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

Example Input: SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ''Spacefaring Priorities for America's
Continued Exploration Act'' or the ''SPACE Act''.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

Congress finds the following:
(1) Russia is not a reliable partner.--(A) Unless Space
Shuttle operations are extended beyond 2010, the United States
will be heavily reliant on Russia to supply crew and possibly
cargo transport services to the International Space Station
during the gap period of 2010 through 2015. There will be no
other way to fly our astronauts into space during this period.
(B) The United States should not increase its reliance on
Russia to transport American astronauts into space, given the
increasingly divergent views and posturing from Russia. Russia
opposes the United States plan to base an antimissile radar
system in the Czech Republic and interceptor missiles in Poland
to deal with the threat posed by the Iranian nuclear weapons
and missile programs. Russia also suspended its participation
in the Conventional Forces in Europe (CFE) treaty, one of the
most significant arms control agreements of the Cold War years.
Additionally, Russia continues to arm some of America's most
hostile adversaries, Iran and Venezuela. Despite United States
objections, Russia sold billions of dollars worth of weapons to
the regime of Hugo Chavez in 2006. Such meddling is a possible
violation of the Monroe Doctrine and a throwback to the Cold
War era. Even more troublesome is the Russian history of
weapons trading with Iran. Russia has supplied advanced
conventional arms technology, missile technology, and nuclear
technologies to this very anti-American regime.
(2) Russia has abused past nasa cooperation agreements.--
(A) In the late 1990s, Russia fell short in fulfilling its
commitment to the International Space Station.
(B) The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (in
this Act referred to as ''NASA'') was forced to transfer
hundreds of millions of dollars to enable the Russians to
complete the critical Space Station service module Zvezda,
without which the International Space Station could not
operate.
(C) Russia delayed completion of the Zvezda service module
for several years. Under the International Space Station
agreement, the Russian government had committed to fund as well
as build the Zvezda service module. Subsequent transfers from
the United States, in order to complete the module, reflect
serious Russian mismanagement in the field of space.
(D) In 2000, while Russia was failing to meet its
commitment to the International Space Station, Russia was
diverting financial and human resources away from fulfilling
its International Space Station commitments in order to keep
the Russian's Mir Space Station aloft.
(E) Russia's past shortcomings in fulfilling commitments to
its international space partners should serve as a warning to
the United States as we consider increased reliance on Russian
space services in the future. It is not prudent for the United
States to depend on Russia for access to space given our past
experience with this relationship.
(3) American space science should not be dependent on
russian support.--(A) The United States has already invested
billions of dollars in the International Space Station program
since its inception.
(B) There is much research of great value being conducted
in space, and on the International Space Station, that may
yield tremendous gains. Research being conducted on the
International Space Station may help scientists back on Earth
develop medicines to treat diseases and help us better
understand the Earth's climate. Many scientists believe that
the microgravity environment of space will enable the
development of new drugs, vaccines, and other therapies.
Equipment on the International Space Station will monitor
stratospheric gases, and investigate ozone chemistry.
(4) The united states must have assured access to space.--
(A) To ensure that the United States realizes the dividends
from the considerable investment we have made in the
International Space Station, we need to ensure continued access
to space for our astronauts. However, NASA's plan for transport
of crew to and from the International Space Station fails to
provide necessary redundancies to provide assured access to
space.
(B) NASA anticipates that the Russian Soyuz spacecraft will
be the only vehicle for astronaut crew rotation to the
International Space Station after 2010. From 2011 until the
planned operation of Orion in 2015, NASA likely has no other
option for transporting American astronauts to space other than
on Russian vehicles.
(C) NASA has conceded that without the Space Shuttle, it
will be unable to transport the Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer
(AMS) to the International Space Station. Scientists involved
in the development of the AMS acknowledge that it will enhance
scientific discoveries. While the AMS has cost over
$1,500,000,000 to develop and build, NASA has stated that the
remaining Space Shuttle manifest does not allow for transport
of the AMS and that it will not be an option to retrofit
another launch vehicle in order to fly it into space. Only by
extending Space Shuttle operations beyond 2010 will NASA be
able to transport the AMS to the International Space Station.
As long as the AMS meets all required standards to verify its
validity and justify its transport on the Space Shuttle, NASA
should fulfill its obligation to the Department of Energy and
our international partners.
(D) In addition, the Japanese Centrifuge Accommodation
Module, which can only fly to the International Space Station
on the Space Shuttle, will also be unable to reach the Space
Station absent extending Space Shuttle operations.
(5) A better approach.--(A) Due to NASA's lack of a backup
plan for reliance on the Russians for transport of American
astronauts to space, the United States needs a better approach.
The best approach is the Space Shuttle, a proven, domestic
source of space transport for assured access to space,
including the International Space Station, for crew and cargo
transport.
(B) With 2 Shuttle missions per year during the human
spaceflight program flight gap between Shuttle and Orion,
currently scheduled from 2010 through 2015, we can replace our
need to rely on the Russians for crew rotation for the
International Space Station.
(C) Savings from replacing Russian transport services to
the International Space Station with the Space Shuttle would
pay for a portion of the costs for flying 2 Space Shuttle
missions per year.
(D) Only by closing the gap between 2010 and 2015, or until
the Orion is operational, will our Nation be able to keep our
Nation's highly skilled and critically important spaceworkers
and engineers gainfully employed, and mitigate the loss of
critical skills.
(E) By extending Space Shuttle operations, NASA may realize
considerable savings by no longer having to pay retention
bonuses to critical space workers. But retention bonuses would
not be the only added costs associated with the end of Space
Shuttle operations when critical skilled workers leave NASA or
its contractors. Recruitment incentives for new workers and
contract cost increases could also be incurred by NASA since
the majority of the Kennedy Space Center's workforce are
contractors.
(F) The success of the Constellation program will depend on
having the most skilled and experienced workforce possible. The
workforce gap, as currently envisioned by NASA, will jeopardize
this. NASA has acknowledged that thousands of critical space
workers will lose their jobs in the transition from the Space
Shuttle to the Constellation program. Continued operation of
the Space Shuttle, but on a reduced flight requirement, while
also integrating these workers into the Orion program, is the
best way to retain many of these critical workers and skill
sets.
(G) An August 2007 study by the Government Accountability
Office, ''NASA Progress Made on Strategic Human Capital
Management, but Future Program Challenges Remain,'' stated that
''the agency as a whole faces challenges in recruiting and
retaining highly experienced senior-level engineers in certain
specialties. NASA's principal workforce challenge will be faced
in the transition to the next generation of human space flight
systems.''.
(H) This Act authorizes for NASA additional funding under
section 4 to fully restore the appropriation shortfalls in
fiscal years 2007 and 2008 compared to the funds that were
authorized for NASA. An additional $1,000,000,000 is authorized
in section 4(b) to reimburse NASA for the costs incurred by
NASA from the Space Shuttle return-to-flight efforts following
the Space Shuttle Columbia disaster.

