[Pages S3429-S3442]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

STATEMENTS OF INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

By Ms. MOSELEY-BRAUN:
S. 1965. A bill to prohibit the publication of identifying
information relating to a minor for criminal sexual purposes; to the
Committee on the Judiciary.

the internet predator prevention act of 1998

Ms. MOSELEY-BRAUN. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce the
Internet Predator Prevention Act of 1998. This legislation will give
much needed protection to the millions of American families with
children.
In the past two decades, the Internet has grown dramatically. In
1981, there were only 213 computers hooked into the Internet. In
January of last year, it was estimated that 17,753,266 computers were
wired into the Internet. And the number of web sites has also increased
significantly in just the last several years: In June of 1993, there
were only 130 reported web sites. By January 1996, that number had
grown to more than 100,000. The Congressional Research Service reports
that studies on the internet have found that 9 million to 47 million
people are using the Internet each year.
This enormous new ``cyberworld,'' which crosses state and national
boundaries as well as race, gender and age barriers, has created a
plethora of new communities, new business opportunities, and
unfortunately, new crimes. It seems as if every month, we are hearing
stories of children who have been exploited and hurt because of
contacts they have made on the Internet.
I am struck by two particular incidents that arose in my home state
of Illinois in just the past year. In August of 1997, I was contacted
by the mother of a 9-year-old Joilet girl whose name and number had
been posted on a series of web pages, bulletin boards and chat rooms
that was designed to attract child molesters. This family only learned
of the posting when they began to receive illicit phone calls from
strangers at odd times of the night. A second family from Illinois had
a similar experience when a stranger began ``logging on'' using their
10-year-old daughter's name. The child's name and the family's home
telephone number was posted on the Internet in a chat room for
pedophiles. These parents were lucky enough to learn that their child's
name had been posted on one of these sites before their children were
placed in greater danger.
Across this nation, there have been numerous other instances in which
parents have learned that their children's names, addresses, and phone
numbers have been posted on Web pages, bulletin boards, and chat rooms
where pedophiles and child molesters lurk.
This ought to be a crime. No one should be allowed to set a child up
for a potentially dangerous situation that could have a lasting and
irrevocable impact. The Internet should serve as a resource and
learning took, and not a vehicle for exploitation.
Currently, there are very few state laws that exist that address this
issue. The few laws that do exist are vague and do not carry the weight
needed to prosecute pedophiles for their crimes. The quick growth of
the Internet has made it difficult to control Internet postings and, in
this case, state and other traditional boundaries cannot and do not
apply. Often times, a child and his or her exploiter may live in
different states on different sides of the country. The crime taking
place, however, is not any less significant than if they were in the
same room.
I believe that the Federal government can play an important role in
stopping child exploitation on the Internet. The federal government has
the ability to regulate interstate activity and federal law has
jurisdiction over all 50 states and territories. A federal law will be
able to navigate the complexity of the issues the Internet raises
regarding interstate commerce and can be used to prosecute criminals
regardless of what state the perpetrator lives in.
Today, I am introducing legislation which I believe will address this
growing problem. My legislation would make it a crime to post a child's
name, address, or telephone number on an Internet web site, chat room
or bulletin board in order to make that child available for criminal
sexual acts with an adult. This bill uses the least restrictive means
of regulating against one of the most offensive acts a human being can
commit toward another: the exploitation of a child.
I urge all of my colleagues to join me in supporting the quick
passage of this legislation.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be
printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:

S. 1965

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ``Internet Predator Prevention
Act of 1998''.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITION AND PENALTIES.

(a) In General.--Chapter 110 of title 18, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

``Sec. 2261. Publication of identifying information relating
to a minor for criminal sexual purposes

``(a) Definition of Identifying Information Relating to a
Minor.--In this section, the term `identifying information
relating to a minor' includes the name, address, telephone
number, social security number, or e-mail address of a minor.
``(b) Prohibition and Penalties.--Whoever, through the use
of any facility in or affecting interstate or foreign
commerce (including any interactive computer service)
publishes, or causes to be published, any identifying
information relating to a minor who has not attained the age
of 17 years, for the purpose of soliciting any person to
engage in any sexual activity for which the person can be
charged with criminal offense under Federal or State law,
shall be imprisoned not less than 1 and not more than 5
years, fined under this title, or both.''.
(b) Technical Amendment.--The analysis for chapter 110 of
title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end
the following:

``2261. Publication of identifying information relating to a minor for
criminal sexual purposes.''.
______

By Mr. FEINGOLD (for himself and Mr. Kohl):
S. 1966. A bill to direct the Secretary of the Interior to study
whether the Apostle Islands National Lakeshore should be protected as a
wilderness area; to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.

