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

[Q]: SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
    This Act may be cited as the ``Fiscal Year 2010 Federal Aviation 
Administration Extension Act''.
SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF TAXES FUNDING AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND.
    (a) Fuel Taxes.--Subparagraph (B) of section 4081(d)(2) of the 
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking ``September 30, 
2009'' and inserting ``December 31, 2009''.
    (b) Ticket Taxes.--
        (1) Persons.--Clause (ii) of section 4261(j)(1)(A) of the 
    Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking ``September 
    30, 2009'' and inserting ``December 31, 2009''.
        (2) Property.--Clause (ii) of section 4271(d)(1)(A) of such 
    Code is amended by striking ``September 30, 2009'' and inserting 
    ``December 31, 2009''.
    (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall take 
effect on October 1, 2009.
SEC. 3. EXTENSION OF AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND EXPENDITURE 
AUTHORITY.
    (a) In General.--Paragraph (1) of section 9502(d) of the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986 is amended--
        (1) by striking ``October 1, 2009'' and inserting ``January 1, 
    2010''; and
        (2) by inserting ``or the Fiscal Year 2010 Federal Aviation 
    Administration Extension Act'' before the semicolon at the end of 
    subparagraph (A).
    (b) Conforming Amendment.--Paragraph (2) of section 9502(e) of such 
Code is amended by striking ``October 1, 2009'' and inserting ``January 
1, 2010''.
    (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall take 
effect on October 1, 2009.
SEC. 4. EXTENSION OF AIRPORT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.
    (a) Authorization of Appropriations.--
        (1) In general.--Section 48103 of title 49, United States Code, 
    is amended--
            (A) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (5);
            (B) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (6) and 
        inserting ``; and''; and
            (C) by adding at the end the following:
        ``(7) $1,000,000,000 for the 3-month period beginning on 
    October 1, 2009.''.
        (2) Obligation of amounts.--Sums made available pursuant to the 
    amendment made by paragraph (1) may be obligated at any time 
    through September 30, 2010, and shall remain available until 
    expended.
    (b) Project Grant Authority.--Section 47104(c) of such title is 
amended by striking ``September 30, 2009,'' and inserting ``December 
31, 2009,''.
SEC. 5. EXTENSION OF EXPIRING AUTHORITIES.
    (a) Section 40117(l)(7) of title 49, United States Code, is amended 
by striking ``October 1, 2009.'' and inserting ``January 1, 2010.''.
    (b) Section 41743(e)(2) of such title is amended by striking 
``2009'' and inserting ``2010''.
    (c) Section 44302(f)(1) of such title is amended--
        (1) by striking ``September 30, 2009,'' and inserting 
    ``December 31, 2009,''; and
        (2) by striking ``December 31, 2009,'' and inserting ``March 
    31, 2010,''.
    (d) Section 44303(b) of such title is amended by striking 
``December 31, 2009,'' and inserting ``March 31, 2010,''.
    (e) Section 47107(s)(3) of such title is amended by striking 
``October 1, 2009.'' and inserting ``January 1, 2010.''.
    (f) Section 47115(j) of such title is amended by inserting ``and 
for the portion of fiscal year 2010 ending before January 1, 2010,'' 
after ``2009,''.
    (g) Section 47141(f) of such title is amended by striking 
``September 30, 2009.'' and inserting ``December 31, 2009.''.
    (h) Section 49108 of such title is amended by striking ``September 
30, 2009,'' and inserting ``December 31, 2009,''.
    (i) Section 161 of the Vision 100--Century of Aviation 
Reauthorization Act (49 U.S.C. 47109 note) is amended by inserting ``, 
or in the portion of fiscal year 2010 ending before January 1, 2010,'' 
after ``fiscal year 2009''.
    (j) Section 186(d) of such Act (117 Stat. 2518) is amended by 
inserting ``and for the portion of fiscal year 2010 ending before 
January 1, 2010,'' after ``2009,''.
    (k) Section 409(d) of such Act (49 U.S.C. 41731 note) is amended by 
striking ``September 30, 2009.'' and inserting ``September 30, 2010.''.
    (l) The amendments made by this section shall take effect on 
October 1, 2009.
SEC. 6. FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION OPERATIONS.
    Section 106(k)(1) of title 49, United States Code, is amended--
        (1) by striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (D);
        (2) by striking the period at the end of subparagraph (E) and 
    inserting ``; and''; and
        (3) by adding at the end the following:
            ``(F) $2,338,287,375 for the 3-month period beginning on 
        October 1, 2009.''.
SEC. 7. AIR NAVIGATION FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT.
    Section 48101(a) of title 49, United States Code, is amended--
        (1) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (4);
        (2) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (5) and 
    inserting ``; and''; and
        (3) by adding at the end the following:
        ``(6) $733,444,250 for the 3-month period beginning on October 
    1, 2009.''.
SEC. 8. RESEARCH, ENGINEERING, AND DEVELOPMENT.
    Section 48102(a) of title 49, United States Code, is amended--
        (1) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (12);
        (2) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (13) and 
    inserting ``; and''; and
        (3) by adding at the end the following:
        ``(14) $46,250,000 for the 3-month period beginning on October 
    1, 2009.''.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
[A]: Fiscal Year 2010 Federal Aviation Administration Extension Act - Amends the Internal Revenue Code to extend through December 31, 2009: (1) excise taxes on aviation fuels and air transportation of persons and property; and (2) the expenditure authority for the Airport and Airway Trust Fund.