SEC. 3. PROHIBITION ON USE OF RUSSIAN SPACE SERVICES.

NASA shall not rely solely on the Russian government for astronaut
transport or cargo resupply services. This prohibition does not apply
to the current Soyuz emergency escape services for astronauts on the
International Space Station.

SEC. 4. ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR NASA.

(a) Additional Authorization for Fiscal Year 2007 Shortfall.--There
are authorized to be appropriated to NASA $1,648,000,000, 41.6 percent
of which shall be for Exploration Systems, and 28.7 percent of which
shall be available for Space Operations.
(b) Columbia Return-to-Flight.--There are authorized to be
appropriated to NASA $1,000,000,000 for emergency funding to reimburse
for Columbia return-to-flight costs, of which the Exploration Systems
and Space Operations Accounts shall receive funding at the rate
proportional to the amounts used to pay the costs associated with the
Space Shuttle return-to-flight efforts.
(c) Additional Authorization for Fiscal Year 2008 Shortfall.--There
are authorized to be appropriated to NASA $1,064,000,000, 41.7 percent
of which shall be for Exploration Systems.
(d) Preservation of Funding for Programs.--NASA shall not take any
funding from its Exploration Systems account or the Constellation
program in order to fund the continued operation of the Space Shuttle
program as required in this Act.

SEC. 5. EXTENDING SPACE SHUTTLE OPERATIONS.