THE GAYLORD NELSON APOSTLE ISLANDS STEWARDSHIP ACT OF 1988

Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce ``The Gaylord
Nelson Apostle Islands Stewardship Act of 1998.'' I am very pleased
that my senior colleague from Wisconsin joins me as an original author
of the bill, and also that my colleague in the other body, Congressman
Obey is joining me in introducing the companion legislation as he
represents the area of Wisconsin where the Apostle Islands are located.
Mr. President, on this Earth Day, the 29th Earth Day, I have chosen
to name this legislation in recognition of the accomplishments of Earth
Day's founder, a former member of this body and former Governor of my
state, Gaylord Nelson. Many outside Wisconsin may not know that, in
addition to founding Earth Day, Senator Nelson was also the primary
sponsor of the Apostle Islands National Lakeshore Act. That Act, which
passed in 1970--the same year Earth Day was founded, protects

[[Page S3430]]

one of Northern Wisconsin's most beautiful areas, and it is a place
where every year my family and I spend our favorite vacation.

Though Senator Nelson has received many awards, I know that among his
proudest accomplishments are those bills he crafted which have produced
real and lasting change in preserving America's lands, such as the
Apostle Islands.
The Apostle Islands National Lakeshore includes 21 forested islands
and 12 miles of pristine shoreline which are among the Great Lakes'
most spectacular scenery. Centuries of wave action, freezing, and
thawing have sculpted the shorelines and nature has carved intricate
caves into the sandstone which forms the islands. Delicate arches,
vaulted chambers, and hidden passageways honeycomb cliffs on the north
shore of Devil's Island, Swallow Point on Sand Island, and northeast of
Cornucopia on the mainland. The Apostle Islands National Lakeshore
includes more lighthouses than any other coastline of similar size in
the United States, and is home to diverse wildlife including: black
bear, bald eagles and deer. It is an important recreational area as
well. Its campgrounds and acres of forest, make the Apostles a favorite
destination for hikers, sailors, kayakers, and bikers. The Lakeshore
also includes the underwater lakebed as well, and scuba divers register
with the National Park Service to view the area's underwater resources.
I also know that Senator Nelson, if he were still a member of this
body, would have been wholeheartedly pursuing the full implementation
of the ecological vision that Wisconsinites and all Americans share for
the Lakeshore. Unfortunately, as do many of the lands managed by the
National Park Service, the Apostle Islands National Lakeshore finds
itself, now 28 years later, with both some significant financial and
legal resource needs. If we are to be true stewards of America's public
lands, we need to be willing to make necessary financial investments
and management improvements when they are warranted. Thus, I am
introducing this legislation in an attempt to resolve the unfinished
business that remains at the Lakeshore, as well as to renew our
Nation's commitment to this beautiful place.
Mr. President, the legislation has three major sections. First, it
directs the Park Service to conduct a wilderness suitability study of
the Lakeshore as required by the Wilderness Act. The legislation
authorizes $200,000 for that purpose.
This study mandate is needed to ensure that we have the appropriate
level of management at the Apostle Islands National Lakeshore. The
Wilderness Act and the National Park Service policies require the Park
Service to conduct an evaluation of the lands it manages for possible
inclusion in the National Wilderness system. Such a study would result
in a recommendation to Congress about whether any of the federally-
owned lands currently within the Lakeshore still retain the
characteristics that would make them suitable to be legally designated
as wilderness. The Congress would then have an opportunity to review
such information. If Congress found that such information indicated
that some of the federal lands within the Lakeshore were in need of
legal wilderness status, Congress would have to subsequently pass
legislation to confer such status.
We need this study, Mr. President because, though 28 years have
passed, we are not certain whether we are under- or over-managing the
Lakeshore. During the General Management Planning Process for the
Lakeshore, which was completed nearly a decade ago in 1989, the need
for a formal wilderness study was identified. Although a wilderness
study has been identified as a high priority by the Lakeshore, it has
never been funded.
Since 1989, most of the Lakeshore, roughly 80 percent of the acreage,
is being managed by the Park Service as if it were federally designated
wilderness. As a protective measure, all lands which might be suitable
for wilderness designation were zoned to protect any wilderness
characteristics they may have pending completion of the study. However,
we may be managing lands as wilderness in the Lakeshore that might, due
to use patterns, no longer be suitable for wilderness designation.
Correspondingly, some land area may have become more ecologically
sensitive and may need additional legal protection.
Second, this legislation also directs the Park Service to protect the
historic Raspberry Island and Outer Island lighthouses. The bill
authorizes $3.9 million for bluff stabilization and other necessary
actions. There are six lighthouses in the Apostle Island National
Lakeshore--Sand Island, Devil's Island, Raspberry Island, Outer Island,
Long Island and Michigan Island. Engineering studies completed for the
National Park Service have determined that several of these lighthouses
are in danger of structural damage due to the continued erosion of the
red clay banks upon which they were built. The situations at Outer
Island and Raspberry Island, the two which this legislation addresses,
were determined to be in the most jeopardy.

