In this task, you are given text for US Congressional and California state bills, your task is to generate a summary for this bill.

Ex Input:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Preservation of Antibiotics for 
Medical Treatment Act of 2011''.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

    The Congress finds the following:
            (1) In January 2001, a Federal interagency task force--
                    (A) released an action plan to address the 
                continuing decline in effectiveness of antibiotics 
                against common bacterial infections, referred to as 
                antibiotic resistance;
                    (B) determined that antibiotic resistance is a 
                growing menace to all people and poses a serious threat 
                to public health; and
                    (C) cautioned that if current trends continue, 
                treatments for common infections will become 
                increasingly limited and expensive, and, in some cases, 
                nonexistent.
            (2) Antibiotic resistance, resulting in a reduced number of 
        effective antibiotics, may significantly impair the ability of 
        the United States to respond to terrorist attacks involving 
        bacterial infections or a large influx of hospitalized 
        patients.
            (3)(A) Any overuse or misuse of antibiotics contributes to 
        the spread of antibiotic resistance, whether in human medicine 
        or in agriculture.
            (B) Recognizing the public health threat caused by 
        antibiotic resistance, Congress took several steps to curb 
        antibiotic overuse in human medicine through amendments to the 
        Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 201 et seq.) made by 
        section 102 of the Public Health Threats and Emergencies Act 
        (Public Law 106-505, title I; 114 Stat. 2315), but has not yet 
        addressed antibiotic overuse in agriculture.
            (4) In a March 2003 report, the National Academy of 
        Sciences stated that--
                    (A) a decrease in antimicrobial use in human 
                medicine alone will have little effect on the current 
                situation; and
                    (B) substantial efforts must be made to decrease 
                inappropriate overuse in animals and agriculture.
            (5) In 2010, the FDA determined that--
                    (A) 13.1 million kilograms of antibacterial drugs 
                were sold for use on food animals in the United States 
                in 2009;
                    (B) 3.3 million kilograms of antibacterial drugs 
                were used for human health in 2009; and
                    (C) therefore, 80 percent of antibacterial drugs 
                disseminated in the United States in 2009 were sold for 
                use on food animals, rather than being used for human 
                health.
            (6)(A) Large-scale, voluntary surveys by the Department of 
        Agriculture's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service in 
        1999, 2001, and 2006 revealed that--
                    (i) 84 percent of grower-finisher swine farms, 83 
                percent of cattle feedlots, and 84 percent of sheep 
                farms administer antimicrobials in the feed or water 
                for health or growth promotion reasons; and
                    (ii) many of the antimicrobials identified are 
                identical or closely related to drugs used in human 
                medicine, including tetracyclines, macrolides, 
                Bacitracin, penicillins, and sulfonamides; and
            (B) these drugs are used in people to treat serious 
        diseases such as pneumonia, scarlet fever, rheumatic fever, 
        venereal disease, skin infections, and even pandemics like 
        malaria and plague, as well as bioterrorism agents like 
        smallpox and anthrax.
            (7) Many scientific studies confirm that the nontherapeutic 
        use of antibiotics in agricultural animals contributes to the 
        development of antibiotic-resistant bacterial infections in 
        people.
            (8) The periodical entitled ``Clinical Infectious 
        Diseases'' published a report in June 2002, that--
                    (A) was based on a 2-year review by experts in 
                human and veterinary medicine, public health, 
                microbiology, biostatistics, and risk analysis, of more 
                than 500 scientific studies on the human health impacts 
                of antimicrobial use in agriculture; and
                    (B) recommended that antimicrobial agents should no 
                longer be used in agriculture in the absence of 
                disease, but should be limited to therapy for diseased 
                individual animals and prophylaxis when disease is 
                documented in a herd or flock.
            (9) The United States Geological Survey reported in March 
        2002 that--
                    (A) antibiotics were present in 48 percent of the 
                streams tested nationwide; and
                    (B) almost half of the tested streams were 
