# ![](media/image1.png)

# Legislative Bulletin Part II.........................................October 6, 2004

**Contents:**

> **H.R. 4470**---To amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to
> extend the authorization of appropriations for the Lake Pontchartrain
> Basin Restoration Program from fiscal year 2005 to 2010
>
> **H.R. 4794** --- To amend the Tijuana River Valley Estuary and Beach
> Sewage Cleanup Act of 2000 to extend the authorization of
> appropriations, and for other purposes (Hunter)---*as introduced*

##  H.R. 5163---Norman Y. Mineta Research and Special Programs Reorganization Act

**H.R. 2828---**Water Supply, Reliability, and Environmental Improvement
Act

## S. 1791---To amend the Lease Lot Conveyance Act of 2002 to provide that the amount received by the United States under that Act shall be deposited in the reclamation fund

**S. 2511---**Chimayo Water Supply System and Espanola Filtration
Facility Act of 2004

## S. 211---Northern Rio Grande National Heritage Area Act

**S. 2178---**National Park System Laws Technical Amendments Act of 2004

**H.R. 4658---**Servicemembers Legal Protection Act of 2004

**H.R. 5061---**Comprehensive Peace in Sudan Act

H.R. 4470---To amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to extend
the authorization of appropriations for the Lake Pontchartrain Basin
Restoration Program from fiscal year 2005 to 2010 (Vitter)

**[Order of Business]{.underline}**: The bill is scheduled for
consideration on Wednesday, October 6^th^, under a motion to suspend the
rules and pass the bill.

**[Summary]{.underline}**: H.R. 4470 authorizes \$20 million annually
(through fiscal year 2010) for the Lake Pontchartrain Basin Restoration
Program. Current authorization for funding expires in fiscal year 2005.

**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: H.R. 4470 was introduced on June 1,
2004, and referred to the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure. The Water Resources and Environment Subcommittee
approved the bill by voice vote on July 15 and the full Committee
reported the bill by voice vote on July 21.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}**: H.R. 4470 authorizes \$20 million
per year for fiscal years 2006-2010. The Congressional Budget Office
estimates the bill would cost \$64 million over the next five years,
subject to appropriations.

**[Does the Bill Expand the Size and Scope of the Federal
Government?]{.underline}**: No.

**[Does the Bill Contain Any New State-Government, Local-Government, or
Private-Sector Mandates?]{.underline}**: No.

**[Constitutional Authority]{.underline}**: The Transportation and
Infrastructure Committee, in House Report 108-676, cites Article I,
Section 8, but fails to cite a specific clause.

**[Staff Contact]{.underline}**: Lisa Bos, <lisa.bos@mail.house.gov>,
(202) 226-1630

H.R. 4794 --- To amend the Tijuana River Valley Estuary and Beach Sewage
Cleanup Act of 2000 to extend the authorization of appropriations, and
for other purposes (Hunter)---*as introduced*

**[Order of Business]{.underline}**: The bill is scheduled for
consideration on Wednesday, October 6^th^, under a motion to suspend the
rules and pass the bill.

**[Summary:]{.underline}** The bill amends the Tijuana River Valley
Estuary and Beach Sewage Cleanup Act of 2000, which was originally
authorized at \$156 million for FY01-05, to indefinitely extend the
authority and authorize \$230 million. The bill, according to the
committee, reauthorizes and updates the authority to comprehensively
address the treatment of sewage emanating from the Tijuana, Mexico area
that flows untreated or partially treated into the United States,
causing significant adverse public health and environmental impacts.

**[Additional Information]{.underline}**: The International Boundary and
Water Commission (IBWC), composed of a U.S. section and a Mexican
section, is responsible for applying the boundary and water treaties
between the United States and Mexico and settling any differences that
may arise out of such treaties. Enacting H.R. 4794 would indefinitely
extend the authority of the U.S. section of the IBWC to enter into a
contract to build and operate a wastewater treatment facility in Mexico.
Under current law, such authority is available through 2005 and is
contingent on the negotiation and conclusion of a new treaty between the
governments of the United States and Mexico.