The Raspberry Island situation is most critical. The Raspberry Island
lighthouse was completed in 1863 to mark the west channel through the
Apostle Islands. The original light was a rectangular frame structure
surmounted by a square tower that held a lens 40 feet above the ground.
A fog signal building was added to Raspberry Island in 1902. The red
brick structure housed a ten-inch steam whistle and a hoisting engine
for a tramway. The need for additional personnel at the station led to
a redesign of the lighthouse building in 1906-07. The structure was
converted to a duplex, housing the keeper and his family in the east
half, with the two assistant keepers sharing the west half. A 23-
kilowatt, diesel-driven electric generator was installed at the station
in 1928. The light was automated in 1947 and then moved to a metal
tower in front of the fog signal building in 1952.
Raspberry Island light is now the most frequently visited of Apostle
Islands National Lakeshore's lighthouses. Recent erosion is threatening
the access tram and the fog signal building.
The Outer Island light station was built in 1874 on a red clay bluff
40 feet above Lake Superior. The lighthouse tower stands 90 feet high
and the watchroom is encircled by an outside walkway and topped by the
lantern.
Historic architects have indicated to the Park Service that Outer
Island lighthouse may already be suffering some structural damage due
to its location on the bluff and the situation would be much worse if
Lake Superior were exceedingly high.
Engineers believe that preservation of these structures requires
protection of the bluff beneath the lighthouses, stabilization of the
banks, and dewatering of the area immediately shoreward of the bluffs.
Although the projects have in the past been included within the Park
Service-wide construction priorities, they have never been funded.
Finally, this legislation adds language to the act which created the
Lakeshore allowing the Park Service to enter into cooperative
agreements with state, tribal, local governments, universities or other
non-profit entities to enlist their assistance in managing the
Lakeshore. Some parks have specific language in the act which created
the park allowing them to enter into such agreements. Parks have used
them for activities such as research, historic preservation, and
emergency services. Apostle Islands currently does not have this
authority, which this legislation adds.
Other National Park lands and lands which are managed by the Park
Service, such as the Lakeshore, have such authority. Adding such
authority to the Lakeshore will be a way to make Lakeshore management
resources go farther. The Park Service has the opportunity to carry out
joint projects with other partners which could contribute to the
management of the Lakeshore including: state, local, and tribal
governments, universities, and non-profit groups. Such endeavors would
have both scientific management and fiscal benefits. In the past, the
Lakeshore has had to pass over opportunities because the specific
authority has been absent.
In his 1969 book on the environment, entitled America's Last Chance,
Senator Nelson issued a political challenge: ``I have come to the
conclusion that the number one domestic problem facing this country is
the threatened destruction of our natural resources

[[Page S3431]]

and the disaster which would confront mankind should such destruction
occur. There is a real question as to whether the nation, which has
spent some two hundred years developing an intricate system of local,
State and Federal Government to deal with the public's problems, will
be bold, imaginative and flexible enough to meet this supreme test.''
Though, fortunately, the Apostle Islands are not, because of former
Senator Nelson's efforts, ``threatened with destruction,'' I believe
that Senator Nelson meant two things by his challenge. Not only did he
mean that government must act immediately and decisively to protect
resources in crisis, but he also meant that government must be
responsible and flexible enough to remain committed to the protection
of the areas we wisely seek to preserve under our laws.
Thus, Mr. President, on this Earth Day I am proud to introduce this
legislation as a renewal of the federal government's commitment to the
Apostle Islands National Lakeshore. I look forward to working with my
colleagues on this legislation.
I ask unanimous consent that a copy of this legislation be printed in
the Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:

S. 1966

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ``Gaylord Nelson Apostle
Islands Stewardship Act of 1998''.