                downstream from agricultural operations.
            (10) An April 1999 study by the General Accounting Office 
        concluded that resistant strains of 3 microorganisms that cause 
        food-borne illness or disease in humans (Salmonella, 
        Campylobacter, and E. coli) are linked to the use of 
        antibiotics in animals.
            (11) Epidemiological research has shown that resistant 
        Salmonella and Campylobacter infections are associated with 
        increased numbers of ill patients and bloodstream infections, 
        and increased death.
            (12) In 2010, the peer-reviewed journal Molecular Cell 
        published a study demonstrating that low-dosage use of 
        antibiotics causes a dramatic increase in genetic mutation, 
        raising new concerns about the agricultural practice of using 
        low-dosage antibiotics in order to stimulate growth promotion 
        and routinely prevent disease in unhealthy conditions.
            (13)(A) In January 2003, Consumer Reports published test 
        results on poultry products bought in grocery stores nationwide 
        showing disturbingly high levels of Campylobacter and 
        Salmonella bacteria that were resistant to the antibiotics used 
        to treat food-borne illnesses.
            (B) The Food and Drug Administration's National 
        Antimicrobial Resistance Monitoring System routinely finds that 
        retail meat products are contaminated with bacteria (including 
        the foodborne pathogens Campylobacter and Salmonella) that are 
        resistant to antibiotics important in human medicine.
            (C) In December 2007, the USDA issued a fact sheet on the 
        recently recognized link between antimicrobial drug use in 
        animals and Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus Aureas (MRSA) 
        infections in humans.
            (14) In October 2001, the New England Journal of Medicine 
        published an editorial urging a ban on nontherapeutic use of 
        medically important antibiotics in animals.
            (15)(A) In 1998, the National Academy of Sciences noted 
        that antibiotic-resistant bacteria generate a minimum of 
        $4,000,000,000 to $5,000,000,000 in costs to United States 
        society and individuals yearly.
            (B) In 2009, Cook County Hospital and the Alliance for 
        Prudent Use of Antibiotics estimated that the total health care 
        cost of antibiotic resistant infections in the United States 
        was between $16,600,000,000 and $26,000,000,000 annually.
            (16) The American Medical Association, the American Public 
        Health Association, the National Association of County and City 
        Health Officials, and the National Campaign for Sustainable 
        Agriculture are among the more than 300 organizations 
        representing health, consumer, agricultural, environmental, 
        humane, and other interests that have supported enactment of 
        legislation to phase out nontherapeutic use in farm animals of 
        medically important antibiotics.
            (17) In 2010, the Danish Veterinary and Food Administration 
        testified that the Danish ban of the non-therapeutic use of 
        antibiotics in food animal production resulted in a marked 
        reduction in antimicrobial resistance in multiple bacterial 
        species, including Campylobacter and Enterococci.
            (18) In 2009, the Congressional Research Service concluded 
        that restrictions overseas on the use of antimicrobial drugs in 
        the production of livestock could impact U.S. export markets 
        for livestock and poultry.
            (19) The Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 
        301 et seq.)--
                    (A) requires that all drugs be shown to be safe 
                before the drugs are approved; and
                    (B) places the burden on manufacturers to account 
                for health consequences and prove safety.
            (20)(A) The Food and Drug Administration recently modified 
        the drug approval process for antibiotics to recognize the 
        development of resistant bacteria as an important aspect of 
        safety, but most antibiotics currently used in animal 
        production systems for nontherapeutic purposes were approved 
        before the Food and Drug Administration began considering 
        resistance during the drug-approval process.
            (B) The Food and Drug Administration has not established a 
        schedule for reviewing those existing approvals.
            (21) Certain non-routine uses of antibiotics in animal 
        agriculture are legitimate to prevent animal disease.
            (22) An April 2004 study by the General Accounting Office--
                    (A) concluded that Federal agencies do not collect 
                the critical data on antibiotic use in animals that 
                they need to support research on human health risks; 
                and
                    (B) recommends that the Department of Agriculture 
                and the Department of Health and Human Services develop 
                and implement a plan to collect data on antibiotic use 
                in animals.

