113 HR 547 IH: Border Security and Responsibility Act of 2013
U.S. House of Representatives
2013-02-06
text/xml
EN
Pursuant to Title 17 Section 105 of the United States Code, this file is not subject to copyright protection and is in the public domain.

		I
		113th CONGRESS
		1st Session
		H. R. 547
		IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

			February 6, 2013
			Mr. Grijalva
			 introduced the following bill; which was referred to the
			 Committee on Homeland
			 Security, and in addition to the Committees on
			 Armed Services,
			 Agriculture, and
			 Natural Resources, for a
			 period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for
			 consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the
			 committee concerned

		A BILL
		To provide for the establishment of a border protection
		  strategy for the international land borders of the United States, to address
		  the ecological and environmental impacts of border security infrastructure,
		  measures, and activities along the international land borders of the United
		  States, and for other purposes.

		1.Short titleThis Act may be cited as the
			 Border Security and Responsibility Act
			 of 2013.
		2.PurposeThe purposes of this Act are to provide a
			 means whereby Federal lands and resources along the United States-Mexico border
			 are provided the highest protection possible from the effects of unauthorized
			 immigration, human and drug smuggling, and border enforcement activities, while
			 ensuring that all operations necessary to achieve border security are
			 undertaken.
		3.FindingsCongress finds the following:
			(1)Federal lands managed by the Department of
			 the Interior and the Department of Agriculture encompass over 40 percent of the
			 1,900 miles of southwestern border in Arizona, California, New Mexico, and
			 Texas.
			(2)Over the last five
			 years, the Border Patrol has nearly doubled the number of its agents on patrol,
			 constructed hundreds of miles of border fence and vehicle barriers, and
			 installed surveillance equipment on and near lands managed by the Department of
			 the Interior and the Department of Agriculture along the southwestern
			 border.
			(3)When operating on
			 Federal lands, the Border Patrol has responsibilities under several Federal
			 land management laws, including the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969,
			 the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, the Wilderness Act of 1964, and
			 the Endangered Species Act of 1973.
			(4)In March 2006, the
			 Department of the Interior, the Department of Homeland Security, and the
			 Department of Agriculture entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)
			 entitled the Cooperative National Security and Counterterrorism Efforts
			 on Federal Lands along the United States’ Borders. This MOU contains
			 provisions related to the development of an efficient means of communication,
			 cooperative identification of patrol routes and operations, conduct of joint
			 enforcement operations, cooperation in the development of environmental and
			 cultural resources awareness training, access by United States Customs and
			 Border Protection (CBP) agents to Federal lands along the border, and guidance
			 on construction and maintenance of tactical infrastructure.
			(5)Since entering
			 into the 2006 MOU, the three departments have continually and successfully
			 worked together to carry out the tenets outlined in the MOU at both the
			 departmental and field levels, and have worked to address concerns regarding
			 coordination to continually improve efforts to secure the borders while
			 conserving the environment.
			(6)A
			 2008 MOU between the three departments bridges communication gaps and provides
			 radio interoperability between Border Patrol agents and their law enforcement
			 partners in the Department of the Interior and the Department of
			 Agriculture.
			(7)Since fiscal year
			 2006, apprehensions of undocumented immigrants along the southwestern border
			 have declined, reaching a low of 327,577 in fiscal year 2011. This decrease has
			 occurred along the entire border, with every sector reporting fewer
			 apprehensions in fiscal year 2011 than in fiscal year 2006.
			(8)CBP partners with Federal, tribal, State,
			 and local entities to benefit border security and protection of the environment
			 and cultural resources on Federal lands. The mission of the Department of
			 Homeland Security, the Department of the Interior, and the Department of
			 Agriculture along the border are inextricably linked in protecting and
			 strengthening United States communities.
			(9)A
			 report by the Government Accountability Office found that Border Patrol agents
			 in charge of Border Patrol stations reported that the overall security status
			 of their jurisdictions is not affected by land management laws. Instead,
			 factors other than access delays or restrictions, such as the remoteness and
			 ruggedness of the terrain or dense vegetation, have had the greatest
			 effect.
			4.DefinitionsIn this Act:
			(a)Indian
			 tribeThe term Indian tribe has the meaning given
			 such term in section 4 of the Indian Self-Determination and Education
			 Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450b).
			(b)SecretaryThe
			 term Secretary means the Secretary of Homeland Security.
			(c)Secretary
			 concernedThe term Secretary concerned means the
			 Secretary of Agriculture with respect to land under the jurisdiction of the
			 Secretary of Agriculture, the Secretary of the Interior with respect to land
			 under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of the Interior, the Secretary of
			 Defense with respect to land under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of Defense
			 or the secretary of a military department, or the Secretary of Commerce with
			 respect to land under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of Commerce
			5.Border protection
			 strategy
			(a)Border
			 protection strategy
				(1)In
			 generalNot later than 180 days after the date of the enactment
			 of this Act, the Secretary, the Secretary of the Interior, the Secretary of
			 Agriculture, the Secretary of Defense, and the Secretary of Commerce, in
			 consultation with tribal, State, and local officials, shall jointly develop and
			 submit to Congress a border protection strategy for the international land
			 borders of the United States.
				(2)Elements of the
			 strategyThe strategy developed in accordance with paragraph (1)
			 shall include the following components:
					(A)A comparative
			 analysis of the levels of border security, based on auditable and verifiable
			 data, achievable through alternative tactical infrastructure and other security
			 measures. Measures assessed shall include, at a minimum—
						(i)pedestrian
			 fencing;
						(ii)vehicle barriers,
			 especially in areas in the vicinity of existing or planned roads;
						(iii)additional
			 Border Patrol agents;
						(iv)efficacy of
			 natural barriers and open space in response to unauthorized or unlawful border
			 crossing;
						(v)fielding of
			 advanced remote sensing and information integration technology, including the
			 use of unmanned aerial vehicles and other advanced technologies and systems,
			 including systems developed and employed, or under development, for tactical
			 surveillance, multi-source information integration, and response analysis in
			 difficult terrain and under adverse environmental conditions;
						(vi)regional as well
			 as urban and rural variation in border security methodologies, and
			 incorporation of natural barriers;
						(vii)enhanced
			 cooperation with, and assistance to, intelligence, security, and law
			 enforcement agencies in Mexico and Canada in detecting, reporting, analyzing,
			 and successfully responding to unauthorized or unlawful border crossings from
			 or into Mexico or Canada; and
						(viii)removal of
			 obstructive non-native vegetation.
						(B)A comprehensive
			 analysis of cost and other impacts of security measures assessed in
			 subparagraph (A), including an assessment of—
						(i)land
			 acquisition costs, including related litigation and other costs;
						(ii)construction
			 costs, including both labor and material costs;
						(iii)maintenance
			 costs over 25 years;
						(iv)contractor
			 costs;
						(v)management and
			 overhead costs;
						(vi)the
			 impacts on soils, wildlife, wildlife habitat, natural communities, and
			 functioning cross-border wildlife migration corridors and hydrology (including
			 water quantity, quality, and natural hydrologic flows) on Federal, tribal,
			 State, local, and private lands along the border;
						(vii)costs of fully
			 mitigating the adverse impacts to Federal, tribal, State, local, and private
			 lands, waters (including water quality, quantity, and hydrological flows),
			 wildlife, and wildlife habitats, including, where such action is possible, the
			 full costs of the replacement or restoration of severed wildlife migration
			 corridors with protected corridors of equivalent biological functionality, as
			 determined by each Secretary concerned, in consultation with appropriate
			 authorities of tribal, State, and local governments and appropriate authorities
			 of Mexico and Canada; and
						(viii)the impacts on the economy, culture,
			 safety, and quality of life on residents in the vicinity of the border.
						(C)A comprehensive compilation of the fiscal
			 investments in acquiring or managing Federal, tribal, state, local, and private
			 lands and waters in the vicinity of, or ecologically related to, the land
			 borders of the United States that have been acquired or managed in whole or in
			 part for conservation purposes (including the creation or management of
			 protected wildlife migration corridors) in—
						(i)units of the
			 National Park System;
						(ii)National Forest
			 System land;
						(iii)land under the
			 jurisdiction of the Bureau of Land Management;
						(iv)land under the
			 jurisdiction of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service;
						(v)other relevant
			 land under the jurisdiction of the Department of the Interior or the Department
			 of Agriculture;
						(vi)land under the
			 jurisdiction of the Department of Defense or the individual military
			 department;
						(vii)land under the
			 jurisdiction of the Department of Commerce;
						(viii)tribal
			 lands;
						(ix)State and private
			 lands; and
						(x)lands within
			 Mexico and Canada.
						(D)Recommendations for strategic border
			 security management based on comparative security as detailed in subparagraph
			 (A), the cost-benefit analysis as detailed in subparagraph (B), as well as
			 protection of investments in public lands specified in subparagraph (C).
					(3)Training
					(A)Required
			 trainingThe Secretary, in
			 cooperation with the Secretary concerned, shall provide—
						(i)natural resource protection training for
			 Customs and Border Protection agents or other Federal personnel assigned to
			 plan or oversee the construction or operation of border security tactical
			 infrastructure or to patrol land along or in the vicinity of a land border of
			 the United States; and
						(ii)cultural resource training for Customs and
			 Border Protection agents and other Federal personnel assigned to plan or
			 oversee the construction or operation of border security tactical
			 infrastructure or to patrol tribal lands.
						(B)Additional
			 considerationsIn developing
			 and providing training under clause (i) of subparagraph (A), the Secretary
			 shall coordinate with the Secretary concerned and the relevant tribal
			 government to ensure that such training is appropriate to the mission of the
			 relevant agency and is focused on achieving border security objectives while
			 avoiding or minimizing the adverse impact on natural and cultural resources
			 resulting from border security tactical infrastructure, operations, or other
			 activities.
					6.Actions to secure
			 the international land borders of the United States
			(a)In
			 generalSection 102 of the
			 Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (Public Law
			 104–208; 8 U.S.C. 1103 note) is amended to read as follows:

