayer dollars.
In ordinary times and because of recent procurement policy reforms, we believe that a Federal agency can buy most anything it needs quickly and efficiently under current law if it has good management practices in place and smart, well-trained contracting officers. However, these are not ordinary times. Further, we know that the Federal Government is not well-managed and our acquisition workforce is rapidly dwindling. With that said, it is our responsibility to ensure that Federal agencies with a role in homeland security can purchase, quickly and efficiently, the most high-tech and sophisticated products and services to support antiterrorism efforts and to defend against biological, chemical, nuclear, radiological or technological attacks.
The bill which we are introducing builds on emergency contracting authority already in place for the Department of Defense and other agencies and goes further by providing additional contracting flexibilities. Today, national security and homeland security have the same kinds of requirements, detection, tracking, preparedness, prevention, response and recovery. By providing additional procurement flexibilities, the agencies involved in homeland security will be able to apply more easily many new and proven defense-related technologies.
For example, current law gives agencies the ability to use streamlined, simplified contracting procedures for contracts under
$200,000 which are made and performed outside the United States in support of a contingency operation or a humanitarian or peacekeeping operation. This bill would raise that threshold to $500,000 for any, outside or within the United States, contract awarded for products or services in support of a contingency operation or a humanitarian or peacekeeping operation.
Current law also provides simplified contracting procedures for the purchase of commercial items, goods and services produced for the commercial marketplace and not encumbered by government specifications or requirements. The bill would allow goods and services purchased to help agencies fight against terrorism or biological, chemical, nuclear, radiological or technological attacks to be treated as if they were purchases for commercial items, in other words, agencies needing these goods and services could use the simpler, expedited procedures. This would allow agencies to quickly buy technologies or products which are cutting-edge, but which may not have made it to the commercial marketplace yet.
This legislation also encourages the use of current procurement flexibilities which are authorized in existing statutes. An agency can use these existing provisions where it is appropriate to provide quick and responsive solutions to its emergency contracting requirements. Further, the bill includes language which will allow agencies to use approaches other than contracts to buy research and development for new technologies to fight against terrorism. The Department of Defense currently has this authority and the bill would extend that authority to the rest of the Federal agencies.
And finally, this bill would encourage more competition in the Federal marketplace by requiring agencies to do ongoing market research to identify new companies with new capabilities to help agencies in the fight against terrorism.
We must ensure that Federal agencies which are preparing to fight terrorism have access to a wide variety of traditional and innovative solutions in a timely fashion. The bill we are introducing today will go a long way toward that goal.
Mr. WARNER. Madam President, I join Senator Thompson in introducing the Federal Emergency Procurement Flexibility Act. This bill will provide emergency contracting relief to Federal agencies in support of our Nation's fight against terrorism by allowing agencies to effectively buy what is needed to address the threats to our Nation.
While the Federal procurement system has improved in the last decade, there are still many areas where changes should be made to support the current emergency. This bill provides for streamlining the contracting process to access new technology, provides for emergency authorities for small purchases, and maximizes the use of existing streamlined procurement authorities.
The United States has some of the best ideas and technology in the world. To win the war on terrorism, the government needs to do all it can to gain access to this technology, much of which is located in the private sector. However, many firms, particularly in the biotechnology and information technology sectors, have been deterred from bidding on government contracts by the perception that government contracting is burdened with red tape and requirements.
In this time of crisis, we can not afford to keep these businesses on the sidelines. To promote the participation of these firms in solving our homeland defense problems, this bill would authorize the use by federal agencies of ``other transactions'' authority for research and development and prototype projects. ``Other transactions'' authority is a streamlined acquisition approach currently available only to the Department of Defense. This authority has been enormously helpful in allowing the Department of Defense to gain access to the research and expertise of non-traditional defense contractors. I anticipate that the Department of Health and Human Services or the Environmental Protection Agency, for example, would be able to effectively use ``other transactions'' authority to research and prototype new vaccines, detection systems, and remediation technology to meet the bioterrorist threat.
For production, service or research needs where ``other transactions'' authority is not appropriate, this bill authorizes
``commercial like'' contracting procedures for those contracts that facilitate the defense against terrorism or nuclear, chemical, biological or information attack on the United States. These commercial contracting procedures are exempted from many government unique requirements and allow for the use of a more streamlined acquisition approach.
______
By Mr. McCAIN (for himself and Mr. Brownback):
S. 1781. A bill to direct the Secretary of Commerce to establish a voluntary national registry system for greenhouse gases trading among industry, to make changes to United States Global Change Research Program, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Mr. McCAIN. Madam President, I, rise to introduce the Emission Reductions Incentive Act of 2001. I thank Senator Brownback for his co-
sponsorship and his cooperation in drafting this bill, along with his commitment to addressing this growing problem.