Authorizes appropriations through the three-month period beginning on October 1, 2009, for airport improvement program (AIP) projects, including project grant authority.

Extends through December 31, 2009, various airport development projects, including: (1) the pilot program for passenger facility fees at nonhub airports; (2) small airport grants for airports located in the Marshall Islands, Micronesia, and Palau; (3) state and local airport land use compatibility projects; (4) the authority of the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority to apply for an airport development grant and impose a passenger facility fee; (5) the temporary increase to 95% in the government share of certain AIP project costs; and (6) Midway Island airport development.

Extends through FY2010 the authorization of appropriations for agreements the Secretary of Transportation makes for assistance under the small community air service development program.

Extends through December 31, 2009, Department of Transportation (DOT) insurance coverage for domestic and foreign-flag air carriers. Allows further extension through March 31, 2010.

Extends through March 31, 2010, air carrier liability limits for injuries to passengers resulting from acts of terrorism.

Extends through December 31, 2009, certain competitive access assurance requirements for large or medium hub airport sponsors applying for AIP grants.

Extends through FY2010 the termination date of any order issued by the Secretary with respect to the eligibility of certain places for essential air service compensation.

Extends through the three-month period beginning on October 1, 2009, the authorization of appropriations for: (1) Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) operations; (2) air navigation facilities and equipment; and (3) research, engineering, and development.


[Q]: SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Air and Health Quality Empowerment 
Zone Designation Act of 2008''.

SEC. 2. PURPOSE.

    The purpose of this Act is to establish criteria through the use of 
which specific geographical areas--
            (1) shall be designated as air and health quality 
        empowerment zones; and
            (2) may apply for grants authorized for the purpose of 
        replacing or retrofitting polluting vehicles or engines (or 
        both vehicles and engines) in order to improve the health of 
        the population living in the zones.

SEC. 3. FINDINGS.

    Congress finds that--
            (1) the San Joaquin Valley faces serious air quality 
        challenges that impact the development, health, and economy of 
        the Valley;
            (2) the Valley emits approximately 624 tons of nitrogen 
        oxides per day, and attainment of the federally mandated 8-hour 
        ozone standard under the Clean Air Act requires emissions of 
        not more than 160 tons of oxides of nitrogen per day;
            (3) the Valley does not attain the federally mandated 
        standard for PM&lt;INF&gt;2.5&lt;/INF&gt;;
            (4) the children of the Valley miss 188,000 school days per 
        year, which translates to 1 in 4 of those children experiencing 
        a day of absence each year due to elevated ozone levels;
            (5) approximately 460 residents of the Valley die earlier 
        than they otherwise would due to elevated ozone levels, and 
        Valley residents experience 23,300 asthma attacks per year, a 
        rate that equals 3 times the State average and 5 times the 
        national average;
            (6) 1 in 5 children residing in the Valley have been 
        diagnosed with asthma;
            (7) nonattainment of Federal air quality standards costs 
        the Valley $3,200,000,000 annually;
            (8) the Valley experiences chronic double-digit 
        unemployment rates; and
            (9) the Federal Government must partner with the Valley and 
        the State to address air quality, health, and economic 
        development for the residents of the Valley through the 
        designation of the Valley as air quality empowerment zone that 
        is eligible for Federal grants and technical assistance.