On February 20, 2004, a new treaty between the two governments was
negotiated, establishing a framework for the development of the
wastewater treatment facility. Under this contract, the plant owner
would treat wastewater to certain U.S. standards, and the federal
government would make annual payments over a 20-year period to cover the
costs of developing, financing, constructing, operating, and maintaining
the facility. This new facility would be designed to address the problem
of untreated or partially treated sewage flowing over the border from
Tijuana, Mexico, to San Diego, California.

**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: H.R. 4794 was introduced on July 9,
2004, and referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
and the International Relations (IR) Committee. The Transportation and
Infrastructure Committee approved the bill by voice vote on July 21
though the IR Committee did not consider it.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}**: H.R. 4794 would authorize the
appropriation of \$230 million for the wastewater treatment contract.
CBO expects that implementing the contract would constitute a federal
lease-purchase of the new treatment facility. CBO estimates, however,
that implementing this legislation would require appropriations of \$295
million over the 2005-2009 period. In addition, CBO estimates that
appropriations of \$316 million would be needed after 2009 to cover the
costs associated with operating and maintaining the facility through the
remainder of the contract period.

**[Does the Bill Expand the Size and Scope of the Federal
Government?]{.underline}**: No.

**[Does the Bill Contain Any New State-Government, Local-Government, or
Private-Sector Mandates?]{.underline}**: No.

**[Constitutional Authority]{.underline}**: The Transportation and
Infrastructure Committee, in House Report 108-688, cites Article I,
Section 8, but fails to cite a specific clause.

[Staff Contact]{.underline}: Sheila Cole,
[**sheila.cole@mail.house.gov**](mailto:sheila.cole@mail.house.gov),
(202) 226-9719

H.R. 5163---Norman Y. Mineta Research and Special Programs
Reorganization Act (Young of Alaska)

**[Order of Business]{.underline}**: The bill is scheduled for
consideration on Wednesday, October 6^th^, under a motion to suspend the
rules and pass the bill.

**[Summary]{.underline}**: H.R. 5163 establishes a Pipeline and
Hazardous Materials Safety Administration within the Department of
Transportation (currently the National Transportation Safety Board has
authority over pipeline and hazardous materials safety). The new office
would have an administrator, deputy administrator, and chief safety
officer. The goal of the office would be to further "the highest degree
of safety in pipeline transportation and hazardous materials
transportation."

The bill also establishes a Research and Innovative Technology
Administration within the Department of Transportation. The new office
would have an administrator, deputy administrator, and chief safety
officer. The duties of the office would be to coordinate, facilitate,
and review the Department\'s research and development programs and
activities, and to advance innovative technologies.

The bill does not authorize any new funding for these offices and
stipulates that funds, personnel, and property must be transferred from
other areas of the Department to complete the establishment of the new
offices.

**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: H.R. 5163 was introduced on
September 29, 2004, and referred to the Committees on Transportation and
Infrastructure, Energy and Commerce, and Science. None of the committees
took official action on the bill.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}**: A cost estimate of the bill is not
available, although the transfer of assets provision would suggest that
the bill would be budget neutral.

**[Does the Bill Expand the Size and Scope of the Federal
Government?]{.underline}**: No.

**[Does the Bill Contain Any New State-Government, Local-Government, or
Private-Sector Mandates?]{.underline}**: No.

**[Constitutional Authority]{.underline}**: A committee report citing
constitutional authority is not available.

**[Staff Contact]{.underline}**: Lisa Bos, <lisa.bos@mail.house.gov>,
(202) 226-1630

H.R. 2828---Water Supply, Reliability, and Environmental Improvement Act
(Calvert)

**[Order of Business]{.underline}**: The bill is scheduled for
consideration on Wednesday, October 6^th^, under a motion to suspend the
rules and pass the bill.