(a) Use of Space Shuttle for Access to Space.--NASA shall fly at
least 2 Space Shuttle missions per year for crew transport, instead of
Russian crew and cargo services, for the period of 2010 through 2015,
or until Orion is operational. There are authorized to be appropriated
to NASA such sums as may be necessary, in addition to amounts otherwise
authorized, to carry out this subsection, including for the production
of more external tanks as may be needed.
(b) Insufficient Funding.--Except as provided under subsection (c),
the requirements of this Act shall have effect only to the extent that
sufficient funding is appropriated, as authorized under subsection (a).
Sufficient funding is defined as funds required to fully or partially
comply with the requirements of this Act.
(c) Report to Congress.--NASA shall report to Congress not later
than 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act on the specific
costs and actions needed to extend the operation of the Space Shuttle
in accordance with this Act.
(d) Operational Efficiencies.--As soon as possible, but no later
than March 31, 2011, NASA shall investigate areas of reduced operations
and enhanced cost savings and implement those that do not impinge the
safe operation of the Space Shuttle program, including the following:
(1) The possible retirement of one Space Shuttle orbiter,
leaving 2 to remain operational, in a manner that ensures the
safe operation of the Space Shuttle program.
(2) Significantly reducing changes to the design of the
Space Shuttle orbiters, in a manner that ensures the safe
operation of the Space Shuttle program. This shall include
changes to the Space Shuttle software systems.
(3) Significantly reducing Space Shuttle orbiter
configuration operations and payload configuration operations,
in a manner that ensures the safe operation of the Space
Shuttle program.
(4) Maximizing the use of shared personnel between the
continued operation of the Space Shuttle and Constellation and
other NASA programs.
(e) Facilities.--If conflicts arise in NASA's efforts to allocate
facilities, personnel, and other resources in order to fly the Space
Shuttle as well as continue the development of Constellation, then NASA
shall identify in a report to Congress in advance such conflicts, along
with recommendations as to how they can be mitigated.

SEC. 6. SHUTTLE RECERTIFICATION.

Not later than 6 months after the date of enactment of this Act,
NASA shall define achievable and attainable requirements for operation
of the Space Shuttle program beyond 2010, as recommended by the
Columbia Accident Investigation Board. NASA shall transmit these
requirements to Congress in the form of a report. NASA shall then
immediately begin the process of satisfying these requirements and
shall satisfy all requirements no later than March 31, 2010.
Example Output: Spacefaring Priorities for America's Continued Exploration Act or SPACE Act - Prohibits the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) from relying solely on the Russian government for astronaut transport or cargo resupply services, except for the current Soyuz emergency escape services for astronauts on the International Space Station.

Authorizes appropriations to NASA for: (1) exploration systems; and (2) emergency funding for Columbia return-to-flight costs.

Requires NASA to fly at least two space shuttle missions per year for crew transport, instead of Russian crew and cargo services, for the period 2010-2015, or until Orion is operational. Authorizes appropriations to carry out such operations. Requires NASA to report to Congress on the specific costs and actions needed to extend the operation of the space shuttle.

Requires NASA, by March 31, 2011, to investigate areas of reduced operations and enhanced cost savings and implement those that do not impinge on the safe operation of the space shuttle program.

Directs NASA to define achievable and attainable requirements for the operation of such program beyond 2010, as recommended by the Columbia Accident Investigation Board. Requires: (1) NASA to report to Congress on such requirements; and (2) NASA to immediately begin satisfying those requirements and to satisfy all of them by March 31, 2010.

Example Input: SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ''Reducing Duplication Overseas Act of
2012''.

SEC. 2. PURPOSE.

The purpose of this Act is to promote high-quality, cost-efficient,
and effective administrative support services to agencies overseas.

SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

In this Act:
(1) Agency.--The term ''agency'' means a department,
agency, or independent establishment in the executive branch
performing any foreign affairs functions.
(2) Appropriate congressional committees.--The term
''appropriate congressional committees'' means--
(A) the Committee on Foreign Relations of the
Senate;
(B) the Committee on Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs of the Senate;
(C) the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate;
(D) the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House
of Representatives;
(E) the Committee on Oversight and Government
Reform of the House of Representatives; and
(F) the Committee on Appropriations of the House of
Representatives.
(3) International cooperative administrative support
services system.--The term ''International Cooperative
Administrative Support Services system'' means the mechanism
established pursuant to section 23 of the State Department
Basic Authorities Act of 1956 (22 U.S.C. 2695) by which the
United States Government manages and funds administrative
support services at overseas posts.
(4) International cooperative administrative support
services customer agencies.--The term ''International
Cooperative Administrative Support Services customer agencies''
means agencies participating in the International Cooperative
Administrative Support Services system.
(5) International cooperative administrative support
services executive board.--The term ''International Cooperative
Administrative Support Services Executive Board'' means the
highest-level International Cooperative Administrative Support
Services policy-making body comprised of senior representatives
of agencies participating in the International Cooperative
Administrative Support Services system.

SEC. 4. PARTICIPATION IN INTERNATIONAL COOPERATIVE ADMINISTRATIVE
SUPPORT SERVICES SYSTEM.

(a) In General.--Not later than 2 years after the date of the
enactment of this Act, each agency with operations overseas under the
authority of the Chief of Mission pursuant to section 207 of the
Foreign Service Act of 1980 (22 U.S.C. 3927) shall participate in the
International Cooperative Administrative Support Services system for
purposes of obtaining household furniture, furnishings, and appliance
pools services, motor pool services, and management services unless--
(1) the agency provides a detailed explanation for
evaluation and decision by the International Cooperative
Administrative Support Services Executive Board that
describes--
(A) how the agency will provide the service outside
of the International Cooperative Administrative Support
Services system;
(B) the cost to the agency of the service; and
(C) how providing the service outside the
International Cooperative Administrative Support
Services system will not increase overall costs to the
United States Government; or
(2) the agency submits a detailed explanation for
evaluation and decision by the International Cooperative
Administrative Support Services Executive Board certifying that
the mission of the agency cannot be achieved by such
participation in the International Cooperative Administrative
Support Services system.
(b) Rule of Construction.--The motor pool services requirement
under subsection (a) applies to administrative services, and shall not
be construed as superseding, removing, or limiting any statutory or
programmatic requirements related to agency use or procurement of
vehicles.

SEC. 5. USE OF ALTERNATE SERVICE PROVIDERS.

The International Cooperative Administrative Support Services
Executive Board shall allow an agency to act as an alternate service
provider for administrative services at an overseas post in place of
the existing International Cooperative Administrative Support Services
provider for purposes of reducing overall costs to the United States
Government if the agency--
(1) demonstrates through a business case that it can
provide the administrative service more efficiently; and
(2) agrees to provide the administrative service to all
other International Cooperative Administrative Support Services
customer agencies at the overseas post.

SEC. 6. REPORTING REQUIREMENTS.

(a) Biennial Report.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
the enactment of this Act, and every 2 years thereafter, the
Secretary of State, in consultation with the International
Cooperative Administrative Support Services Executive Board,
shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees a
report on the International Cooperative Administrative Support
Services system.
(2) Content.--The report required under paragraph (1)
shall--
(A) establish performance goals to define the level
of performance to be achieved in providing efficient,
effective, and equitable administrative services to
International Cooperative Administrative Support
Services customer agencies;
(B) establish a balanced set of performance
indicators to be used in measuring or assessing
progress toward each performance goal;
(C) describe how the International Cooperative
Administrative Support Services system ensures the
accuracy and reliability of the data used to measure
progress; and
(D) identify strategies and the resources required
to achieve performance goals.
(b) Comptroller General Review.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 2 years after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General of the
United States shall submit to the appropriate congressional
committees a review of the International Cooperative
Administrative Support Services system.
(2) Content.--The review required under paragraph (1) shall
include--
(A) an evaluation of whether requiring agencies to
participate in the International Cooperative
Administrative Support Services system for household
furniture, furnishings, and appliance pools services
and motor pools services has increased cost-efficiency
and reduced administrative redundancies;
(B) recommendations, if warranted, for further
consolidation of services in the International
Cooperative Administrative Support Services system;
(C) an evaluation of how implementation of this Act
is affecting the performance of International
Cooperative Administrative Support Services customer
agencies; and
(D) recommendations, if warranted, for improving
the International Cooperative Administrative Support
Services system and implementing this Act.
Example Output: Reducing Duplication Overseas Act of 2012 - Requires a federal agency that performs any foreign affairs functions and operates overseas to participate in the International Cooperative Administrative Support Services system for purposes of obtaining household furniture, furnishings, and appliance pools services, motor pool services, and management services unless such agency provides a detailed explanation that describes: (1) how such agency will provide the service outside the system, (2) the cost of the service, and (3) how providing the service outside the system will not increase overall costs. Requires such an agency to provide a detailed explanation certifying that the mission of the agency cannot be achieved by participation in the system.