SEC. 4. DEFINITIONS.

    In this Act:
            (1) Administrator.--The term ``Administrator'' means the 
        Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency.
            (2) Agency.--The term ``Agency'' means the Environmental 
        Protection Agency.
            (3) Clean air act.--The term ``Clean Air Act'' means the 
        Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.).
            (4) PM&lt;INF&gt;2.5&lt;/INF&gt;.--The term ``PM&lt;INF&gt;2.5&lt;/INF&gt;'' means 
        particulate matter with a diameter that does not exceed 2.5 
        micrometers.
            (5) Strategic plan.--The term ``strategic plan'' means, 
        with respect to an area, the plan contained in the application 
        for designation of the area under section 5.
            (6) Valley.--The term ``Valley'' means the San Joaquin 
        Valley, California.

SEC. 5. AIR QUALITY EMPOWERMENT ZONE DESIGNATION PROCEDURES.

    (a) In General.--From among the areas nominated for designation 
under this section, the Administrator may designate 1 or more areas as 
air and health quality empowerment zones.
    (b) Period for Which Designation Is in Effect.--
            (1) In general.--Any designation under this section shall 
        remain in effect during the period beginning on the date of the 
        designation and ending on the earlier of--
                    (A) the last day of the tenth calendar year 
                beginning on the date of the designation; or
                    (B) the date on which the Administrator revokes the 
                designation.
            (2) Revocation of designation.--The Administrator may 
        revoke the designation under this section of an area if the 
        Administrator determines that the local air pollution control 
        district in which the designated area is located--
                    (A) has been designated as being in attainment with 
                the national ambient air quality standard for 
                PM&lt;INF&gt;2.5&lt;/INF&gt; and ozone promulgated under the Clean 
                Air Act; or
                    (B) is not complying substantially with, or fails 
                to make progress in achieving the goals of, the 
                strategic plan.
    (c) Limitations on Designations.--No area may be designated under 
subsection (a) unless--
            (1) the area is nominated for designation by the air 
        pollution control district with jurisdiction over the area;
            (2) the air pollution control district provides written 
        assurances satisfactory to the Administrator that the strategic 
        plan will be implemented; and
            (3) the Administrator determines that any information 
        provided is reasonably accurate.
    (d) Application.--No area may be designated under subsection (a) 
unless the application for the designation--
            (1) demonstrates that the nominated area satisfies the 
        eligibility criteria described in section 6; and
            (2) includes a strategic plan for accomplishing the 
        purposes of this Act that--
                    (A) describes--
                            (i) the process by which the nominated area 
                        is a full partner in the process of developing 
                        and implementing the plan; and
                            (ii) the extent to which local institutions 
                        and organizations have contributed to the 
                        planning process;
                    (B) identifies--
                            (i) the amount of State, local, and private 
                        resources that will be available for the 
                        nominated area; and
                            (ii) the private/public partnerships to be 
                        used (which may include participation by, and 
                        cooperation with, institutions of higher 
                        education, medical centers, and other private 
                        and public entities);
                    (C) identifies the funding requested under any 
                Federal program in support of the purposes of this Act;
                    (D) identifies baselines, methods, and benchmarks 
                for measuring the success of carrying out the strategic 
                plan; and
                    (E) includes such other information as may be 
                required by the Administrator.

SEC. 6. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA.