H.R. 2828 originally passed the House on July 9, 2004, by voice vote.
The Senate passed the bill, with an amendment, on September 15. The
summary below reflects the text of the Senate amendment with changes
indicated in red bold.

**[Summary]{.underline}**: H.R. 2828 reauthorizes federal participation
in the Calfed Bay-Delta Program and recognizes the 2000 Calfed Bay-Delta
Program Record of Decision (ROD) as the general framework for the
activities authorized under the bill.

Authorized activities include:

-   [Water Storage and Water Yield]{.underline}: includes feasibility
    studies of projects. A project would be automatically authorized
    unless Congress passes a disapproval resolution within 120 days (not
    including adjournments of more than 3 days) after the study was
    submitted.

-   [Conveyance]{.underline}: requires specific activities, including
    the installation of temporary and permanent flow control barriers in
    the South Delta, San Joaquin floodway improvement, and improved fish
    screening in the North Delta. Before increasing exports of water
    from the Delta, the Secretary of the Interior and the Governor of
    California must develop and implement a program to meet all existing
    water quality standards that are the responsibility of the Central
    Valley Project.

-   [Water Use Efficiency]{.underline}: includes water conservation
    projects, technical assistance for water conservation projects,
    water recycling and desalination projects, and water measurement and
    transfer actions. Renders several water projects as feasible.

-   [Water Transfers]{.underline}: activities include increasing the
    availability of existing facilities for water transfers and
    maintaining a water transfer information clearinghouse.

-   [Integrated Regional Water Management Plans]{.underline}: includes
    assisting local and regional communities in developing and
    implementing integrated water management plans that improve water
    supply reliability, water quality, ecosystem restoration, and flood
    protection.

-   [Ecosystem Restoration]{.underline}: includes restoration projects
    in San Francisco Bay, fish screen and fish passage improvement
    projects, implementation of an invasive species programs, and tidal
    wetland and riparian habitat restoration. Requires the Secretary of
    the Interior to submit restoration management plans to Congress for
    all projects where the federal cost exceeds \$20,000. Creates a
    requirement that before acquiring land for a project, the Secretary
    must determine that existing federal land, state land, or other land
    already acquired for ecosystem restoration is not available for use.

-   [Watersheds]{.underline}: includes building local capacity to assess
    and manage watersheds and technical assistance for watershed
    assessments and management plans.

-   [Water Quality]{.underline}: includes addressing drainage problems
    in the San Joaquin Valley, investing in treatment technology
    demonstration projects, controlling runoff into the California
    aqueduct, and addressing water quality problems at the North Bay
    aqueduct.

-   [Science]{.underline}: includes establishing and maintaining an
    independent science board and technical panels for oversight and
    peer review.

-   [Diversification of Water Supplies]{.underline}: includes activities
    to diversify modes of delivery of water to refuges.

"New and expanded" authorizations for fiscal years 2005 through **2010**
(House-passed bill was through 2008) include various conveyance
activities (maximum of \$184 million in funding) such as feasibility
studies, a maximum of \$90 million for implementation of the
Environmental Water Account, a maximum of \$90 million for levee
stability, and a maximum of \$25 million for program management,
oversight, and coordination (total of \$389 million).

The bill directs federal agencies to coordinate with state agencies and
to work with local governments and the public through an advisory
committee. Federal agencies are also required to ensure that programs
are "subjected to credible and objective scientific review" and that
major decisions are based upon "the best available scientific
information." H.R. 2828 also includes a requirement for annual reports
to Congress on the activities and progress of the Calfed program.

Other major provisions of the bill include:

-   Requiring the Administration to include Calfed funding for each
    federal agency in its annual budget;

-   Limiting the federal share of programs costs to 33.3 percent;

-   Requiring the Secretary of the Interior to establish an office in
    Sacramento, California, for the use of all federal and state
    agencies involved in issuing permits and preparing environmental
    documentation for projects (the bill allows the Secretary to accept
    contributions from other public entities for the preparation of
    permits and environmental documentation, which is intended to offset
    the cost of establishing and maintaining the office);

-   Requiring a study of the feasibility of constructing rural water
    systems in coordination with other federal agencies with rural water
    programs and in cooperation with non-federal project entities; and

-   Requiring a study of the feasibility of reclaiming the Salton Sea.