Requires the International Cooperative Administrative Support Services Executive Board to allow an agency to act as an alternative provider for administrative services at an overseas post in place of the system if the agency: (1) demonstratives that it can provide the administrative service more efficiently, and (2) agrees to provide the administrative service to all other International Cooperative Administrative Support Services customer agencies at the overseas post.

Requires the Comptroller General (GAO) to submit a review of the system to specified congressional committees

Example Input: SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ''Level Playing Field in Trade
Agreements Act of 2015''.

SEC. 2. INELIGIBILITY FOR EXPEDITED CONSIDERATION BY CONGRESS OF
CERTAIN TRADE AGREEMENTS.

(a) In General.--No trade agreement with a country or implementing
bill with respect to a trade agreement may receive expedited
consideration by Congress under any provision of law, including any
limitation on amendments or debate in either the Senate or the House of
Representatives (other than under rule XXII of the Standing Rules of
the Senate, as in effect on the date of the enactment of this Act)
unless the agreement--
(1) includes binding and enforceable requirements that all
producers of merchandise exported to the United States from
that country pay adequate wages and maintain sustainable
production methods; and
(2) provides that, for purposes of merchandise from that
country, the application of antidumping duty laws under
subtitle B of title VII of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C.
1673 et seq.) shall be modified as provided under subsection
(b).
(b) Adjustment of Normal Value To Include the Cost of Paying
Adequate Wages and Maintaining Sustainable Production Methods.--
(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (3), in
determining the price of covered merchandise under subsection
(a)(1)(B) of section 773 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C.
1677b) for purposes of determining the normal value of the
covered merchandise under that section, the administering
authority shall increase the price by the difference, if any,
between--
(A) the actual cost of producing the covered
merchandise; and
(B) the estimated cost of producing the covered
merchandise if the producer paid its employees adequate
wages and maintained sustainable production methods.
(2) Demonstration of injury.--An interested party described
in subparagraph (C), (D), (E), (F), or (G) of section 771(9) of
the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1677(9)) that files a
petition under section 732(b)(1) of that Act (19 U.S.C.
1673a(b)(1)) with respect to covered merchandise that relies on
calculations of normal value made under this subsection shall
be presumed to demonstrate that the party is materially injured
or threatened with material injury by reason of imports of the
covered merchandise unless--
(A) the country from which the covered merchandise
is exported is covered by a precertification issued
under paragraph (3)(A)(ii); or
(B) the estimated cost of producing the covered
merchandise under paragraph (1)(B) is equal to or
greater than the cost of producing the merchandise in
the country in which the interested party is located.
(3) Precertification.--
(A) In general.--
(i) Exporter- or producer-specific
precertification.--If an exporter or producer
of covered merchandise demonstrates to the
satisfaction of the administering authority
that all such merchandise, including
significant components or ingredients of the
covered merchandise, was or will be produced
under conditions under which all employees
receive adequate wages or sustainable
production methods are maintained, the
administering authority shall issue to that
exporter or producer, upon request, a
precertification with respect to wages,
production methods, or both, that covers all
covered merchandise by that exporter or
producer.
(ii) Country precertification.--The
administering authority may issue a
precertification for all covered merchandise
imported from a country if the government of
that country maintains and enforces laws
requiring all producers of such merchandise in
that country to pay its employees adequate
wages and to maintain sustainable production
methods.
(B) Safe harbor.--
(i) In general.--If the administering
authority has issued a precertification under
subparagraph (A), covered merchandise to which
the precertification applies shall not be
subject to an antidumping duty solely because a
petition filed under section 732(b)(1) of the
Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1673a(b)(1)) with
respect to the covered merchandise alleges that
the covered merchandise was not produced under
conditions under which all employees receive
adequate wages and sustainable production
methods are maintained.
(ii) Challenging precertification.--An
interested party described in subparagraph (C),
(D), (E), (F), or (G) of section 771(9) of the
Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1677(9)) that
files a petition under section 732(b)(1) of
that Act (19 U.S.C. 1673a(b)(1)) with respect
to covered merchandise covered by a
precertification issued under subparagraph (A)
bears the burden of proving that the covered
merchandise was not produced under conditions
under which all employees receive adequate
wages, sustainable production methods are