					102.Improvement of
				border security
						(a)In
				generalThe Secretary of
				Homeland Security shall take such actions as may be required to secure the
				international land borders of the United States. Such actions may be taken only
				in accordance with the border protection strategy developed under section 5(a)
				of the Border Security and Responsibility Act of 2013.
						(b)Priority of
				methodsIn carrying out the
				requirements of subsection (a), the Secretary of Homeland Security shall, where
				practicable, give first priority to the use of remote cameras, sensors, removal
				of non-native vegetation, incorporation of natural barriers, additional
				manpower, unmanned aerial vehicles, or other low impact border enforcement
				techniques.
						(c)Consultation
							(1)In
				generalIn carrying out this
				section, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall consult with the Secretary of
				the Interior, the Secretary of Agriculture, the Secretary of Defense, the
				Secretary of Commerce, States, local governments, tribal governments, and
				private property owners in the United States to minimize the impact on the
				environment, culture, commerce, safety, and quality of life for the communities
				and residents located near the sites at which actions under subsection (a) are
				proposed to be taken.
							(2)Rule of
				constructionNothing in this subsection may be construed
				to—
								(A)create or negate
				any right of action for a State, local government, tribal government, or other
				person or entity affected by this subsection;
								(B)affect the eminent
				domain laws of the United States or of any State; or
								(C)waive the
				application of any other applicable Federal, State, local, or tribal
				law.
								(3)Limitation on
				requirementsNotwithstanding
				subsection (a), nothing in this section shall require the Secretary of Homeland
				Security to install fencing, physical barriers, roads, lighting, cameras, or
				sensors in a particular location along an international border of the United
				States if the Secretary determines that the use or placement of such resources
				is not the most effective and appropriate means to secure the international
				border at such location, or if the Secretary determines that the direct and
				indirect costs of or the impacts on the environment, culture, commerce, safety,
				or quality of life for the communities and residents along the border likely to
				result from the use or placement of such resources outweigh the benefits of
				such use or
				placement.
							.
			(b)PreconditionsIn fulfilling the requirements of section
			 102 of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996,
			 as amended by subsection (a) of this section, the Secretary of Homeland
			 Security shall not commence any construction of fencing, physical barriers,
			 roads, lighting, cameras, sensors, or other tactical infrastructure along or in
			 the vicinity of an international land border of the United States, or award or
			 expend funds pursuant to any contract or other agreement related thereto, prior
			 to 90 days following the submission to Congress of the border protection
			 strategy required under section 5(a) of this Act.
			7.Borderlands
			 monitoring and mitigation
			(a)In
			 generalThe Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary of the
			 Interior, the Secretary of Agriculture, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary
			 of Commerce, and the heads of appropriate State and tribal wildlife agencies
			 and entities, shall develop and implement a comprehensive monitoring and
			 mitigation plan to address the ecological and environmental impacts of border
			 security infrastructure, measures, and activities along the international land
			 borders of the United States.
			(b)RequirementsThe
			 mitigation plan required under subsection (a) shall include, at a minimum,
			 measures to address and mitigate the full range of ecological and environmental
			 impacts of border security infrastructure, measures, and activities,
			 including—
				(1)preserving,
			 maintaining, and, if necessary, restoring wildlife migration corridors, key
			 habitats, and the ecologically functional connectivity between and among key
			 habitats sufficient to ensure that species (whether or not designated as rare,
			 protected, or of concern) remain viable and are able to adapt to the impacts of
			 climate change;
				(2)addressing control
			 of invasive species and implementing measures necessary to avoid the spread of
			 such species;
				(3)maintaining
			 hydrological functionality, including water quantity and quality;
				(4)incorporating
			 adaptive management, including detailed provisions for long-term monitoring of
			 the mitigation plan’s effectiveness and for necessary adjustments to such plan
			 based on such monitoring results; and
				(5)protection of
			 cultural and historical resources.
				(c)Preemption
				(1)In
			 generalNotwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary
			 may, subject to paragraph (2), carry out the mitigation plan required under
			 subsection (a) on any Federal, State, local, tribal, or private lands in the
			 vicinity of or ecologically related to an international land border of the
			 United States regardless of which individual, agency, or entity has ownership
			 of or principal responsibility for the management of any such lands.
				(2)ConditionsActivities
			 carried out pursuant to paragraph (1) in connection with the mitigation plan
			 shall be carried out in full consultation with, and with the concurrence of,
			 the owner of, or entity with principal responsibility for, the management of
			 the lands described in such paragraph.
				(d)Administration
				(1)AuthorizationThe
			 Secretary of Homeland Security may transfer funds of the Department of Homeland
			 Security to other Federal agencies for—
					(A)expenditure under
			 programs (including any international programs) of such agencies that are
			 designed to fund conservation related activities (directly or through grants or
			 similar mechanisms) on non-Federal lands, including land acquisition programs;
			 and
					(B)mitigation
			 activities on Federal lands managed by such agencies, if such activities are
			 required to implement the mitigation plan required under subsection (a) and if
			 the costs of such activities are higher than the costs associated with managing
			 such lands in the absence of such activities.
					(2)Exemption from
			 reprogramming requirementsFunds transferred pursuant to the
			 authorization under paragraph (1) shall not be subject to reprogramming
			 requirements.
				(3)Acceptance and
			 use of donationsThe Secretary may accept and use donations for
			 the purpose of developing and implementing the mitigation plan required under
			 subsection (a), and may transfer such funds to any other Federal agency for
			 expenditure under such plan pursuant to paragraph (1).
				(e)Authorization of
			 appropriationsNotwithstanding any other provision of law, funds
			 appropriated to the Department of Homeland Security for border security
			 infrastructure and activities may be used by the Secretary to develop and
			 implement the mitigation plan required under subsection (a).