SEC. 3. PURPOSE.

    The purpose of this Act is to preserve the effectiveness of 
medically important antibiotics used in the treatment of human and 
animal diseases by reviewing the safety of certain antibiotics for 
nontherapeutic purposes in food-producing animals.

SEC. 4. PROOF OF SAFETY OF CRITICAL ANTIMICROBIAL ANIMAL DRUGS.

    (a) Definitions.--Section 201 of the Federal Food, Drug, and 
Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 321) is amended by adding at the end the 
following:
    ``(ss) Critical Antimicrobial Animal Drug.--The term `critical 
antimicrobial animal drug' means a drug that--
            ``(1) is intended for use in food-producing animals; and
            ``(2) is composed wholly or partly of--
                    ``(A) any kind of penicillin, tetracycline, 
                macrolide, lincosamide, streptogramin, aminoglycoside, 
                or sulfonamide; or
                    ``(B) any other drug or derivative of a drug that 
                is used in humans or intended for use in humans to 
                treat or prevent disease or infection caused by 
                microorganisms.
    ``(tt) Nontherapeutic Use.--The term `nontherapeutic use', with 
respect to a critical antimicrobial animal drug, means any use of the 
drug as a feed or water additive for an animal in the absence of any 
clinical sign of disease in the animal for growth promotion, feed 
efficiency, weight gain, routine disease prevention, or other routine 
purpose.''.
    (b) Applications Pending or Submitted After Enactment.--Section 
512(d)(1) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 
360b(d)(1)) is amended--
            (1) in the first sentence--
                    (A) in subparagraph (H), by striking ``or'' at the 
                end;
                    (B) in subparagraph (I), by inserting ``or'' at the 
                end; and
                    (C) by inserting after subparagraph (I) the 
                following:
                    ``(J) with respect to a critical antimicrobial 
                animal drug or a drug of the same chemical class as a 
                critical antimicrobial animal drug, the applicant has 
                failed to demonstrate that there is a reasonable 
                certainty of no harm to human health due to the 
                development of antimicrobial resistance that is 
                attributable, in whole or in part, to the 
                nontherapeutic use of the drug; or''; and
            (2) in the second sentence, by striking ``(A) through (I)'' 
        and inserting ``(A) through (J)''.
    (c) Phased Elimination of Nontherapeutic Use in Animals of Critical 
Antimicrobial Animal Drugs Important for Human Health.--Section 512 of 
the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 360b) is amended by 
adding at the end the following:
    ``(q) Phased Elimination of Nontherapeutic Use in Animals of 
Critical Antimicrobial Animal Drugs Important for Human Health.--
            ``(1) Applicability.--This subsection applies to the 
        nontherapeutic use in a food-producing animal of a drug--
                    ``(A)(i) that is a critical antimicrobial animal 
                drug; or
                    ``(ii) that is of the same chemical class as a 
                critical antimicrobial animal drug; and
                    ``(B)(i) for which there is in effect an approval 
                of an application or an exemption under subsection (b), 
                (i), or (j) of section 505; or
                    ``(ii) that is otherwise marketed for use.
            ``(2) Withdrawal.--The Secretary shall withdraw the 
        approval of a nontherapeutic use in food-producing animals 
        described in paragraph (1) on the date that is 2 years after 
        the date of enactment of this subsection unless--
                    ``(A) before the date that is 2 years after the 
                date of the enactment of this subsection, the Secretary 
                makes a final written determination that the holder of 
                the approved application has demonstrated that there is 
                a reasonable certainty of no harm to human health due 
                to the development of antimicrobial resistance that is 
                attributable in whole or in part to the nontherapeutic 
                use of the drug; or
                    ``(B) before the date specified in subparagraph 
                (A), the Secretary makes a final written determination 
                under this subsection, with respect to a risk analysis 
                of the drug conducted by the Secretary and other 
                relevant information, that there is a reasonable 
                certainty of no harm to human health due to the 
                development of antimicrobial resistance that is 
                attributable in whole or in part to the nontherapeutic 
                use of the drug.
            ``(3) Exemptions.--Except as provided in paragraph (5), if 
        the Secretary grants an exemption under section 505(i) for a 
        drug that is a critical antimicrobial animal drug, the 
        Secretary shall rescind each approval of a nontherapeutic use 
        in a food-producing animal of the critical antimicrobial animal 
        drug, or of a drug in the same chemical class as the critical 
        antimicrobial animal drug, as of the date that is 2 years after 
        the date on which the Secretary grants the exemption.
            ``(4) Approvals.--Except as provided in paragraph (5), if 
        an application for a drug that is a critical antimicrobial 
        animal drug is submitted to the Secretary under section 505(b), 
        the Secretary shall rescind each approval of a nontherapeutic 
        use in a food-producing animal of the critical antimicrobial 
        animal drug, or of a drug in the same chemical class as the 
        critical antimicrobial animal drug, as of the date that is 2 
        years after the date on which the application is submitted to 
        the Secretary.
            ``(5) Exception.--Paragraph (3) or (4), as the case may be, 
        shall not apply if--
                    ``(A) before the date on which approval would be 
                rescinded under that paragraph, the Secretary makes a 
                final written determination that the holder of the 
                application for the approved nontherapeutic use has 
                demonstrated that there is a reasonable certainty of no 
                harm to human health due to the development of 
                antimicrobial resistance that is attributable in whole 
                or in part to the nontherapeutic use in the food-
                producing animal of the critical antimicrobial animal 
                drug; or
                    ``(B) before the date specified in subparagraph 
                (A), the Secretary makes a final written determination 
                under this subsection, with respect to a risk analysis 
                of the critical antimicrobial animal drug conducted by 
                the Secretary and any other relevant information, that 
                there is a reasonable certainty of no harm to human 
                health due to the development of antimicrobial 
                resistance that is attributable in whole or in part to 
                the nontherapeutic use of the drug.''.