-   **Requires a feasibility study of the Alder Creek Water Storage and
    Conservation Project, authorized at \$3 million.**

-   **Increases the authorization for the Folsom Reservoir Temperature
    Control Device (P.L. 105-295) from \$3.5 million to \$6.25
    million.**

**[Additional Background]{.underline}**: The following is a summary of
the Calfed Bay-Delta Program from the Environmental Protection Agency:

The CALFED Bay-Delta Program, a cooperative effort among state and
federal agencies and California's environmental, urban and agricultural
communities, was initiated in 1995 to address environmental and water
management problems associated with the Bay-Delta system. The Bay-Delta
system is an intricate web of waterways created at the junction of the
San Francisco Bay and the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Delta.
Critical to California's economy and ecology, the Bay-Delta has been the
focus of competing interests virtually since the Gold Rush. The
Bay-Delta is a critical habitat for 120 fish and wildlife species. It
also serves as the hub of California's water distribution system,
supplying drinking water to 20 million people and irrigation water to 4
million acres of farmland. As a result of these demands, the ecosystem
has suffered greatly. Habitats are declining, and fish populations have
plummeted with several species listed as threatened or endangered. The
system no longer serves as a reliable source of high quality water and
levees face an unacceptably high risk of breaching.

> The CALFED Bay-Delta Program was established to reduce conflicts in
> the system by developing a sustainable, long-term solution to water
> management and environmental problems associated with the Bay-Delta
> system. CALFED is developing a comprehensive plan that will restore
> ecological health, improve water supply reliability for beneficial
> uses, improve water quality, and improve levee stability in the
> Bay-Delta estuary.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}**: The Congressional Budget Office
previously estimated that H.R. 2828 authorized \$448 million for fiscal
years 2005-08, subject to appropriations. There are some additional
authorizations in the Senate-approved version of H.R. 2828 and the
authorization has been extended to fiscal year 2010, however an official
cost estimate is not available.

**[Does the Bill Expand the Size and Scope of the Federal
Government?]{.underline}**: No.

**[Does the Bill Contain Any New State-Government, Local-Government, or
Private-Sector Mandates?]{.underline}**: No.

**[Constitutional Authority]{.underline}**: The Committee on Resources,
in House Report 108-573, cites Article I, Section 8, but fails to cite a
specific clause.

**[Staff Contact]{.underline}**: Lisa Bos, <lisa.bos@mail.house.gov>,
(202) 226-1630

S. 1791---To amend the Lease Lot Conveyance Act of 2002 to provide that
the amount received by the United States under that Act shall be
deposited in the reclamation fund (Senator Domenici)

**[Order of Business]{.underline}**: The bill is scheduled for
consideration on Wednesday, October 6^th^, under a motion to suspend the
rules and pass the bill.

**[Summary]{.underline}**: S. 1791 would require that all funds received
by the United States under the Lease Lot Conveyance Act of 2002 (P.L.
107-335) be deposited into the Reclamation Fund and made immediately
available to the Elephant Butte Irrigation District and the El Paso
County Water Improvement District No. 1. Under P.L. 107-335, the
Secretary of the Interior was required to sell 403 cabin sites located
in the Elephant Butte and Caballo State Parks in New Mexico.

Under existing law, proceeds from withdrawn public lands are deposited
as a general credit to the Reclamation Fund and not credited toward a
particular project, as S. 1791 would do (note: this is why the
Administration opposes the bill, as indicated below).

**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: S. 1791 passed the Senate by
unanimous consent on September 15, 2004. The bill was received in the
House on September 17 and referred to the Committee on Resources, where
it was not considered.