		I
		111th CONGRESS
		1st Session
		H. R. 2435
		IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

			May 14, 2009
			Ms. Kosmas introduced
			 the following bill; which was referred to the
			 Committee on Ways and
			 Means

		A BILL
		To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend the
		  tax-free treatment for distributions from individual retirement plans for
		  charitable purposes.

		1.Short titleThis Act may be cited as the
			 IRA Charitable Giving Act.
		2.Extension of
			 tax-free distributions from individual retirement plans for charitable
			 purposesSubparagraph (F) of
			 section 408(d)(8) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking
			 December 31, 2009 and inserting December 31,
			 2010.


		II
		112th CONGRESS
		1st Session
		S. 1887
		IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

			November 17, 2011
			Mrs. Boxer introduced
			 the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the
			 Committee on the
			 Judiciary

		A BILL
		To protect children from abuse and
		  neglect.

		1.Short titleThis Act may be cited as the
			 State Children’s Protection
			 Act.
		2.State
			 laws
			(a)Law
			 requiredEach State shall
			 pass and implement a law requiring, at a minimum—
				(1)any person who
			 knows or has reasonable cause to believe or suspect that a child has been
			 subjected to child abuse or neglect or who observes any child being subjected
			 to conditions or circumstances that would reasonably result in child abuse or
			 neglect, shall immediately report it to the child protective agency or local
			 law enforcement agency; and
				(2)any person,
			 official, institution or agency participating in good faith in any act required
			 to report child abuse or neglect is immune from any civil or criminal liability
			 that might otherwise result by reason of the action. Immunity shall not be
			 accorded to persons acting in bad faith.
				(b)PenaltyA
			 State that fails to pass and implement the requirements of this section within
			 1 year of the enactment of this Act, shall—
				(1)forfeit the
			 ability to reserve up to 10 percent of its grants under the Edward Byrne
			 Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program under part E of title I of the
			 Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3751(e)) for
			 administrative use; and
				(2)be required to
			 return to the Federal Government the portion of their Byrne Justice Assistance
			 Grant funding used for such purpose in the prior fiscal year.
				(c)PreemptionNothing
			 in this section shall preempt the right of a State to protect privileged
			 communications.
			3.Federal
			 assistance for crimes against children
			(a)In
			 generalAt the request of a State, Indian tribal government, or
			 unit of local government, the Attorney General shall provide technical,
			 forensic, prosecutorial, or any other form of assistance in the criminal
			 investigation or prosecution of any crime that—
				(1)constitutes a
			 felony under the laws of the State or Indian tribe; and
				(2)is committed
			 against an individual under 18 years of age.
				(b)PriorityIf
			 the Attorney General determines that there are insufficient resources to
			 fulfill requests made pursuant to subsection (a), the Attorney General shall
			 give priority to requests for assistance to—
				(1)crimes committed
			 by, or believed to be committed by, offenders who have committed crimes in more
			 than 1 State; and
				(2)jurisdictions
			 that have limited resources and difficulty covering the extraordinary expenses
			 relating to the investigation or prosecution of the crime.
				(c)Reporting
			 requirements
				(1)In
			 generalEvery 180 days following the date of enactment of this
			 Act, the Attorney General shall submit to Congress a report on applications for
			 Federal assistance under this section, and Federal assistance provided under
			 this section.
				(2)ContentsEach
			 report under paragraph (1) shall include—
					(A)a listing of all
			 applications for Federal assistance under this section during the previous 180
			 days;
					(B)a description of
			 each application submitted during the previous 180 days, whether approved,
			 denied, or pending, including the name of the requesting party and the nature
			 of the request for assistance;
					(C)reasons for
			 approval or denial of each application, and the persons involved in the review
			 and decisionmaking process for each application; and
					(D)if Federal
			 assistance was provided, a description of the assistance provided, including
			 the date on which the assistance was provided.
					4.Enhanced
			 tracking and coordination of FBI efforts in addressing crimes against
			 children
			(a)In
			 generalNot later than 90 days after the date of enactment of
			 this Act, the Attorney General shall submit a report to the appropriate
			 committees of Congress, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget and
			 the Domestic Policy Council that sets forth the proposed systems, procedures
			 and protocols developed and implemented in response to Chapter 3 of the Office
			 of Inspector General's Audit Report 09–08 (January 2009) entitled The
			 Federal Bureau of Investigation's Efforts to Combat Crimes Against
			 Children, including any additional funding needs for development and
			 implementation of the recommendations.
			(b)ContentIf
			 any recommendation proposed in the Office of Inspector General's Audit Report
			 09–08 (January 2009) remains incomplete or has not been implemented at the time
			 the report required under subsection (a) is prepared, the report shall
			 describe—
				(1)the reasons that
			 the remaining recommendation has not been implemented; or
				(2)a specific action
			 plan for implementing or completing implementation of the remaining
			 recommendation.
				(c)Appropriate
			 committeesIn this section, the term appropriate committees
			 of Congress means—
				(1)the Committee on
			 the Judiciary, the Committee on Appropriations, and the Committee on Health,
			 Education, Labor, and Pensions of the Senate; and
				(2)the Committee on
			 the Judiciary, the Committee on Appropriations, the Committee on Education and
			 Labor, and the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of
			 Representatives.
				(d)Authorization
			 of appropriationsThere are
			 authorized to be appropriated to the Attorney General such sums as needed to
			 carry out this section.


		II

		109th CONGRESS

		1st Session

		S. 410

		IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

			February 16, 2005

			Mr. McCain introduced

			 the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the

			 Committee on

			 Finance

		A BILL

		To authorize the extension of nondiscriminatory treatment

		  (normal trade relations treatment) to the products of Ukraine.