    (a) In General.--A nominated area shall be eligible for designation 
under section 5(a) only if the area meets all of the following 
criteria:
            (1) Nonattainment.--The nominated area has been designated 
        as being--
                    (A) in extreme nonattainment of the 8-hour ozone 
                national ambient air quality standard promulgated by 
                the Administrator under the Clean Air Act; and
                    (B) in nonattainment of national ambient air 
                quality standard for PM&lt;INF&gt;2.5&lt;/INF&gt; promulgated by 
                the Administrator under that Act.
            (2) Agricultural sources.--The nominated area has--
                    (A) emissions of oxides of nitrogen from farm 
                equipment of at least 30 tons per day in calendar year 
                2010; or
                    (B) emissions of volatile organic compounds from 
                farming operations of at least 40 tons per day in 
                calendar year 2010.
            (3) Air-related health effects.--As of the date of 
        nomination, the nominated area--
                    (A) meets or exceeds the national average per 
                capita incidence of asthma; and
                    (B) meets or exceeds the national average of school 
                days missed due to the health impact of elevated ozone 
                levels.
            (4) Economic impact.--As of the date of nomination, the 
        nominated area experiences unemployment rates higher than the 
        national average.
            (5) State matching funds.--The nominated area is located 
        within a State and local area that will match at least \1/2\ of 
        the funds provided by the Federal Government under this Act.

SEC. 7. ELIGIBLE GRANT APPLICANTS.

    Any air pollution control district or other local governmental 
entity authorized to regulate air quality in a State under the Clean 
Air Act may apply for a grant under this Act.

SEC. 8. AUTHORIZATION OF AIR AND HEALTH EMPOWERMENT GRANTS.

    (a) Eligibility.--
            (1) In general.--Each area designated as an air and health 
        quality empowerment zone under section 5(a) shall be eligible 
        to receive 1 or more grants under this section.
            (2) Amount of grants.--The amount of each grant awarded to 
        a designated air and health quality empowerment zone shall be 
        determined by the Administrator based upon a review of--
                    (A) the information contained in the applications 
                required by section 5(d); and
                    (B) the needs set forth in the applications by 
                those designated as beneficiaries.
            (3) Timing of grants.--With respect to each designated air 
        and health quality empowerment zone, the Administrator shall 
        make--
                    (A) a grant under this section to each such zone on 
                the date of designation of the zone under section 5(a); 
                and
                    (B) the grant under this section to each such zone 
                available on the first day of the first fiscal year 
                that begins after the date of designation of the zone.
            (4) Oversight of grants.--The air pollution control 
        district or other local government entity authorized to 
        regulate air quality in an area designated as an air and health 
        safety empowerment zone under section 5(a) shall oversee the 
        use of any grant funds provided to the zone under this section.
    (b) Use of Grants.--Each air and health safety empowerment zone 
that receives a grant under this section shall use the grant solely--
            (1) to carry out activities that achieve the purposes 
        described in section 2;
            (2) in accordance with the strategic plan for the zone; and
            (3) for activities that benefit the residents of the zone 
        for which the grant is made through improved air quality and 
        health.
    (c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized to be 
appropriated to the Administrator to provide grants under this section 
$20,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2009 through 2013.
[A]: Air and Health Quality Empowerment Zone Designation Act of 2008 - Authorizes the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to designate areas nominated by local air pollution control districts as air and health quality empowerment zones, which shall be eligible for grants for replacing or retrofitting polluting vehicles and/or engines in order to improve the health of the population living in the zones.

Sets forth area eligibility requirements, including: (1) being in nonattainment of specified national ambient air quality standards for ozone or PM2.5 (particulate matter with a diameter that does not exceed 2.5 micrometers); (2) having specified emission levels from agricultural sources; (3) meeting or exceeding national averages for asthma, school days missed for ozone levels, and unemployment; and (4) being eligible for state or local matching funds.

Prohibits an area from being designated unless the relevant district provides satisfactory assurances that the strategic plan (to be contained in its application) will be implemented. Authorizes the Administrator to revoke the designation if the relevant district: (1) has been designated as being in attainment with the air quality standards; or (2) is failing to comply with, or make progress in achieving the goals of, its strategic plan.


[Q]: SECTION 1. FINDINGS.