SEC. 5. COMMITTEE HEARINGS ON IMPLEMENTATION.

    (a) In General.--The Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House 
of Representatives and the Committee on Energy of the Senate shall each 
hold a hearing on the implementation by the Commissioner of Food and 
Drugs of section 512(q) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, as 
added by section 4 of this Act.
    (b) Exercise of Rulemaking Authority.--Subsection (a) is enacted--
            (1) as an exercise of the rulemaking power of the House of 
        Representatives and Senate, and, as such, they shall be 
        considered as part of the rules of the House or Senate (as the 
        case may be), and such rules shall supersede any other rule of 
        the House or Senate only to the extent that rule is 
        inconsistent therewith; and
            (2) with full recognition of the constitutional right of 
        either House to change such rules (so far as relating to the 
        procedure in such House) at any time, in the same manner, and 
        to the same extent as in the case of any other rule of the 
        House or Senate.

Ex Output:
Preservation of Antibiotics for Medical Treatment Act of 2011 - Amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to require the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) to deny an application for a new animal drug that is a critical antimicrobial animal drug unless the applicant demonstrates that there is a reasonably certainty of no harm to human health due to the development of antimicrobial resistance attributable to the nontherapeutic use of the drug. Defines "critical antimicrobial animal drug" as a drug intended for use in food-producing animals that contains specified antibiotics or other drugs used in humans to treat or prevent disease or infection caused by microorganisms.

Requires the Secretary to withdraw approval of a nontherapeutic use of such drugs in food-producing animals two years after the date of enactment of this Act unless certain safety requirements are met. Directs specified congressional committees to hold hearings on the implementation of such a withdrawal of approval.


Ex Input:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE AND TABLE OF CONTENTS.

    (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``California Forest 
Ecosystems Health Act''.
    (b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act is as 
follows:

Sec. 1. Short title and table of contents.
Sec. 2. Findings.
Sec. 3. Definitions.
Sec. 4. Ecosystem management plans for National Forest System lands in 
                            California.
Sec. 5. Process for full implementation of ecosystem management plans.
Sec. 6. Research and monitoring program.
Sec. 7. Miscellaneous requirements.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