		1.FindingsCongress finds that—

			(1)Ukraine—

				(A)has made

			 considerable progress toward respecting fundamental human rights consistent

			 with the objectives of title IV of the Trade Act of 1974;

				(B)has adopted

			 administrative procedures that accord its citizens the right to emigrate,

			 travel freely, and to return to their country without restriction;

				(C)has been found to

			 be in full compliance with the freedom of emigration provisions in title IV of

			 the Trade Act of 1974;

				(D)has made great

			 progress toward the establishment of a genuine democracy and the creation of a

			 free market economic system;

				(E)has demonstrated

			 a commitment to adopting the full range of internationally recognized core

			 labor standards and to continuing to improve the effective enforcement of its

			 laws reflecting such standards;

				(F)has committed to

			 developing a system of governance in accordance with the provisions of the

			 Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (also known

			 as the Helsinki Final Act) regarding human rights and

			 humanitarian affairs;

				(G)has endeavored to

			 address issues related to its national and religious minorities and, as a

			 member state of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE),

			 committed to adopting special measures for ensuring that persons belonging to

			 national minorities have full equality individually as well as in community

			 with other members of their group;

				(H)has enacted

			 legislation providing protection against incitement to violence against persons

			 or groups based on national, racial, ethnic, or religious discrimination,

			 including anti-Semitism, and has committed itself, including through a December

			 17, 2001, letter from the President of Ukraine to the President of the United

			 States, to ensuring freedom of religion and combating racial and ethnic

			 intolerance and hatred;

				(I)has continued to

			 return communal properties confiscated from national and religious minorities

			 during the Soviet period, facilitating the reemergence of these communities in

			 the national life of Ukraine, and establishing the legal framework for

			 completion of this process in the future;

				(J)concluded a

			 bilateral trade agreement with the United States in 1992 and a bilateral

			 investment treaty in 1994;

				(K)has demonstrated

			 a strong desire to build a friendly and cooperative relationship with the

			 United States; and

				(L)is seeking

			 admission to the World Trade Organization (WTO) on an expedited basis;

			 and

				(2)extension of

			 unconditional normal trade relations treatment to the products of Ukraine will

			 enable the United States to avail itself of all rights under the World Trade

			 Organization with respect to Ukraine.

			2.Termination of

			 application of title IV of the Trade Act of 1974 to Ukraine

			(a)Presidential

			 determinations and extensions of nondiscriminatory

			 treatmentNotwithstanding any provision of title IV of the Trade

			 Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2431 et seq.), the President may—

				(1)determine that

			 such title should no longer apply to Ukraine; and

				(2)after making a

			 determination under paragraph (1) with respect to Ukraine, proclaim the

			 extension of nondiscriminatory treatment (normal trade relations treatment) to

			 the products of that country.

				(b)Termination of

			 application of title IVOn and after the effective date of the

			 extension under subsection (a)(2) of nondiscriminatory treatment to the

			 products of Ukraine, title IV of the Trade Act of 1974 shall cease to apply to

			 that country.


		I
		111th CONGRESS
		1st Session
		H. R. 1405
		IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

			March 10, 2009
			Mr. Wilson of Ohio
			 introduced the following bill; which was referred to the
			 Committee on Ways and
			 Means

		A BILL
		To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow Head
		  Start teachers the same above-the-line deduction for supplies as is allowed to
		  elementary and secondary school teachers.

		1.Head start teachers allowed
			 above-the-line deduction for supplies
			(a)In
			 generalParagraph (1) of
			 section 62(d) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (defining eligible educator)
			 is amended by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:

					(C)Head start
				teachersThe term
				eligible education includes, with respect to any taxable year, an
				individual who is a teacher or aide under a Head Start program operating under
				the Head Start Act (42 U.S.C. 9831 et seq.) for at least 700 hours during a
				school
				year.
					.
			(b)Effective
			 dateThe amendment made by subsection (a) shall apply to taxable
			 years ending after the date of the enactment of this Act.


 HR 2151 ENR: To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 7722 South Main Street in Pine Plains, New York, as the “Senior Chief Petty Officer Shannon M. Kent Post Office”.
U.S. House of Representatives

text/xml
EN
Pursuant to Title 17 Section 105 of the United States Code, this file is not subject to copyright protection and is in the public domain.

I
One Hundred Sixteenth Congress of the United States of AmericaAt the First SessionBegun and held at the City of Washington on Thursday, the third day of January, two thousand and nineteen
H. R. 2151

AN ACT
To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 7722 South Main Street in Pine Plains, New York, as the Senior Chief Petty Officer Shannon M. Kent Post Office.

1.Senior Chief Petty Officer Shannon M. Kent Post Office
(a)DesignationThe facility of the United States Postal Service located at 7722 South Main Street in Pine Plains, New York, shall be known and designated as the Senior Chief Petty Officer Shannon M. Kent Post Office.  (b)ReferencesAny reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the Senior Chief Petty Officer Shannon M. Kent Post Office.
 Speaker of the House of Representatives.Vice President of the United States and President of the Senate.


114 HR 3466 IH: Next Generation Researchers Act
U.S. House of Representatives
2015-09-09
text/xml
EN
Pursuant to Title 17 Section 105 of the United States Code, this file is not subject to copyright protection and is in the public domain.

		I
		114th CONGRESS
		1st Session
		H. R. 3466
		IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

			September 9, 2015
			Mr. Pocan (for himself, Ms. Schakowsky, Mr. Welch, Mr. Cartwright, Mr. Hastings, Mr. Higgins, Mr. DeFazio, Mr. Grijalva, and Mr. Honda) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce

		A BILL
		To demonstrate a commitment to our Nation’s scientists by increasing opportunities for the
			 development of our next generation of researchers.

 1.Short titleThis Act may be cited as the Next Generation Researchers Act. 2.Investing in the next generation of researchersPart A of title IV of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 281 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:

				404M.Next generation of researchers
 (a)Next Generation of Researchers InitiativeThere shall be established within the Office of the Director of the National Institutes of Health, the Next Generation of Researchers Initiative (referred to in this section as the Initiative), through which the Director shall coordinate all policies and programs within the National Institutes of Health aimed at promoting and providing opportunities for new researchers and earlier research independence.
 (b)ActivitiesThe Director of NIH, through the Initiative shall— (1)promote policies and programs within the National Institutes of Health that are aimed at improving opportunities for new researchers and promoting earlier research independence, including existing policies and programs such as the Pathway to Independence Award, the NIH Director's New Innovator Award, the Early Independence Award, and Early-Stage Investigator grant review procedures;
 (2)develop, modify, or accelerate policies, as needed, within the National Institutes of Health to promote opportunities for new researchers and earlier research independence, including policies to enhance training opportunities for research-related career options, strengthen mentorship programs between new and veteran researchers, enhance workforce diversity efforts, and help to improve new researchers' success in obtaining renewal funding;
 (3)coordinate with appropriate agencies and academic institutions to develop systems to enhance workforce data for biomedical postdoctoral researchers and students to help improve tracking of trainees and career progress; and
 (4)carry out other activities, as appropriate, to promote the development of the next generation of researchers and earlier research independence.
						(c)Study and report
 (1)StudyThe Director of NIH shall request the National Academy of Sciences, as part of the studies conducted under section 489, to conduct a comprehensive study on policies affecting the next generation of researchers in the United States. Such study shall include an evaluation of, and strategies to address, the legislative, administrative, educational, and cultural barriers to providing for a successful next generation of researchers and to promote earlier research independence.
 (2)ReportNot later than 5 years after the date of enactment of the Next Generation Researchers Act, the National Academy of Sciences shall submit to the Director, the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions and the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate, and the Committee on Energy and Commerce and the Committee on Appropriations of the House of Representatives, a report concerning the results of the study conducted under paragraph (1). Such report shall include—
 (A)an evaluation of the legislative, administrative, educational, and cultural barriers faced by the next generation of researchers;
 (B)an evaluation of the impact of sequestration resulting from the Budget Control Act of 2011 (Public Law 112–25) and Federal budget constraints on the next generation of researchers; and
 (C)recommendations for the implementation of policies to incentivize, improve entry into, and sustain careers in research for the next generation of researchers and to promote earlier research independence, including proposed policies for agencies and academic institutions..