maintained, or both, depending on the scope of
the precertification.
(C) Use of third-party standards.--
(i) In general.--The administering
authority, the Secretary of Labor, and the
Administrator of the Environmental Protection
Agency may jointly establish procedures
pursuant to which obtaining certification from
an organization described in clause (ii) may
demonstrate the eligibility of an exporter or
producer for a precertification under
subparagraph (A)(i) or the eligibility of a
country for a precertification under
subparagraph (A)(ii).
(ii) Organization described.--An
organization described in this clause is an
independent third-party organization that sets
standards with respect to adequate wages or
sustainable production methods.
(D) Guidance on compliance.--Not later than one
year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the
administering authority shall publish in the Federal
Register guidance with respect to how persons producing
covered merchandise for exportation to the United
States or seeking to import covered merchandise into
the United States may obtain a precertification under
subparagraph (A).
(c) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Adequate wages.--The term ''adequate wages''--
(A) means compensation for a regular work week that
is sufficient to meet the basic needs of the employee
and any dependents of the employee, including providing
reasonable discretionary income; and
(B) includes, at a minimum--
(i) the payment of the higher of the
minimum wage or the appropriate prevailing
wage;
(ii) compliance with all legal requirements
relating to wages (including freedom of
association relating to the bargaining relating
to wages and related matters); and
(iii) the provision of such benefits as are
required by law or contract.
(2) Administering authority.--The term ''administering
authority'' has the meaning given that term in section 771(1)
of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1677(1)).
(3) Covered merchandise.--The term ''covered merchandise''
means merchandise imported into the United States from a
country described in subsection (a).
(4) Sustainable production methods.--The term ''sustainable
production methods''--
(A) means the application of technologies and
methods that are necessary to provide for workplace
safety, toxic waste control, control of discharge of
pollutants to air, water, and land, and the reasonable
conservation of energy and natural resources, taking
into account local standards and conditions; and
(B) includes, at a minimum, the use of technologies
and methods that would be required for similar
production facilities in the United States.
Example Output:
Level Playing Field in Trade Agreements Act of 2015 No trade agreement with a country, or implementing bill for one, may receive expedited consideration by Congress under any provision of law, including any limitation on amendments or debate in either the Senate (except under rule XXII of the Standing Rules) or the House of Representatives unless the agreement: includes binding and enforceable requirements that all producers of merchandise exported to the United States from that country pay adequate wages and maintain sustainable production methods; and provides that, for purposes of such merchandise, the application of antidumping duty laws under the Tariff Act of 1930 shall be modified according to this Act. The administering authority, in determining the normal price of covered merchandise and whether it is or is likely to be sold at less than fair value, must increase the price by the difference, if any, between the actual cost of producing the merchandise and the estimated cost of producing it if the producer paid its employees adequate wages and maintained sustainable production methods. Certain interested parties that petition for an antidumping proceeding with respect to covered merchandise relying on calculations of normal value under this Act shall be presumed to demonstrate that they are materially injured, or threatened with material injury, by reason of imports of the covered merchandise unless: the country from which the covered merchandise is exported is covered by a precertification, or the estimated cost of producing the covered merchandise is equal to or greater than the cost of producing it in the country in which the interested party is located. The administering authority shall issue a precertification with respect to wages, production methods, or both, for merchandise of a requesting exporter or producer that demonstrates to the administering authority's satisfaction that all such merchandise, including significant components or ingredients, was or will be produced under conditions under which all employees receive adequate wages or sustainable production methods are maintained. The administering authority shall also issue a precertification for all merchandise imported from a country if that country's government maintains and enforces laws requiring all producers of such merchandise in that country to pay its employees adequate wages and to maintain sustainable production methods. The administering authority, the Secretary of Labor, and the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency may jointly establish procedures pursuant to which obtaining certification from an independent third-party standards-setting organization may demonstrate eligibility for a precertification.