Earlier this year, I announced intentions to consider the establishment of a ``cap and trade'' system for carbon dioxide emissions. I am continuing to work with Senator Lieberman on this effort. However, the bill which I am introducing today is not in lieu of that commitment, but rather in support of it.
The bill proposes the establishment of a national voluntary registry for entities to register carbon emissions reductions. The registry would support current voluntary trading practices in private industry and other non-governmental organizations. Over the past years, the Commerce Committee has heard testimony from several organizations on their efforts conduct trading programs internally or across a small segment of industry. This registry bill will aid those efforts greatly by establishing a national system whereby these companies may be able to participate and be assured that a ton of carbon purchased is indeed a ton of carbon.
Establishment of the registry would also require the development of certain standards for measuring, verifying and reporting emission reductions to the registry. I believe that with these procedures in place, the registry would be able to withstand any future requirements imposed by a mandatory ``cap and trade'' system. The bill would also provide for consideration of credits realized under this program against any future mandatory system.
The bill also proposed changes to the US Global Climate Change Program, USGCRP. It requires a new strategic plan for the next 10 years. The bill would provide for dedicated management to support the interagency USGCRP and have this office report to the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy. We feel this will provide a needed channel to the White House for the Federal scientific community to be heard. We have also asked the office to work with the agencies' development activities.
The bill proposed additional changes to the Partnership for New Generation Vehicles, PHGV, program and provides additional incentives for the licensing of technologies. I hope that we can increase the deployment of technologies to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by providing further incentives to Federal employees, those who are ultimately responsible for the transfer of the research results. The National Research Council recently made recommendations on the PNGV program, a cooperative research and development program between the Federal Government and the US Council for Automotive Research. The bill requires the Department of Commerce to implement many of those recommendations.
As we all know, more than 160 countries recently reached an agreement on the Kyoto Protocol, which would require industrialized nations to reduce their carbon dioxide emissions. There are many US companies that operate facilities in other countries. These facilities will have to meet local emissions requirements. The bill requires the Secretary of Commerce to study the effects that a ratified treaty will have on the US industry and its ability to compete globally.
Again, I thank Senator Brownback for help on this piece of legislation. I understand that other members of the Commerce Committee have recently introduced legislation in this area and look forward to working with them on a comprehensive package.
Mr. BROWNBACK. Madam President, I am please to join Senator McCain today in introducing the Emission Reductions Incentive Act of 2001. This bill will put into place a voluntary registry for greenhouse gas, GHG, reductions house in the Department of Commerce. Furthermore, the bill establishes structure for the independent measurement and verification of GHG reductions. This is an important step in providing an incentive for companies who wish to reduce their emissions, and it will provide assurance that companies who take positive action on climate change today will be rewarded in the future. All this can be accomplished with barely any cost to the government, since it will be private, third party groups that undertake the burden to measure, verify and prove actual greenhouse gas emission reductions.
There are those who wonder why such a measure is needed, given the fact that there is an existing registry in the Department of Energy and the uncertainty on the climate change issue. First, the new registry will only hold information that has been independently verified. Like the current registry, this new registry would be completely voluntary. However, unlike the DOE program, this registry will focus on keeping track of proven greenhouse gas reductions, and will therefore, encourage more companies to undertake measures to reduce emissions since they will have the ability to defend these reductions as real if future regulations are put in to place. Also, since this registry will be housed in the Department of Commerce and verified by independent parties, it treats the issue as an investment or transaction between companies to limit risk, rather than an environmental regulation.
Several utilities and other companies who emit high levels of carbon dioxide have expressed real concern that they need certainty to be able to plan for the life of new power plants and investment decisions which will last for 20 years or more. Currently, there is no certainty with regard to how the climate change issue will be handled. This means companies must plan for an uncertain future which leads to undue expense. This bill will allow companies to decide for themselves how much action they need to take, and provide a way of taking out an insurance policy, of sorts, on the climate change issue. This is important because we need more investment in energy infrastructure, more clean coal plants and natural gas plants. Yet these new plants won't move forward if they fear being hit with a high carbon tad in the next 5-10 years.