115 HRES 281 IH: Expressing support for designation of April 2017 as “Second Chance Month”.
U.S. House of Representatives
2017-04-26
text/xml
EN
Pursuant to Title 17 Section 105 of the United States Code, this file is not subject to copyright protection and is in the public domain.

IV115th CONGRESS1st SessionH. RES. 281IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVESApril 26, 2017Mr. Cárdenas (for himself, Mr. Jeffries, Mr. Bishop of Georgia, Mr. Chabot, Mr. Curbelo of Florida, Mr. Conyers, Mrs. Love, Mr. Walker, Mr. Russell, Ms. Bass, and Mr. Danny K. Davis of Illinois) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the JudiciaryRESOLUTIONExpressing support for designation of April 2017 as Second Chance Month.

 Whereas April 2017 is an appropriate month to designate as Second Chance Month: Now, therefore, be it  That the House of Representatives—
 (1)honors the work of communities, governmental entities, nonprofit organizations, congregations, employers, and individuals to remove unnecessary legal and societal barriers that prevent an individual with a criminal record from becoming a productive member of society; and
 (2)calls on the people of the United States to observe Second Chance Month through actions and programs that—
 (A)promote awareness of collateral consequences; and (B)provide closure for individuals who have paid their debts.


115 HR 6593 IH: Medication Automated Quotation System, or MEDAQ, Act of 2018
U.S. House of Representatives
2018-07-26
text/xml
EN
Pursuant to Title 17 Section 105 of the United States Code, this file is not subject to copyright protection and is in the public domain.

		I
		115th CONGRESS2d Session
		H. R. 6593
		IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

			July 26, 2018
			Mr. Duncan of Tennessee introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce

		A BILL
		To direct the Comptroller General of the United States to conduct a study on the feasibility of
			 establishing and maintaining an automated and searchable system that
			 tracks prescription drug prices in the United States, and for other
			 purposes.

 1.Short titleThis Act may be cited as the Medication Automated Quotation System, or MEDAQ, Act of 2018. 2.Study on the feasibility of creating a system that tracks prescription drug costs (a)StudyThe Comptroller General of the United States, in consultation with the Commissioner of Food and Drugs and the Administrator of CMS, shall conduct a study on the feasibility of establishing a medication automated quotation system.
 (b)ElementsThe feasibility study required under subsection (a) shall include assessments of the following: (1)The feasibility of—
 (A)collecting or compiling data on the acquisition price per unit that any purchaser (including but not limited to a distributor, a retailer, a third-party payor, or ultimate consumer) pays for a prescription drug and the effect PBMs and other involved entities have on such prices; and
 (B)aggregating such data in a manner that does not reveal personally identifiable information. (2)The cost of procuring and maintaining a medication automated quotation system, or MEDAQ, based on the above data.
 (3)The need for new or additional laws, regulations, or policies to collect the data necessary for a medication automated quotation system to track and generate prescription drug pricing data in the United States.
 (4)The possibility of integrating or using the FDA's NDC system and CMS NADAC when creating the MEDAQ. (5)Integration of CMS NADAC when creating the MEDAQ and, not withstanding any other provision of this Act, shall not consider pharmacy reporting, collecting, or compiling requirements beyond or in addition to the requirements of CMS NADAC.
 (6)Whether the system described under subsection (a) is likely to be effective in reducing overall prescription drug prices by increasing competition and transparency in the drug industry.
 (c)ReportNot later than 270 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General shall submit to Congress a report on the results of the study conducted under subsection (a).
 (d)Medication automated quotation system definedThe term medication automated quotation system or MEDAQ means an automated and searchable system that— (1)with respect to the United States (and with respect to each region thereof), tracks and generates data on the acquisition price per unit of any prescription drug that a purchaser pays for such unit of such drug;
 (2)produces reports in real time on average prices per unit and other data; and (3)is accessible to purchasers, who have paid a user fee, with limitations to ensure appropriate privacy but also transparency in price negotiations.


115 S1296 IS: PRIVATE Act
U.S. Senate
2017-06-06
text/xml
EN
Pursuant to Title 17 Section 105 of the United States Code, this file is not subject to copyright protection and is in the public domain.

II115th CONGRESS1st SessionS. 1296IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATESJune 6, 2017Mrs. McCaskill (for herself, Mr. Heller, and Mrs. Ernst) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Armed ServicesA BILLTo amend the Uniform Code of Military Justice to prohibit the wrongful broadcast or distribution of
			 intimate visual images.

 1.Short titleThis Act may be cited as the Protecting the Rights of IndiViduals Against Technological Exploitation Act or the PRIVATE Act. 2.Prohibition on wrongful broadcast or distribution of intimate visual images (a)ProhibitionSubchapter X of chapter 47 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by inserting after section 917 (article 117 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice) the following new section (article):

					917a.Art. 117a. Wrongful broadcast or distribution of intimate visual images
 (a)ProhibitionAny person subject to this chapter who— (1)knowingly and wrongfully broadcasts or distributes an intimate visual image of a private area of another person who—
 (A)is at least 18 years of age at the time the intimate visual image was created; (B)is identifiable from the image itself or from information displayed in connection with the image; and
 (C)does not explicitly consent to the broadcast or distribution of the intimate visual image; (2)knows or reasonably should have known that the intimate visual image was made under circumstances in which the person depicted in the intimate visual image retained a reasonable expectation of privacy regarding any broadcast or distribution of the intimate visual image; and
 (3)knows or reasonably should have known that the broadcast or distribution of the intimate visual image is likely—
 (A)to cause harm, harassment, intimidation, emotional distress, or financial loss for the person depicted in the intimate visual image; or
 (B)to harm substantially the depicted person with respect to that person’s health, safety, business, calling, career, financial condition, reputation, or personal relationships,
								is guilty of wrongful distribution of intimate visual images and shall by punished as a
 court-martial may direct.(b)DefinitionsIn this section (article): (1)BroadcastThe term broadcast means to electronically transmit a visual image with the intent that it be viewed by a person or persons.
 (2)DistributeThe term distribute means to deliver to the actual or constructive possession of another person, including transmission by mail or electronic means.
 (3)Intimate visual imageThe term intimate visual image means a photograph, video, film, or recording made by any means that depicts a private area of a person.
 (4)Private areaThe term private area means the naked or underwear-clad genitalia, anus, buttocks, or female areola or nipple. (5)Reasonable expectation of privacyThe term reasonable expectation of privacy refers to circumstances in which a reasonable person would believe that an intimate visual image of the person would not be broadcast or distributed to another person..
 (b)Clerical amendmentThe table of sections at the beginning of subchapter X of chapter 47 of title 10, United States Code (the Uniform Code of Military Justice), is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 917 (article 117) the following new item:
				917a. 117a. Wrongful broadcast or distribution of intimate visual images..