**[Administration Position]{.underline}**: A representative of the
Administration testified on March 25, 2004, that the Department of the
Interior "**cannot support S. 1791**" (*emphasis added*).
<http://energy.senate.gov/hearings/testimony.cfm?id=1087&wit_id=2720>

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}**: The Congressional Budget Office
estimates that S. 1791 would increase direct spending by \$1 million
annually.

**[Does the Bill Expand the Size and Scope of the Federal
Government?]{.underline}**: No.

**[Does the Bill Contain Any New State-Government, Local-Government, or
Private-Sector Mandates?]{.underline}**: No.

**[Constitutional Authority]{.underline}**: A committee report citing
constitutional authority is not available.

**[Staff Contact]{.underline}**: Lisa Bos, <lisa.bos@mail.house.gov>,
(202) 226-1630

S. 2511---Chimayo Water Supply System and Espanola Filtration Facility
Act of 2004 (Senator Domenici)

**[Order of Business]{.underline}**: The bill is scheduled for
consideration on Wednesday, October 6^th^, under a motion to suspend the
rules and pass the bill.

**[Summary]{.underline}**: S. 2511 would require a water supply system
feasibility study for the town of Chimayo, New Mexico. The federal share
of the cost of the study would be 75 percent. The Secretary of the
Interior would also be authorized to enter into contracts with water
authorities in Chimayo to provide emergency water supply development
assistance, with a federal share of 75 percent. The bill authorizes \$2
million for fiscal years 2005-2008 for the study and \$3 million for
fiscal years 2005-2010 for assistance grants.

The bill also requires the Secretary of the Interior to provide
assistance to the city of Espanola, New Mexico, for the construction of
a water filtration facility. The federal share of the cost of the
project is limited to 25 percent. S. 2511 authorizes \$3 million for
fiscal years 2005-2009 for this purpose.

**[Additional Background]{.underline}**: According to the Department of
the Interior, the Bureau of Reclamation has already provided financial
assistance of about \$400,000 to the City of Espanola to perform a
feasibility study, including environmental reviews under the National
Environmental Policy Act. As of June 17, 2004, the Department had not
received the study, which it believes should precede any authorization
for construction.

<http://energy.senate.gov/hearings/testimony.cfm?id=1227&wit_id=3566>

**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: S. 2511 passed the Senate by
unanimous consent on September 15, 2004. The bill was received in the
House on September 17 and referred to the Committee on Resources, where
it was not considered.

**[Administration Position]{.underline}**: On June 17, 2004, a
representative of the Department of Interior testified that "the
Administration **cannot support** S. 2511 in its current form"
(*emphasis added*). It does not appear that the language has been
amended to address the Administration's concerns.
<http://energy.senate.gov/hearings/testimony.cfm?id=1227&wit_id=3566>

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}**: S. 2511 authorizes \$8 million over
the fiscal year 2005-2010 period. The Congressional Budget Office
estimates that the bill would cost \$8 million over the 2005-2009
period.

**[Does the Bill Expand the Size and Scope of the Federal
Government?]{.underline}**: No.

**[Does the Bill Contain Any New State-Government, Local-Government, or
Private-Sector Mandates?]{.underline}**: No.

**[Constitutional Authority]{.underline}**: A committee report citing
constitutional authority is not available.

**[Staff Contact]{.underline}**: Lisa Bos, <lisa.bos@mail.house.gov>,
(202) 226-1630

S. 211---Northern Rio Grande National Heritage Act (*Senator Bingaman*)

**[Order of Business]{.underline}**: The bill is scheduled for
consideration on Wednesday, October 6^th^, under a motion to suspend the
rules and pass the bill.

**[Summary]{.underline}**: S. 211 would establish the Northern Rio
Grande National Heritage Area in northern New Mexico along the Rio
Grande River, including the cities of Taos and Santa Fe and the
community of San Juan Pueblo. A management entity would be established
under the bill to oversee the heritage area. The bill authorizes \$10
million to carry out the bill over a period of 15 years, with no more
than \$1 million allowed to be appropriated in any one year. The federal
share of any activity may not exceed 50 percent.