    Congress finds that--
            (1) Oliver L. Brown is the namesake of the landmark United 
        States Supreme Court decision of 1954, Brown v. Board of 
        Education (347 U.S. 483, 1954);
            (2) Oliver L. Brown is honored as the lead plaintiff in the 
        Topeka, Kansas case which posed a legal challenge to racial 
        segregation in public education;
            (3) by 1950, African-American parents began to renew their 
        efforts to challenge State laws that only permitted their 
        children to attend certain schools, and as a result, they 
        organized through the National Association for the Advancement 
        of Colored People (the NAACP), an organization founded in 1909 
        to address the issue of the unequal and discriminatory 
        treatment experienced by African-Americans throughout the 
        country;
            (4) Oliver L. Brown became part of the NAACP strategy led 
        first by Charles Houston and later by Thurgood Marshall, to 
        file suit against various school boards on behalf of such 
        parents and their children;
            (5) Oliver L. Brown was a member of a distinguished group 
        of plaintiffs in cases from Kansas (Brown v. Board of 
        Education), Delaware (Gebhart v. Belton), South Carolina 
        (Briggs v. Elliot), and Virginia (Davis v. County School Board 
        of Prince Edward County) that were combined by the United 
        States Supreme Court in Brown v. Board of Education, and in 
        Washington, D.C. (Bolling v. Sharpe), considered separately by 
        the Supreme Court with respect to the District of Columbia;
            (6) with respect to cases filed in the State of Kansas--
                    (A) there were 11 school integration cases dating 
                from 1881 to 1949, prior to Brown v. Board of Education 
                in 1954;
                    (B) in many instances, the schools for African-
                American children were substandard facilities with out-
                of-date textbooks and often no basic school supplies;
                    (C) in the fall of 1950, members of the Topeka, 
                Kansas chapter of the NAACP agreed to again challenge 
                the ``separate but equal'' doctrine governing public 
                education;
                    (D) on February 28, 1951, the NAACP filed their 
                case as Oliver L. Brown et al. v. The Board of 
                Education of Topeka Kansas (which represented a group 
                of 13 parents and 20 children);
                    (E) the district court ruled in favor of the school 
                board and the case was appealed to the United States 
                Supreme Court;
                    (F) at the Supreme Court level, the case was 
                combined with other NAACP cases from Delaware, South 
                Carolina, Virginia, and Washington, D.C. (which was 
                later heard separately); and
                    (G) the combined cases became known as Oliver L. 
                Brown et al. v. The Board of Education of Topeka, et 
                al.;
            (7) with respect to the Virginia case of Davis et al. v. 
        Prince Edward County Board of Supervisors--
                    (A) one of the few public high schools available to 
                African-Americans in the State of Virginia was Robert 
                Moton High School in Prince Edward County;
                    (B) built in 1943, it was never large enough to 
                accommodate its student population;
                    (C) the gross inadequacies of these classrooms 
                sparked a student strike in 1951;
                    (D) the NAACP soon joined their struggles and 
                challenged the inferior quality of their school 
                facilities in court; and
                    (E) although the United States District Court 
                ordered that the plaintiffs be provided with equal 
                school facilities, they were denied access to the 
                schools for white students in their area;
            (8) with respect to the South Carolina case of Briggs v. 
        R.W. Elliott--
                    (A) in Clarendon County, South Carolina, the State 
                NAACP first attempted, unsuccessfully and with a single 
                plaintiff, to take legal action in 1947 against the 
                inferior conditions that African-American students 
                experienced under South Carolina's racially segregated 
                school system;
                    (B) by 1951, community activists convinced African-
                American parents to join the NAACP efforts to file a 
                class action suit in United States District Court;
                    (C) the court found that the schools designated for 
                African-Americans were grossly inadequate in terms of 
                buildings, transportation, and teacher salaries when 
                compared to the schools provided for white students; 
                and
                    (D) an order to equalize the facilities was 
                virtually ignored by school officials, and the schools 
                were never made equal;
            (9) with respect to the Delaware cases of Belton v. Gebhart 
        and Bulah v. Gebhart--
                    (A) first petitioned in 1951, these cases 
                challenged the inferior conditions of 2 African-
                American schools;
                    (B) in the suburb of Claymont, Delaware, African-
                American children were prohibited from attending the 
                area's local high school, and in the rural community of 
                Hockessin, Delaware, African-American students were 
                forced to attend a dilapidated 1-room schoolhouse, and 
                were not provided transportation to the school, while 
                white children in the area were provided transportation 
                and a better school facility;
                    (C) both plaintiffs were represented by local NAACP 
                attorneys; and
                    (D) though the State Supreme Court ruled in favor 
                of the plaintiffs, the decision did not apply to all 
                schools in Delaware;
            (10) with respect to the District of Columbia case of 
        Bolling, et al. v. C. Melvin Sharpe, et al.--
                    (A) 11 African-American junior high school students 
                were taken on a field trip to Washington, D.C.'s new 
                John Philip Sousa School for white students only;
                    (B) the African-American students were denied 
                admittance to the school and ordered to return to their 
                inadequate school; and
                    (C) in 1951, a suit was filed on behalf of the 
                students, and after review with the Brown case in 1954, 
                the United States Supreme Court ruled that segregation 
                in the Nation's capitol was unconstitutional;
            (11) on May 17, 1954, at 12:52 p.m., the United States 
        Supreme Court ruled that the discriminatory nature of racial 
        segregation ``violates the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, 
        which guarantees all citizens equal protection of the laws'';
            (12) the decision in Brown v. Board of Education set the 
        stage for dismantling racial segregation throughout the 
        country;
            (13) the quiet courage of Oliver L. Brown and his fellow 
        plaintiffs asserted the right of African-American people to 
        have equal access to social, political, and communal 
        structures;
            (14) our country is indebted to the work of the NAACP Legal 
        Defense and Educational Fund, Inc., Howard University Law 
        School, the NAACP, and the individual plaintiffs in the cases 
        considered by the Supreme Court;
            (15) Reverend Oliver L. Brown died in 1961, and because the 
        landmark United States Supreme Court decision bears his name, 
        he is remembered as an icon for justice, freedom, and equal 
        rights; and
            (16) the national importance of the Brown v. Board of 
        Education decision had a profound impact on American culture, 
        affecting families, communities, and governments by outlawing 
        racial segregation in public education, resulting in the 
        abolition of legal discrimination on any basis.