    The Congress finds the following:
            (1) Although people have had an active part in the 
        development and maintenance of forest structure and the 
        condition of the National Forest System lands in the State of 
        California for many years, recent forest management policies 
        have often resulted in a degeneration of the forest structure 
        and a loss of forest health and vigor.
            (2) The Forest Service, through the judicious use of 
        ecosystem management, has an opportunity to reverse these 
        forest management policies and restore the health and vigor of 
        National Forest System lands in California.
            (3) Ecosystems are dynamic and in a state of constant 
        change, and it is not possible to preserve a given ecosystem 
        condition in a static state over a period of time.
            (4) The many and varied resources and uses of National 
        Forest System lands provide both tangible and intangible 
        benefits to the people of the United States.
            (5) Although management of National Forest System lands in 
        California has traditionally placed first priority on the need 
        to produce maximum volumes of timber, the other multiple forest 
        resources and services are equally important to the people of 
        California and the United States.
            (6) Ecosystem management must balance the needs of outdoor 
        recreation, range, timber, watershed, fish, and wildlife, as 
        required by the Multiple-Use Sustained-Yield Act of 1960 (16 
        U.S.C. 528 et seq.), as well as protect soil and air quality 
        and provide for forest research.
            (7) National Forest System lands in California include some 
        of the most unique forest ecosystems in the world, including 
        giant sequoias, coastal redwoods, and bristlecone pines.
            (8) Destructive forest fires classified by the Forest 
        Service as ``intense'' have occurred in unprecedented numbers 
        and size on the National Forest System lands in California in 
        recent years, and these fires pose a threat to the very health 
        of the forests and present a danger to human life and property.
            (9) The Forest Service, through the judicious use of 
        ecosystem management, has an opportunity to reduce the 
        likelihood that fires classified as ``intense'' will occur with 
        such frequency and, at the same time, to improve forest vigor 
        and visitor safety.
            (10) Ecosystem management that considers the needs of all 
        species and their ability to interact with the presence of 
        humans can integrate both the conservation needs of the many 
        species of the ecosystems and the multiple use activities of 
        humans.
            (11) Identification of sound management options is both a 
        biological issue and a social issue, and the resulting 
        management policies must be socially acceptable, ecologically 
        sustainable, scientifically sound, legally responsible, and 
        economically viable.
            (12) The results of management practices in local 
        ecosystems can have a profound effect on the levels of demand 
        for commodity outputs from other ecosystems around the world.

SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

    For purposes of this Act:
            (1) Adaptive management.--The term ``adaptive management'' 
        means the experimental and monitored application of 
        scientifically derived management decisions to gain knowledge 
        that is then used to improve subsequent management decisions.
            (2) Ecosystem.--The term ``ecosystem'' means a community of 
        organisms and its environment that functions as a unit.
            (3) Ecosystem management.--The term ``ecosystem 
        management'' means the integration of ecological, economic, and 
        social factors to meet the biological needs of all associated 
        organisms and human needs through diverse, healthy, and 
        productive ecosystems, addressing resource supply, 
        conservation, and demand as opposed to a strategy for managing 
        individual species.
            (4) Ecosystem management plans.--The terms ``ecosystem 
        management plans'' and ``plans'' mean the ecosystem management 
        plans for National Forest System lands in the State of 
        California required to be developed by section 4(a).
            (5) National forest system.--The term ``National Forest 
        System'' has the meaning given that term in section 11(a) of 
        the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act of 
        1974 (16 U.S.C. 1609(a)).
            (6) Seral stages.--The term ``seral stages'' means the 
        various age or life stages of a vegetative community as it 
        progresses from initial establishment toward a climax stage or 
        equilibrium.
            (7) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
        of Agriculture.
            (8) Stand.--The term ``stand'' means an area within a 
        forest where the trees have similar characteristics with 
        respect to species composition, size, condition, and age.
            (9) Vigor.--The term ``vigor'', with respect to forest 
        ecosystems, means the relative health of stands of trees and 
        related vegetation, including their actual growth rates as 
        compared with potential growth rates and their ability to 
        protect themselves naturally from forest pests, diseases, and 
        the effects of natural disaster.

SEC. 4. ECOSYSTEM MANAGEMENT PLANS FOR NATIONAL FOREST SYSTEM LANDS IN 
              CALIFORNIA.