**[Additional Background]{.underline}**: Congress has established 24
National Heritage Areas around the country, in which conservation,
interpretation, and other activities are managed by partnerships among
federal, state, and local governments and the private sector. The
National Park Service provides technical assistance, as well as
financial assistance, for a limited number of years following
designation.

The National Park Service defines a National Heritage Area as follows:

> A "National Heritage Area" is a place designated by the United States
> Congress, where natural, cultural, historic and recreational resources
> combine to form a cohesive, nationally distinctive landscape arising
> from patterns of human activity shaped by geography. These patterns
> make National Heritage Areas representative of the national experience
> through the physical features that remain and the traditions that have
> evolved in the areas. Continued use of the National Heritage Areas by
> people whose traditions helped to shape the landscapes enhances their
> significance.
>
> National Heritage Areas are a new kind of national designation which
> seeks to preserve and celebrate many of America\'s defining
> landscapes. <http://www.cr.nps.gov/heritageareas/FAQ/INDEX.HTM>

**NOTE: no legislative criteria exist for designating a National
Heritage Area.**

Most of the 24 existing National Heritage Areas are located in the
eastern third of the United

States. To see what and where they are, visit this webpage:

<http://www.cr.nps.gov/heritageareas/VST/INDEX.HTM>

Congress authorized the National Heritage Areas as follows:

-   1 in 1984

-   1 in 1986

-   2 in 1988

-   2 in 1994

-   11 in 1996

-   6 in 2000

-   1 in 2003

For more information on National Heritage Areas, visit this website:
<http://www.cr.nps.gov/heritageareas/>

**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: S. 211 passed the Senate by
unanimous consent on September 15, 2004. The bill was received in the
House on September 17 and referred to the Committee on Resources, where
it was not considered.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}**: The Congressional Budget Office
estimates that S. 211 would cost \$10 million over the next 10-15 years.

**[Does the Bill Expand the Size and Scope of the Federal
Government?]{.underline}**: Yes, the bill creates a new heritage area.

**[Does the Bill Contain Any New State-Government, Local-Government, or
Private-Sector Mandates?]{.underline}**: No.

**[Constitutional Authority]{.underline}**: A committee report citing
constitutional authority is not available.

**[Staff Contact]{.underline}**: Lisa Bos, <lisa.bos@mail.house.gov>,
(202) 226-1630

S. 2178---National Park System Laws Technical Amendments Act of 2004
(Senator Domenici)

**[Order of Business]{.underline}**: The bill is scheduled for
consideration on Wednesday, October 6^th^, under a motion to suspend the
rules and pass the bill.

**[Summary]{.underline}**: S. 2178 would make a variety of technical
corrections to laws related to the National Park Service. None of these
changes are significant and they would not have any affect on the
federal budget.

**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: S. 2178 passed the Senate by
unanimous consent on September 15, 2004. The bill was received in the
House on September 17 and referred to the Committee on Resources, where
it was not considered.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}**: The Congressional Budget Office
estimates that S. 2178 would have no significant impact on the federal
budget.

**[Does the Bill Expand the Size and Scope of the Federal
Government?]{.underline}**: No.

**[Does the Bill Contain Any New State-Government, Local-Government, or
Private-Sector Mandates?]{.underline}**: No.

**[Constitutional Authority]{.underline}**: A committee report citing
constitutional authority is not available.

**[Staff Contact]{.underline}**: Lisa Bos, <lisa.bos@mail.house.gov>,
(202) 226-1630

H.R. 4658---Servicemembers Legal Protection Act of 2004 (Smith of New
Jersey)

**[Order of Business]{.underline}**: The bill is scheduled for
consideration on Wednesday, October 6^th^, under a motion to suspend the
rules and pass the bill.