SEC. 2. CONGRESSIONAL GOLD MEDAL.

    (a) Presentation Authorized.--
            (1) In general.--The Speaker of the House of 
        Representatives and the President pro tempore of the Senate 
        shall make appropriate arrangements for the posthumous 
        presentation, on behalf of Congress, of a gold medal of 
        appropriate design in commemoration of the Reverend Oliver L. 
        Brown, in recognition of his and his fellow plaintiffs' 
        enduring contributions to civil rights and American society.
            (2) Display.--The medal presented under paragraph (1) shall 
        be maintained and displayed at the Brown Foundation of Topeka, 
        Kansas.
    (b) Design and Striking.--For purposes of the presentation referred 
to in subsection (a), the Secretary of the Treasury (referred to in 
this Act as the ``Secretary'') shall strike a gold medal with suitable 
emblems, devices, and inscriptions, to be determined by the Secretary.

SEC. 3. DUPLICATE MEDALS.

    The Secretary may strike and sell duplicates in bronze of the gold 
medal struck pursuant to section 2 under such regulations as the 
Secretary may prescribe, at a price sufficient to cover the cost 
thereof, including labor, materials, dies, use of machinery, and 
overhead expenses, and the cost of the gold medal.

SEC. 4. STATUS OF MEDALS.

    (a) National Medals.--The medals struck pursuant to this Act are 
national medals for purposes of chapter 51 of title 31, United States 
Code.
    (b) Numismatic Items.--For purposes of section 5134 of title 31, 
United States Code, all medals struck under this Act shall be 
considered to be numismatic items.

SEC. 5. AUTHORITY TO USE FUND AMOUNTS; PROCEEDS OF SALE.

    (a) Authority to Use Fund Amounts.--There is authorized to be 
charged against the United States Mint Public Enterprise Fund, such 
amounts as may be necessary to pay for the costs of the medals struck 
pursuant to this Act.
    (b) Proceeds of Sale.--Amounts received from the sale of duplicate 
bronze medals authorized under section 3 shall be deposited into the 
United States Mint Public Enterprise Fund.
[A]:
Directs the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President pro tempore of the Senate to arrange for the posthumous presentation, on behalf of Congress, of a gold medal in commemoration of the Reverend Oliver L. Brown (the lead plaintiff in the landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision in Brown v. Board of Education) in recognition of his and his fellow plaintiffs' enduring contributions to civil rights and American society.