    (a) Plans Required.--Notwithstanding the planning provisions of 
section 6 of the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act 
of 1974 (16 U.S.C. 1604), the Secretary of Agriculture shall develop 
and implement ecosystem management plans pursuant to this Act to 
develop and demonstrate ecosystem management, including adaptive 
management techniques, for National Forest System lands described in 
subsection (b).
    (b) Federal Lands Covered by Plans.--The ecosystem management plans 
required by subsection (a) shall apply to all management units of the 
National Forest System located in the State of California. In the case 
of National Forest System lands in California that have been designated 
by law for special management before the date of the enactment of this 
Act, the Secretary shall incorporate into the ecosystem management 
plans applicable to those lands any statutory provisions that are in 
effect on such date and applicable to those lands.
    (c) Principles of Plans.--Ecosystem management plans shall embody 
the following principles:
            (1) Application of management techniques that will enhance 
        the health and vigor of the renewable natural resources on the 
        National Forest System lands covered by the plans and provide 
        for the continued protection of the soil, air, and water 
        resources of these lands.
            (2) Improvement of the forest ecosystems on these lands 
        toward desired forest conditions that--
                    (A) provide a mosaic of forest seral stages--
                            (i) representing a range of wildlife 
                        habitats necessary to meet the needs of the 
                        species indigenous to the ecosystem being 
                        managed; and
                            (ii) designed in such a way as to obviate 
                        the need for corridors or special management 
                        areas to meet the needs of given species or 
                        situations;
                    (B) minimize the danger of stand-destroying 
                uncontrolled wildfire;
                    (C) increase or maintain the health and vigor of 
                stands at a level that will permit the stands to resist 
                naturally, to the greatest degree practicable, insect 
                and disease attacks and the effects of other natural 
                disasters while incorporating the concern that some 
                level of dead-wood, both standing and down, is 
                desirable in healthy ecosystems;
                    (D) maintain the sustainable economic well-being 
                and stability of communities in areas dependent upon 
                national forest resources; and
                    (E) are developed, to the extent possible, with 
                consideration of the conditions that are known to have 
                existed on these lands or on similar lands before the 
                impacts of European settlement.
            (3) Concentration of management activities on the condition 
        of the renewable resources of an ecosystem rather than on 
        producing targeted outputs, with projected outputs based upon 
        attainment of specific stand conditions.
            (4) Emphasis on tangible management results rather than on 
        procedural standards and guidelines, but with development of 
        scientifically credible monitoring standards and guidelines to 
        assess both short- and long-term management results.
            (5) Except for any statutory provisions incorporated under 
        subsection (b) with respect to specific lands, prohibition on 
        requiring the allocation or categorization of tracts of land 
        for specific preselected ecosystem management emphases.
            (6) Consideration of the habitat needs of all species 
        across a broad landscape using management indicator species 
        whose presence will reflect a suitable amount and distribution 
        of particular habitat elements, rather than concentrating on 
        the needs of single species in a limited area.
            (7) Application across the entire unreserved land base in 
        such a manner as to harmonize the various multiple uses.
            (8) Incorporation of maximum flexibility in resource 
        decisionmaking through the use of adaptive management.
    (d) Management to Promote Desired Forest Conditions.--
            (1) In general.--Ecosystem management under the ecosystem 
        management plans shall be planned and practiced in a manner 
        that--
                    (A) considers the entire landscape in a management 
                unit of the National Forest System covered by a plan; 
                and
                    (B) benefits, to the extent practicable, all 
                renewable resources and the human resource in or 
                dependent upon the management unit.
            (2) Individual projects.--Individual management projects in 
        a management unit of the National Forest System covered by the 
        ecosystem management plans shall be designed to provide 
        multiresource benefits, promote the desired forest conditions 
        described in subsection (c)(2), and achieve maximum project 
        operating efficiency.
    (e) Selection of Acres for Ecosystem Management Activities.--
            (1) Minimum acres.--Ecosystem management plans shall 
        specify the minimum number of acres on which ecosystem 
        management activities will be applied annually in any 
        management unit of the National Forest System covered by the 
        plans. Such acreage shall be determined on the basis of the 
        total number of acres in the management unit, the work to be 
        performed across the unit as a whole during the plan period, 
        and the pro rata annual acreage on which ecosystem management 
        activities must be applied in order to establish and maintain 
        the desired forest condition during the specified plan period.
            (2) Effect of natural disasters.--In case of natural 
        disasters, such as wildfire, flood, windthrow, insect or 
        disease attack, a revision of the schedule of acres to be 
        treated may be granted by the Secretary in order to conduct 
        restoration and rehabilitation activities on the acres affected 
        by the natural disaster.
    (f) Participation in Development.--To ensure that the ecosystem 
management plans are economically, scientifically, and socially 
acceptable, the Secretary shall develop the plans through the use of 
public involvement programs that emphasize input from residents of 
local communities to be affected by the plans. The Secretary shall 
continue to consult with all interested persons in evaluating or 
modifying the plans.

SEC. 5. PROCESS FOR FULL IMPLEMENTATION OF ECOSYSTEM MANAGEMENT PLANS.