**[Summary]{.underline}**: H.R. 4658 would make several changes to the
Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (SCRA), including:

-   Allowing both plaintiffs and defendants to require stays of civil
    proceedings

-   Applying lease termination provisions when the servicemember has
    permanent change of station orders from a state outside the
    continental U.S. to any location outside that state

-   Prohibiting double taxation of servicemembers when the laws of a tax
    jurisdiction do not provide a credit for taxes previously paid to
    another tax jurisdiction

Amendments to the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployments Rights
Act (USERRA):

-   Increases from 18 to 24 months the maximum period of
    employer-sponsored health coverage that an employee covered by
    USERRA may elect to continue

-   Requires employers to provide noticed to employees of the rights,
    benefits, and obligations of employers and employees under USERRA

-   Requires the Secretary of Labor and the Office of Special Counsel
    (OSC) to carry out a three-year demonstration project on enforcement
    of USERRA rights for federal executive branch employees

Matters Relating to Fiduciaries:

-   Defines a fiduciary as a guardian, curator, conservator, committee
    or person legally vested with the responsibility or care of a
    claimant (or the claimant's estate) or of a beneficiary (or the
    beneficiary's estate), or any other person appointed in a
    representative capacity to receive money paid by the Veterans
    Administration (VA)

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Requires the VA to conduct an inquiry or investigation as to the
    fitness of a fiduciary before certification

-   Gives the Secretary of the VA authority to appoint a temporary
    fiduciary for up to 120 days if needed to protect the assets of a
    beneficiary

-   Prohibits a fiduciary from collecting a fee from the beneficiary for
    any month when it has been determined that the fiduciary has misused
    the veteran's benefits

-   Requires the Secretary to conduct periodic on-site reviews of any
    person or agency located in the United States that serves as a
    fiduciary to more than 20 beneficiaries and the total annual amount
    of benefits exceeds \$50,000

Additional Provisions:

-   Requires the Secretary to establish and maintain an inventory of
    medical waste management facilities in VA facilities

-   Authorizes the VA to provide post-natal care to newborns of female
    veterans receiving maternity care from the VA who are without other
    health insurance coverage

-   Allows veterans to use their education benefits (under the
    Montgomery GI bill) to receive on-the-job training without pay for
    periods of less than six months, when that training is needed to
    obtain a license to engage in a self-employment occupation or is
    required for ownership and operation of a franchise

**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: The Committee on Veterans' Affairs
reported the bill by voice vote on July 21, 2004.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}**: The Congressional Budget Office
estimates that H.R. 4658 would increase direct spending for veterans
programs by \$11 million over the 2005--2009. In addition, CBO estimates
that discretionary spending resulting from H.R. 4658 would total almost
\$28 million over the 2005--2009 period, assuming appropriation of the
necessary amounts.

**[Does the Bill Expand the Size and Scope of the Federal
Government?]{.underline}**: No.

**[Does the Bill Contain Any New State-Government, Local-Government, or
Private-Sector Mandates?]{.underline}**: Yes, the bill contains a new
private-sector mandate and a new intergovernmental mandate.

**[Constitutional Authority]{.underline}**: The Committee on Veterans'
Affairs, in House Report 108-683, cites Article I, Section 8, but fails
to cite a specific clause.

**[Staff Contact]{.underline}**: Lisa Bos, <lisa.bos@mail.house.gov>,
(202) 226-1630

H.R. 5061---Comprehensive Peace in Sudan Act (Tancredo)

**[Order of Business]{.underline}**: The bill is scheduled for
consideration on Wednesday, October 6^th^, under a motion to suspend the
rules and pass the bill.

**[Summary]{.underline}**: H.R. 5061 would provide assistance for the
Darfur region of the Sudan. The bill expresses the sense of Congress
that "the Sudan Peace Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 note) remains relevant and
should be extended to include the Darfur region of Sudan" and that "that
atrocities unfolding in the Darfur region of Sudan are genocide." It
also expresses the sense of Congress in favor of targeted sanctions
against Sudanese Government officials involved in the policy of
genocide, humanitarian assistance, and a new Special Presidential Envoy
for Peace.