113 HR 2705 IH: Stanislaus River Native Anadromous Fish Improvement Act
U.S. House of Representatives
2013-07-17
text/xml
EN
Pursuant to Title 17 Section 105 of the United States Code, this file is not subject to copyright protection and is in the public domain.

		I
		113th CONGRESS
		1st Session
		H. R. 2705
		IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

			July 17, 2013
			Mr. Denham introduced
			 the following bill; which was referred to the
			 Committee on Natural
			 Resources

		A BILL
		To develop a pilot program to remove non-native predator
		  fishes from the Stanislaus River to protect the native anadromous fishery
		  resources affected by the operation of the New Melones Unit of the East Side
		  Division of the Central Valley Project, and for other
		  purposes.

		1.Short titleThis Act may be cited as the
			 Stanislaus River Native Anadromous
			 Fish Improvement Act.
		2.Pilot program to
			 protect anadromous fish in the stanislaus river
			(a)Establishment of
			 non-Native predator fish removal programThe Commissioner and
			 districts, in consultation with the National Marine Fisheries Service, the
			 United States Fish and Wildlife Service, and the California Department of Fish
			 and Wildlife, shall jointly develop and conduct a pilot non-native predator
			 fish removal program to remove non-native striped bass, smallmouth bass,
			 largemouth bass, black bass, and other non-native predator fishes from the
			 Stanislaus River. The pilot program shall—
				(1)be scientifically
			 based;
				(2)include methods to
			 quantify the number and size of predator fishes removed each year, the impact
			 of such removal on the overall abundance of predator fishes, and the impact of
			 such removal on the populations of juvenile anadromous fish found in the
			 Stanislaus River by, among other things, evaluating the number of juvenile
			 anadromous fish that migrate past the rotary screw trap located at
			 Caswell;
				(3)use wire fyke
			 trapping, portable resistance board weirs, and boat electrofishing, which are
			 the most effective predator collection techniques that minimize affects to
			 native anadromous fish;
				(4)be developed,
			 including the application for all necessary scientific research and species
			 enhancement permits under section 10(a)(1) of the Endangered Species Act of
			 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1539(a)(1)), for the performance of the pilot program, not
			 later than 6 months after the date of the enactment of this Act;
				(5)be implemented on
			 the first business day of the calendar year following the issuance of all
			 necessary scientific research and species enhancement permits needed to begin
			 the pilot program; and
				(6)be implemented for
			 a period of five consecutive calendar years.
				(b)ManagementThe
			 management of the pilot program shall be the joint responsibility of the
			 Commissioner and the districts. Such parties shall work collaboratively to
			 insure the performance of the pilot program, and shall discuss and agree upon,
			 among other things, changes in the structure, management, personnel,
			 techniques, strategy, data collection, reporting, and conduct of the pilot
			 program.
			(c)Conduct
				(1)In
			 generalAt the election of the districts, the pilot program may
			 be conducted by their own personnel, qualified private contractors hired by the
			 districts, personnel of, on loan to, or otherwise assigned to the Bureau of
			 Reclamation, or a combination thereof.
				(2)Participation by
			 bureau of reclamationIn the event the districts elect to conduct
			 the program using their own personnel or qualified private contractors hired by
			 them, the Commissioner has the option to assign an employee of, on loan to, or
			 otherwise assigned to the Bureau of Reclamation, to be present for all
			 activities performed in the field. Such presence shall insure compliance with
			 the agreed upon elements specified in subsection (b). The districts shall pay
			 100 percent of the cost of such participation as specified in subsection
			 (d).
				(3)Timing of
			 ElectionThe districts shall notify the Commissioner of their
			 election on or before October 15 of each calendar year of the pilot program,
			 which election shall apply to the work performed in the subsequent calendar
			 year.
				(d)Funding
				(1)Annual
			 fundingThe districts shall be responsible for 100 percent of the
			 cost of the pilot program. On or before December 1 of each year of the pilot
			 program, the Commissioner shall submit to the districts an estimate of the cost
			 to be incurred by the Bureau of Reclamation in the following calendar year, if
			 any, including the cost of any data collection and posting under subsection
			 (e). If an amount equal to the estimate is not provided to the reclamation fund
			 identified in section 3 of the Act of February 21, 1911 (43 U.S.C. 525), by the
			 districts on or before December 31 of each year—
					(A)the Bureau of Reclamation shall have no
			 obligation to conduct the pilot program activities otherwise scheduled until
			 full payment is made by the districts; and
					(B)the districts
			 shall be prohibited from conducting any aspect of the pilot program until full
			 payment is made by the districts.
					(2)AccountingOn
			 or before September 1 of each calendar year, the Commissioner shall provide an
			 accounting of the prior calendar year’s expenses to the districts. If the
			 estimate paid by the districts was less than the actual costs incurred by the
			 Bureau of Reclamation, the districts shall have until September 30 of that
			 calendar year to pay the difference to the reclamation fund. If the estimate
			 paid by the districts was greater than the actual costs incurred by the Bureau
			 of Reclamation, then a credit shall be provided to the districts, which shall
			 be deducted from the estimate payment the districts must make for the work
			 performed by the Bureau of Reclamation, if any, in the next calendar
			 year.
				(e)Reporting and
			 evaluation
				(1)In
			 generalOn or before the 15th day of each month, the Commissioner
			 shall post on the Web site of the Bureau of Reclamation a tabular summary of
			 the raw data collected in the prior month.
				(2)ReportOn
			 or before June 30 of the calendar year following the completion of the program,
			 the Commissioner and districts shall jointly publish a peer reviewed report
			 that—
					(A)discusses the
			 findings and conclusions of the pilot program;
					(B)synthesizes the
			 data collected under paragraph (1); and
					(C)makes
			 recommendations for further study and action.
					(f)Permits
			 process
				(1)Not later than 180
			 days after filing of an application by the Commissioner and the districts, the
			 Secretary of the Interior, the Secretary of Commerce, or both, as appropriate,
			 shall issue all necessary scientific research and species enhancement permits
			 under section 10(a)(1) of the Endangered Species Act (16 U.S.C. 153(9)(a)(1)),
			 for the performance of the pilot program.
				(2)Any permit
			 application that is not approved by the Secretary of the Interior, Secretary of
			 Commerce, or both, as appropriate, for any reason, within 180 days after
			 receiving the application, shall be deemed approved.
				(3)All permits issued
			 shall be in the name of the Bureau of Reclamation and the districts.
				(4)Districts may
			 delegate the authority to administer the permit authority to any qualified
			 private contractor retained in accordance with subsection (c).
				(5)The pilot program,
			 including amendments thereto by the appropriate Federal and State agencies,
			 shall constitute a conservation plan that complies with the requirements of
			 section 10(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C.
			 1539(a)(2)).
				(g)NEPASection
			 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C.
			 4332(2)(C)) shall not apply with respect to section 2 and the issuance of any
			 permit under this subsection during the seven-year period beginning on the date
			 of the implementation of the pilot program.
			3.RestrictionsAny restriction imposed under California law
			 on the catch, take, or harvest of any non-native or introduced aquatic or
			 terrestrial species that preys upon anadromous fish and that occupies or is
			 found in the Stanislaus River is hereby void and is preempted.
		4.DefinitionsFor the purposes of this Act:
			(1)Anadromous
			 fish
				(A)The term
			 anadromous fish as applied to the Stanislaus River and the
			 operation of New Melones—
					(i)means those native
			 stocks of salmon (including steelhead) that—
						(I)as of October 30,
			 1992, were present in and had not been extirpated from the Stanislaus River;
			 and
						(II)which ascend the
			 Stanislaus River to reproduce after maturing in San Francisco Bay or the
			 Pacific Ocean; and
						(ii)does not mean any
			 stock, strain or member of American shad, sockeye salmon, or striped
			 bass.
					(B)The definition of
			 anadromous fish provided in section 3403(a) of the Central Valley Project
			 Improvement Act (Public Law 102–575) shall not apply to the operation of New
			 Melones Dam and Reservoir, or to any Federal action in the Stanislaus
			 River.
				(2)CommissionerThe
			 term Commissioner means the Commissioner of the Bureau of
			 Reclamation.
			(3)DistrictsThe
			 term districts means the Oakdale Irrigation District and the South
			 San Joaquin Irrigation District.
			(4)Pilot
			 programThe term pilot program means the pilot
			 non-native predator removal program established under section 2(b).
			5.SunsetThis Act and the authorities provided under
			 this Act shall expire 7 years after implementation of the pilot program
			 begins.