    (a) Implementation.--Beginning not later than January 1, 1995, the 
Secretary shall begin to implement the ecosystem management plans. The 
Secretary shall develop and implement the plans progressively over a 
five-year period to ensure full application of all plans not later than 
January 1, 2000, to all National Forest System lands described in 
section 4(b). Upon implementation of an ecosystem management plan for 
any portion of the lands described in such section, the plan shall 
replace and supersede any land and resource management plan (or portion 
of such a plan) then in effect for such lands.
    (b) Yearly Expansion.--During each year of the period specified in 
subsection (a), the Secretary shall expand application of the ecosystem 
management plans to contiguous areas required to be covered by such 
plans, as described in section 4(b). To the extent the Secretary 
considers it to be necessary, the Secretary may modify the ecosystem 
management plans for each new addition in order to incorporate the 
lessons gained from experience. Adaptive management shall be used to 
evaluate management decisions and to develop new information to be used 
to keep the plans and subsequent management decisions up-to-date.
    (c) Modification of Ecosystem Management Plans.--The Secretary 
shall modify the ecosystem management plans to incorporate findings 
from research, adaptive management projects, or monitoring to the 
extent such findings indicate changes in the plans are necessary or 
appropriate to achieve the principles described in section 4(c). Before 
the end of the first two years of the period specified in subsection 
(a), the Secretary shall issue regulations that set forth the process 
to be used for any modification of the ecosystem management plans.
    (d) Consistency.--Resource plans and permits and other instruments 
for the use and occupancy of National Forest System lands covered by an 
ecosystem management plan that are executed subsequent to the 
implementation date of the plan with respect to such lands shall be 
consistent with the plan. If the ecosystem management plan is modified, 
resource plans and permits and other instruments that are executed 
subsequent to the date of the modification shall be consistent with the 
modified plan. Appropriate supplemental documents under the National 
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) shall be 
prepared for those resource plans and permits, contracts, and other 
instruments in existence upon adoption of the ecosystem management plan 
or any modification of the plan. Any revisions in existing resource 
plans and permits, contracts, and other instruments shall be consistent 
with the supplemental document findings and subject to the agreement of 
all contractual parties. Any revision in present or future permits, 
contracts, and other instruments made pursuant to this subsection shall 
be subject to valid existing rights.

SEC. 6. RESEARCH AND MONITORING PROGRAM.

    The Secretary shall describe in detail in the ecosystem management 
plans and implement as part of the plans a targeted program of research 
and monitoring aimed at measuring the effects of the management regimes 
adopted under the plans. The Secretary shall ensure that monitoring is 
sufficient to measure the responses of the various resources to 
management practices and to provide a basis for adjustments of 
subsequent management decisions.

SEC. 7. MISCELLANEOUS REQUIREMENTS.

    (a) Increased Use of Certified Professional Practitioners.--With 
respect to National Forest System lands covered by the ecosystem 
management plans, the Secretary shall endeavor to increase the amount 
of field work to be done by professional practitioners certified by the 
Forest Service.
    (b) Accountability Procedures.--The Secretary shall develop 
accountability procedures to annually measure and inform the Congress 
concerning the work (as described in section 4(e)) achieved through the 
use of funds appropriated each year for National Forest System lands 
covered by the ecosystem management plans. The selection of acres upon 
which such work will be performed shall be controlled through the 
planning process. The accountability procedures required by this 
subsection shall be established and in operation before the end of the 
first two years of the period specified in section 5(a) and shall be 
designed to ensure the accomplishment of the work in accordance with 
plan direction.
    (c) Budgetary Considerations.--The Secretary shall develop budgets 
for each management unit of the National Forest System covered by 
ecosystem management plans on the basis of estimated benefits to the 
various resources affected by the ecosystem management activities, and 
such budgets will be justified on such basis. The Secretary shall 
provide the managers of these units the flexibility to accomplish over-
all objectives within over-all budgets in lieu of requiring and 
preparing detailed line-item budgets for each unit of work, except that 
accountability procedures developed under subsection (b) shall include 
requirements for detailed explanations of expenditures and estimates of 
benefits for each resource.

Ex Output:
California Forest Ecosystems Health Act - Directs the Secretary of Agriculture to develop and implement ecosystem management plans for National Forest System lands in California.


Ex Input:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Sunshine in the Courtroom Act of 
2007''.

