```

[Journal of the House of Representatives, 1995]
[Tuesday, October 10, 1995 (125), Para 125.10 Edible Oil Regulatory Reform]
[Pages 1496-1497]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

para.125.10  edible oil regulatory reform

  The Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union was 
discharged from further consideration of the bill (H.R. 436) to require 
the heads of any Federal agency to differentiate between fats, oils, and 
greases of animal, marine, or vegetable origin, and other oils and 
greases in issuing certain regulations, and for other purposes.
  When said bill was considered and read twice.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore, Mr. EVERETT, pursuant to clause 4 of rule 
XIII, recognized Mr. BURR and Mr. OBERSTAR, each for 30 minutes.
  Mr. BURR, pursuant to the foregoing order of the House of today, 
submitted the following amendment in the nature of a substitute:

       Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the 
     following:

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Edible Oil Regulatory Reform 
     Act''.

     SEC. 2. DIFFERENTIATION AMONG FATS, OILS, AND GREASES.

       (a) In General.--Except as provided in subsection (c), in 
     issuing or enforcing any regulation or establishing any 
     interpretation or guideline relating to a fat, oil, or grease 
     under any Federal law, the head of any Federal agency shall--
       (1) differentiate between and establish separate classes 
     for--
       (A) animal fats and oils and greases, and fish and marine 
     mammal oils, within the meaning of paragraph (2) of section 
     61(a) of title 13, United States Code, and oils of vegetable 
     origin, including oils from the seeds, nuts, and kernels 
     referred to in paragraph (1)(A) of such section; and
       (B) other oils and greases, including petroleum; and
       (2) apply different standards to different classes of fats 
     and oils as provided in subsection in subsection (B).
       (b) Considerations.--In differentiating between the class 
     of fats, oils, and greases described in subsection (a)(1)(A) 
     and the class of oils and greases described in subsection 
     (a)(1)(B), the head of the Federal agency shall consider 
     differences in the physical, chemical, biological, and other 
     properties, and in the environmental effects, of the classes.
       (c) Exception.--The requirements of this Act shall not 
     apply to the Food and Drug Administration and the Food Safety 
     and Inspection Service.
       (d) Financial Responsibility.--

[[Page 1497]]

       (1) Section 1004(a)(1) of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (33 
     U.S.C. 2704(a)(1)) is amended by striking ``for a tank 
     vessel,'' and inserting ``for a tank vessel carrying oil in 
     bulk as cargo or cargo residue (except a tank vessel on which 
     the only oil carried is an animal fat or vegetable oil, as 
     those terms are used in section 2 of the Edible Oil 
     Regulatory Reform Act)''.
       (2) Section 1016(a) of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (33 
     U.S.C. 2176(a)) is amended in the first sentence by striking 
     ``, in the case of a tank vessel, the responsible party could 
     be subject under section 1004(a)(1) or (d) of this Act, or to 
     which, in the case of any other vessel, the responsible party 
     could be subjected under section 1004(a)(2) or (d)'' and 
     inserting ``the responsible party could be subjected under 
     section 1004(a) or (d) of this Act''.

  After debate,
  Pursuant to clause 4 of rule XIII, the previous question on the 
amendment in the nature of a substitute and the bill was considered as 
ordered.
  The question being put, viva voce,
  Will the House agree to said amendment in the nature of a substitute?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore, Mr. EVERETT, announced that the yeas had it.
  So the amendment in the nature of substitute was agreed to.
  The bill, as amended, was ordered to be engrossed and read a third 
time, was read a third time by title.
  The question being put, viva voce,
  Will the House pass said bill?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore, Mr. EVERETT, announced that three-fifths of 
the Members present had voted in the affirmative.
  So, three-fifths of the Members present having voted in favor thereof, 
the bill was passed.
  A motion to reconsider the vote whereby the bill was passed was, by 
unanimous consent, laid on the table.
  Ordered, That the Clerk request the concurrence of the Senate in said 
bill.
```