110 HR 441 IH: Retirement Security for America’s Domestic Workers Act of 2007
U.S. House of Representatives
2007-01-12
text/xml
EN
Pursuant to Title 17 Section 105 of the United States Code, this file is not subject to copyright protection and is in the public domain.

I
110th CONGRESS 1st Session
H. R. 441
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

January 12, 2007
Mr. Becerra introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

A BILL
To amend title II of the Social Security Act and the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to coordinate the threshold requirement for coverage of domestic employees under Social Security with the amount required for a quarter of coverage.

1.Short titleThis Act may be cited as the Retirement Security for America’s Domestic Workers Act of 2007.
2.Coordination of threshold requirement for coverage of domestic employees with amount required for quarter of coverage
(a)Amendments to the Social Security ActSection 209(a)(6)(B) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 409(a)(6)(B)) is amended—
(1)by striking is less than and all that follows and inserting is less than the greater of—; and
(2)by adding at the end the following:

(i)$1,500, or
(ii)the amount of wages and self-employment income which an individual must have in such year in order to be credited with a quarter of coverage in such year under section 213(a)(2)(A)(ii) (as determined under section 213(d))..
(b)Amendments to the Internal Revenue Code of 1986Section 3121 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to definitions under FICA) is amended—
(1)in subsection (a)(7)(B)—
(A)by striking is less than and all that follows and inserting is less than the greater of—; and
(B)by adding at the end the following:

(i)$1,500, or
(ii)the amount of wages and self-employment income which an individual must have in such year in order to be credited with a quarter of coverage in such year under section 213(a)(2)(A)(ii) of the Social Security Act (as determined under section 213(d) of such Act).; and
(2)by striking subsection (x).
3.Effective dateThe amendments made by this Act shall apply with respect to remuneration paid after December 31, 2006.


109 HR 2151 IH: To suspend temporarily the duty on Vulkacit MOZ/LG and Vulkacit MOZ/SG.
U.S. House of Representatives
2005-05-05
text/xml
EN
Pursuant to Title 17 Section 105 of the United States Code, this file is not subject to copyright protection and is in the public domain.

I
109th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. R. 2151
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

May 5, 2005
Mr. Brown of South Carolina introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

A BILL
To suspend temporarily the duty on Vulkacit MOZ/LG and Vulkacit MOZ/SG.

1.Vulkacit MOZ and Vulkacit MOZ/SG
(a)In generalSubchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following new heading:

9902.06.02 2-(morpholinothio)benzothiazole (CAS No. 102-77-2) (provided for in subheading 2934.20.15)FreeNo changeNo changeOn or before 12/31/2009.
(b)Effective dateThe amendment made by subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.


		II
		110th CONGRESS
		1st Session
		S. 552
		IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED
		  STATES

			February 12, 2007
			Ms. Murkowski (for
			 herself and Mr. Stevens) introduced the
			 following bill; which was read twice and referred to the
			 Committee on
			 Finance

		A BILL
		To provide for the tax treatment of income
		  received in connection with the litigation concerning the Exxon Valdez oil
		  spill and for other purposes.

		1.Short titleThis Act may be cited as the
			 Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Tax Treatment
			 Act.
		2.Tax treatment of income received in
			 connection with the Exxon Valdez litigation
			(a)Income averaging of amounts received from
			 the Exxon Valdez litigation
				(1)In generalAt the election of a qualified taxpayer who
			 receives qualified settlement income during a taxable year, the tax imposed by
			 chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 for such taxable year shall be
			 equal to the sum of—
					(A)the tax which would be imposed under such
			 chapter if—
						(i)no amount of elected qualified settlement
			 income were included in gross income for such year, and
						(ii)no deduction were allowed for such year for
			 expenses (otherwise allowable as a deduction to the taxpayer for such year)
			 attributable to such elected qualified settlement income, plus
						(B)the increase in tax under such chapter
			 which would result if taxable income for each of the years in the applicable
			 period were increased by an amount equal to the applicable fraction of the
			 elected qualified settlement income reduced by any expenses (otherwise
			 allowable as a deduction to the taxpayer) attributable to such elected
			 qualified settlement income.
					Any adjustment under this section for
			 any taxable year shall be taken into account in applying this section for any
			 subsequent taxable year.(2)Coordination with farm income
			 averagingIf a qualified
			 taxpayer makes an election with respect to any qualified settlement income
			 under paragraph (1) for any taxable year, such taxpayer may not elect to treat
			 such amount as elected farm income under section 1301 of the Internal Revenue
			 Code of 1986.
				(3)DefinitionsFor purposes of this subsection—
					(A)Applicable periodThe term applicable period
			 means the period beginning on January 1, 1994, and ending on December 31 of the
			 year in which the elected qualified settlement income is received.
					(B)Applicable fractionThe term applicable fraction
			 means the fraction the numerator of which is one and the denominator of which
			 is the number of years in the applicable period.
					(C)Elected qualified settlement
			 incomeThe term elected
			 qualified settlement income means so much of the taxable income for the
			 taxable year which is—
						(i)qualified settlement income, and
						(ii)specified under the election under
			 paragraph (1).
						(b)Contributions of amounts received to
			 retirement accounts
				(1)In generalAny qualified taxpayer who receives
			 qualified settlement income during the taxable year may, at any time before the
			 end of the taxable year in which such income was received, make one or more
			 contributions to an eligible retirement plan of which such qualified taxpayer
			 is a beneficiary in an aggregate amount not to exceed the amount of qualified
			 settlement income received during such year.
				(2)Time when contributions deemed
			 madeFor purposes of
			 paragraph (1), a qualified taxpayer shall be deemed to have made a contribution
			 to an eligible retirement plan on the last day of the taxable year in which
			 such income is received if the contribution is made on account of such taxable
			 year and is made not later than the time prescribed by law for filing the
			 return for such taxable year (not including extensions thereof).
				(3)Treatment of contributions to eligible
			 retirement plansFor purposes
			 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, if a contribution is made pursuant to
			 paragraph (1) with respect to qualified settlement income, then—
					(A)except as provided in paragraph (4)—
						(i)to the extent of such contribution, the
			 qualified settlement income shall not be included in taxable income, and
						(ii)for purposes of section 72 of such Code,
			 such contribution shall not be considered to be investment in the contract,
			 and
						(B)the qualified taxpayer shall, to the extent
			 of the amount of the contribution, be treated—
						(i)as having received the qualified settlement
			 income—
							(I)in the case of a contribution to an
			 individual retirement plan (as defined under section 7701(a)(37) of such Code),
			 in a distribution described in section 408(d)(3) of such Code, and
							(II)in the case of any other eligible
			 retirement plan, in an eligible rollover distribution (as defined under section
			 402(f)(2) of such Code), and
							(ii)as having transferred the amount to the
			 eligible retirement plan in a direct trustee to trustee transfer within 60 days
			 of the distribution.
						(4)Special rule for Roth IRAs and Roth
			 401(k)sFor purposes of the Internal Revenue Code
			 of 1986, if a contribution is made pursuant to paragraph (1) with respect to
			 qualified settlement income to a Roth IRA (as defined under section 408A(b) of
			 such Code) or as a designated Roth contribution to an applicable retirement
			 plan (within the meaning of section 402A of such Code), then—
					(A)the qualified settlement income shall be
			 includible in taxable income, and
					(B)for purposes of section 72 of such Code,
			 such contribution shall be considered to be investment in the contract.
					(5)Eligible retirement planFor purpose of this subsection, the term
			 eligible retirement plan has the meaning given such term under
			 section 402(c)(8)(B) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.
				(c)Qualified settlement income not included in
			 SECAFor purposes of chapter
			 2 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and section 211 of the Social Security
			 Act, no portion of qualified settlement income received by a qualified taxpayer
			 shall be treated as self-employment income.
			(d)Qualified taxpayerFor purposes of this section, the term
			 qualified taxpayer means—
				(1)any plaintiff in the civil action In re
			 Exxon Valdez, No. 89–095–CV (HRH) (Consolidated) (D. Alaska); or
				(2)any beneficiary of the estate of such a
			 plaintiff who—
					(A)acquired the right to receive qualified
			 settlement income from that plaintiff; and
					(B)was the spouse or an immediate relative of
			 that plaintiff.
					(e)Qualified settlement incomeFor purposes of this section, the term
			 qualified settlement income means income received (whether as lump
			 sums or periodic payments) in connection with the civil action In re Exxon
			 Valdez, No. 89–095–CV (HRH) (Consolidated) (D. Alaska), including interest
			 (whether pre- or post judgment and whether related to a settlement or
			 judgment).