SEC. 2. FEDERAL APPELLATE AND DISTRICT COURTS.

    (a) Definitions.--In this section:
            (1) Presiding judge.--The term ``presiding judge'' means 
        the judge presiding over the court proceeding concerned. In 
        proceedings in which more than 1 judge participates, the 
        presiding judge shall be the senior active judge so 
        participating or, in the case of a circuit court of appeals, 
        the senior active circuit judge so participating, except that--
                    (A) in en banc sittings of any United States 
                circuit court of appeals, the presiding judge shall be 
                the chief judge of the circuit whenever the chief judge 
                participates; and
                    (B) in en banc sittings of the Supreme Court of the 
                United States, the presiding judge shall be the Chief 
                Justice whenever the Chief Justice participates.
            (2) Appellate court of the united states.--The term 
        ``appellate court of the United States'' means any United 
        States circuit court of appeals and the Supreme Court of the 
        United States.
    (b) Authority of Presiding Judge To Allow Media Coverage of Court 
Proceedings.--
            (1) Authority of appellate courts.--
                    (A) In general.--Except as provided under 
                subparagraph (B), the presiding judge of an appellate 
                court of the United States may, at the discretion of 
                that judge, permit the photographing, electronic 
                recording, broadcasting, or televising to the public of 
                any court proceeding over which that judge presides.
                    (B) Exception.--The presiding judge shall not 
                permit any action under subparagraph (A), if--
                            (i) in the case of a proceeding involving 
                        only the presiding judge, that judge determines 
                        the action would constitute a violation of the 
                        due process rights of any party; or
                            (ii) in the case of a proceeding involving 
                        the participation of more than 1 judge, a 
                        majority of the judges participating determine 
                        that the action would constitute a violation of 
                        the due process rights of any party.
            (2) Authority of district courts.--
                    (A) In general.--
                            (i) Authority.--Notwithstanding any other 
                        provision of law, except as provided under 
                        clause (iii), the presiding judge of a district 
                        court of the United States may, at the 
                        discretion of that judge, permit the 
                        photographing, electronic recording, 
                        broadcasting, or televising to the public of 
                        any court proceeding over which that judge 
                        presides.
                            (ii) Obscuring of witnesses.--Except as 
                        provided under clause (iii)--
                                    (I) upon the request of any witness 
                                (other than a party) in a trial 
                                proceeding, the court shall order the 
                                face and voice of the witness to be 
                                disguised or otherwise obscured in such 
                                manner as to render the witness 
                                unrecognizable to the broadcast 
                                audience of the trial proceeding; and
                                    (II) the presiding judge in a trial 
                                proceeding shall inform each witness 
                                who is not a party that the witness has 
                                the right to request the image and 
                                voice of that witness to be obscured 
                                during the witness' testimony.
                            (iii) Exception.--The presiding judge shall 
                        not permit any action under this subparagraph, 
                        if that judge determines the action would 
                        constitute a violation of the due process 
                        rights of any party.
                    (B) No televising of jurors.--The presiding judge 
                shall not permit the televising of any juror in a trial 
                proceeding.
            (3) Advisory guidelines.--The Judicial Conference of the 
        United States may promulgate advisory guidelines to which a 
        presiding judge, at the discretion of that judge, may refer in 
        making decisions with respect to the management and 
        administration of photographing, recording, broadcasting, or 
        televising described under paragraphs (1) and (2).
            (4) Sunset of district court authority.--The authority 
        under paragraph (2) shall terminate 3 years after the date of 
        the enactment of this Act.

Ex Output:

Sunshine in the Courtroom Act of 2007 - Authorizes the presiding judge of a U.S. appellate court or U.S. district court to permit the photographing, electronic recording, broadcasting, or televising to the public of court proceedings over which that judge presides except when such action would constitute a violation of the due process rights of any party.

Directs: (1) a district court, upon the request of any witness in a trial proceeding other than a party, to order the face and voice of the witness to be disguised or otherwise obscured to render the witness unrecognizable to the broadcast audience of the trial proceeding; and (2) the presiding judge in a trial proceeding to inform each witness who is not a party of the right to make such request.

Authorizes the Judicial Conference of the United States to promulgate advisory guidelines to which a presiding judge may refer in making decisions regarding the management and administration of photographing, recording, broadcasting, or televising described in this Act.