This bill offers industry a way to make investments in GHG reductions or carbon sequestration offsets gradually, building up credits that could be used down the road if regulations are put into place. While there is no ``one-for-one'' trade in on these credits, there would be a government certified stamp of approval on early actions to reduce greenhouse gases--which any future regulations would have to account for
Second, there are those who argue that the science is still unsettled with regard to the climate change issue, and that we should not move toward costly measures which will punish industry for a problem that is still not fully understood. Actually, this is the very reason why we should establish a voluntary, but measured and verified registry now. This bill given industry the opportunity to experiment and get credit for pro-active measures that will reduce greenhouse gas emissions without unduly burdening energy consumers. New and better technology is the key to solving this issue, but why would a company employ such technology now with the uncertainty surrounding how this issue will be addressed? They could in fact, be punished for such actions if later regulations are put into place which do not account for reductions that were already taken. This is a free-market approach to reward and encourage responsible industry to continue and even make a market out of reducing greenhouse gases. This registery will help establish and encourage the most cost-effective ways to tackle this problem while also finding where difficulties may lie.
We can not shrink from difficult challenges, nor should we overreact. When there is the opportunity to allow market force to work on a problem, we should most definitely encourage that process. I am pleased to be joining my friend from Arizona in introducing this legislation and look forward to pursuing this policy during the upcoming energy debate.
______
By Mr. WARNER (for himself, Mr. Stevens, Mr. Allen, Mr. Cleland, and Mr. Inouye):
S. 1782. A bill to authorize the burial in Arlington National Cemetery of any former Reservist who died in the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks and would have been eligible for burial in Arlington National Cemetery but for age at time of death; to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation for myself, Senator Stevens, Senator Allen Senator Cleland, and Senator Inouye to provide a exception to the rules governing burials at Arlington national Cemetery.
This very limited legislation will permit individuals with extensive military service, who lost their lives on September 11, to be buried at Arlington National Cemetery.
I am introducing this legislation today, along with my colleagues, to address a specific situation that involves Captain Charles F. ``Chic'' Burlingame III, a resident of Oak Hills Virginia and others who may have the same accrued entitlement.
Captain Burlingame was the pilot of American Airlines flight 77, that ill-fated aircraft which was hi-jacked by terrorists and used as a horrible weapon of destruction against the Pentagon on September 11.
Captain Burlingame, however, was more than the pilot of that plane--
he was also a retired veteran of the United States Navy.
He served his country with distinction for 8 years by flying fighter planes off aircraft carriers--one of the military's most hazardous duties.
He continued his military career as a reserve officer, honorably retiring with the rank of Captain. Ironically, Captain Burlingame's reserve duty was in the Pentagon, a building he knew so well.
In the aftermath of September 11 we have learned of many heroic acts of those who lost their lives in trying to overcome the terrorists on that tragic morning. This is certainly true in the case of Captain Burlingame.
Recent information from the FBI indicate that Captain Burlingame was killed by the terrorists prior to the crash of the Flight 77 into the Pentagon. Clearly, Captain Burlingame gave his life fighting to protect the passengers of the plane and those on the ground. One can clearly see that Captain Burlingame and those who lost their lives on September 11 were the first casualties of our War on Terrorism.
Arlington Cemetery is the resting place for many American heroes who gave their lives to protect American freedoms. Certainly, Captain Burlingame's service to country and his sacrifice on Flight 77 should be recognized by our nation.
Captain Burlingame's widow, Sheri, and his brothers and sisters, desire that Captain Burlingame be buried in Arlington National Cemetery. Captain Burlingame's superb military service would make him eligible for burial in any of our other National Cemeteries.
The very strict regulations which govern burials at Arlington, however, do not allow for burial of a person retired from the Reserves until they reach sixty years of age. Had he merely reached the age of sixty, he would have been fully eligible for burial in Arlington National Cemetery.
Additionally, there may be others who lost their lives on September 11 who are in a similar situation. This bill will also allow those person to be buried in Arlington National Cemetery.
I respectfully request that my colleagues support this effort.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the Record, as follows:
S. 1782
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. AUTHORITY FOR BURIAL OF CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS AT
ARLINGTON NATIONAL CEMETERY.
(a) In General.--The Secretary of the Army shall authorize the burial in a separate gravesite at Arlington National Cemetery, Virginia, of any individual who--
(1) died as a direct result of the terrorist attacks on the United States on September 11, 2001; and
(2) would have been eligible for burial in Arlington National Cemetery by reason of service in a reserve component of the Armed Forces but for the fact that such individual was less than 60 years of age at the time of death.
(b) Eligibility of Surviving Spouse.--The surviving spouse of an individual buried in a gravesite in Arlington National Cemetery under the authority provided under subsection (a) shall be eligible for burial in the gravesite of the individual to the same extent as the surviving spouse of any other individual buried in Arlington National Cemetery is eligible for burial in the gravesite of such other individual.
____________________
Alerts Sign-up