114 HR 4739 IH: Greater Sage Grouse Protection and Recovery Act of 2016
U.S. House of Representatives
2016-03-15
text/xml
EN
Pursuant to Title 17 Section 105 of the United States Code, this file is not subject to copyright protection and is in the public domain.

		I
		114th CONGRESS
		2d Session
		H. R. 4739
		IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

			March 15, 2016
			Mr. Bishop of Utah (for himself, Mr. Simpson, Mrs. Lummis, Mr. Amodei, Mr. Bridenstine, Mr. Weber of Texas, Mr. Gosar, Mr. Duncan of South Carolina, Mr. Lamborn, Mr. Stewart, Mr. Hardy, Mr. Zinke, Mr. Hurd of Texas, Mr. Cook, and Mr. Chaffetz) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Natural Resources

		A BILL
		To provide for the conservation and preservation of the Greater Sage Grouse by facilitating State
			 recovery plans.

 1.Short titleThis Act may be cited as the Greater Sage Grouse Protection and Recovery Act of 2016. 2.Protection and recovery of greater sage grouse (a)DefinitionsIn this section:
 (1)Federal resource management planThe term Federal resource management plan means— (A)a land use plan prepared by the Bureau of Land Management for public lands pursuant to section 202 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1712); or
 (B)a land and resource management plan prepared by the Forest Service for National Forest System lands pursuant to section 6 of the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act of 1974 (16 U.S.C. 1604).
 (2)Greater Sage GrouseThe term Greater Sage Grouse means a sage grouse of the species Centrocercus urophasianus. (3)State management planThe term State management plan means a State-approved plan for the protection and recovery of the Greater Sage Grouse.
 (b)PurposeThe purpose of this section is— (1)to facilitate implementation of State management plans over a period of multiple, consecutive Greater Sage Grouse life cycles; and
 (2)to demonstrate the efficacy of the State management plans for the protection and recovery of the Greater Sage Grouse.
				(c)Delay in making Endangered Species Act of 1973 finding
 (1)Delay requiredIn the case of any State with a State management plan, the Secretary of the Interior may not make a finding under clause (i), (ii), or (iii) of section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1533(b)(3)(B)) with respect to the Greater Sage Grouse in that State before September 30, 2026.
 (2)Effect on other lawsThe delay imposed by paragraph (1) is, and shall remain, effective without regard to any other statute, regulation, court order, legal settlement, or any other provision of law or in equity.
 (3)Effect on conservation statusUntil the date specified in paragraph (1), the conservation status of the Greater Sage Grouse shall remain not warranted for listing under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
				(d)Coordination of Federal land management and State management plans
 (1)Prohibition on withdrawals and modifications of Federal resource management plansIn order to foster coordination between a State management plan and Federal resource management plans that affect the Greater Sage Grouse, upon notification by the Governor of a State with a State management plan, the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture, as applicable, may not exercise authority under section 204 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1714) to make, modify, or extend any withdrawal, nor amend or otherwise modify any Federal resource management plan applicable to Federal land in the State, in a manner inconsistent with the State management plan for a period, to be specified by the Governor in the notification, of at least five years beginning on the date of the notification.
 (2)Retroactive effectIn the case of any State that provides notification under paragraph (1), if any withdrawal was made, modified, or extended or if any amendment or modification of a Federal resource management plan applicable to Federal lands in the State was issued during the three-year period preceding the date of the notification and the withdrawal, amendment, or modification altered management of the Greater Sage Grouse or its habitat, implementation and operation of the withdrawal, amendment, or modification shall be stayed to the extent that the withdrawal, amendment, or modification is inconsistent with the State management plan. The Federal resource management plan, as in effect immediately before the amendment or modification, shall apply instead with respect to management of the Greater Sage Grouse and its habitat, to the extent consistent with the State management plan.
 (3)Determination of inconsistencyAny disagreement regarding whether a withdrawal, or an amendment or other modification of a Federal resource management plan, is inconsistent with a State management plan shall be resolved by the Governor of the affected State.
 (e)Relation to National Environmental Policy Act of 1969With regard to any major Federal action consistent with a State management plan, any findings, analyses, or conclusions regarding the Greater Sage Grouse or its habitat under section 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)) shall not have a preclusive effect on the approval or implementation of the major Federal action in that State.
 (f)Reporting requirementNot later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act and annually thereafter through 2026, the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture shall jointly submit to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate and the Committee on Natural Resources of the House of Representatives a report on the Secretaries’ implementation and effectiveness of systems to monitor the status of Greater Sage Grouse on Federal lands under their jurisdiction.
 (g)Judicial reviewNotwithstanding any other provision of statute or regulation, the requirements and implementation of this section, including determinations made under subsection (d)(3), are not subject to judicial review.