Specifically, the bill authorizes assistance for Sudan to support the
implementation of a comprehensive peace agreement for Sudan and to
address the humanitarian and human rights crisis in the Darfur region
and eastern Chad. Assistance may only be provided if the President
certifies that the Government of Sudan has taken steps to:

> "(A) ensure that the armed forces of Sudan and any associated militias
> are not committing atrocities or obstructing human rights monitors or
> the provision of humanitarian assistance;
>
> "(B) demobilize and disarm militias supported or created by the
> Government of Sudan;
>
> "(C) allow full and unfettered humanitarian assistance to all regions
> of Sudan, including Darfur;
>
> "(D) allow an international commission of inquiry to conduct its
> investigation of atrocities in the Darfur region and Khartoum,
> preserve evidence of atrocities and prosecute those responsible for
> war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide;
>
> "(E) cooperate fully with the African Union and all other observer and
> monitoring missions mandated to operate in Sudan;
>
> "(F) ensure the safe return of displaced persons and refugees to their
> homes and rebuild the communities destroyed in the violence;
>
> "(G) implement the Nairobi Declaration on the Final Phase of Peace in
> the Sudan; and
>
> "(H) install a new coalition government based on the agreements
> reached in the Nairobi Declaration on the Final Phase of Peace in the
> Sudan."

The President must immediately suspend assistance if the Government of
Sudan stops taking any of the actions above. The bill authorizes \$100
million for each of fiscal years 2005-2007 for assistance to implement a
comprehensive peace agreement and \$150 million for fiscal year 2005 for
humanitarian assistance.

H.R. 5061 also requires the President, on the date of enactment, to
implement measures authorized under the Sudan Peace Act. These are as
follows:

"The President\--

"(A) shall, through the Secretary of the Treasury, instruct the United
States executive directors to each international financial institution
to continue to vote against and actively oppose any extension by the
respective institution of any loan, credit, or guarantee to the
Government of Sudan;

> "(B) should consider downgrading or suspending diplomatic relations
> between the United States and the Government of Sudan;
>
> "(C) shall take all necessary and appropriate steps, including through
> multilateral efforts, to deny the Government of Sudan access to oil
> revenues to ensure that the Government of Sudan neither directly nor
> indirectly utilizes any oil revenues to purchase or acquire military
> equipment or to finance any military activities; and
>
> "(D) shall seek a United Nations Security Council Resolution to impose
> an arms embargo on the Government of Sudan."

The bill also:

-   Requires the Secretary of the Treasury to complete an annual report
    on commercial activities in Sudan

-   Encourages actions by the President in relation to the United
    Nations

-   Requires the President to complete a report on the planned U.S.
    response to a comprehensive peace agreement for Sudan

**[Additional Background]{.underline}**: Click here to read the RSC
Legislative Bulletin on the Sudan Peace Act:
[http://johnshadegg.house.gov/rsc/Lb100702.pdf](http://johnshadegg.house.gov/rsc/LB61301.PDF)

**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: H.R. 5061 was introduced on
September 9, 2004, and referred to the Committee on International
Relations. The Subcommittee on Africa approved the bill by voice vote on
September 30. The full Committee did not take action on the bill.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}**: H.R. 5061 specifically authorizes
\$250 million for fiscal year 2005 and \$100 million for fiscal years
2006 and 2007.

**[Does the Bill Expand the Size and Scope of the Federal
Government?]{.underline}**: The bill authorizes new assistance to Sudan,
contingent on certain actions by the Sudanese government.

**[Does the Bill Contain Any New State-Government, Local-Government, or
Private-Sector Mandates?]{.underline}**: No.

**[Constitutional Authority]{.underline}**: A committee report citing
constitutional authority is not available.

**[Staff Contact]{.underline}**: Lisa Bos, <lisa.bos@mail.house.gov>,
(202) 226-1630