SEC. 2. GAYLORD NELSON APOSTLE ISLANDS.

(a) Declarations.--Congress declares that--
(1) the Apostle Islands National Lakeshore is a national
and a Wisconsin treasure;
(2) the sesquicentennial year of the State of Wisconsin
provides an opportunity to reflect on and act to protect
important components of the State's ecological and cultural
identity, such as the Lakeshore;
(3) the State of Wisconsin is particularly indebted to
former Senator Gaylord Nelson for his leadership in the
creation of the Lakeshore;
(4) after 28 years of enjoyment, some issues critical to
maintaining the overall ecological, recreational, and
cultural vision of the Lakeshore need additional attention;
(5) the general management planning process for the
Lakeshore has identified a need for a formal wilderness
study;
(6) all lands within the Lakeshore that might be suitable
for designation as wilderness are currently zoned and managed
to protect wilderness characteristics pending completion of
such a study;
(7) several historic lighthouses within the Lakeshore are
currently in danger of structural damage due to severe
erosion;
(8) the Secretary of the Interior has been unable to take
full advantage of cooperative agreements with Federal, State,
local, and tribal governmental agencies, institutions of
higher education, and other nonprofit organizations that
could assist the National Park Service by contributing to the
management of the Lakeshore;
(9) because of competing needs in other units of the
National Park System, the standard authorizing and budgetary
process has not resulted in updated legislative authority and
necessary funding for improvements to the Lakeshore; and
(10) the need for improvements to the Lakeshore and
completion of a wilderness study should be accorded a high
priority among National Park Service activities.
(b) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Lakeshore.--The term ``Lakeshore'' means the Apostle
Islands National Lakeshore.
(2) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of the Interior, acting through the Director of the National
Park Service.
(c) Wilderness Study.--In fulfillment of the
responsibilities of the Secretary under the Wilderness Act
(16 U.S.C. 1131 et seq.) and of applicable agency policy, the
Secretary shall evaluate areas of land within the Lakeshore
for inclusion in the National Wilderness System.
(d) Apostle Islands Lighthouses.--The Secretary shall
undertake appropriate action (including protection of the
bluff toe beneath the lighthouses, stabilization of the bank
face, and dewatering of the area immediately shoreward of the
bluffs) to protect the lighthouse structures at Raspberry
Lighthouse and Outer Island Lighthouse within the Lakeshore.
(e) Cooperative Agreements.--Section 6 of Public Law 91-424
(16 U.S.C. 460w-5) is amended--
(1) by striking ``Sec. 6. The lakeshore'' and inserting the
following:

``SEC. 6. MANAGEMENT.

``(a) In General.--The lakeshore''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(b) Cooperative Agreements.--The Secretary may enter into
a cooperative agreement with a Federal, State, tribal, or
local government agency or a nonprofit private entity if the
Secretary determines that a cooperative agreement would be
beneficial in carrying out section 7.''.
(f) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated--
(1) $200,000 to carry out subsection (c); and
(2) $3,900,000 to carry out subsection (d).
______

By Mr. SARBANES:
S. 1967. A bill to provide for mass transportation in national parks
and related public lands; to the Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources.

the transit in parks act

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, today I am introducing new legislation
to help ease congestion, protect our nation's natural resources, and
improve mobility and accessibility in our national parks and wildlife
refuges. The ``Transit In Parks Act'' or TRIP bill is a new federal
transit grant initiative that is designed to provide mass transit and
alternative transportation services for our national parks, our
wildlife refuges, federal recreational areas, and other public lands
managed by three agencies of the Department of the Interior.
When the parks first opened in the second half of the nineteenth
century, visitors arrived by stagecoach along dirt roads. Travel
through parklands, such as Yosemite or Yellowstone, was difficult and
long and costly. Not many people could afford or endure such a trip.
The introduction of the automobile gave every American greater
mobility and freedom, which included the freedom to travel and see some
of our nation's great natural wonders. Early in this century landscape
architects from the National Park Service and highway engineers from
the U.S. Bureau of Public Roads collaborated to produce many feats of
road engineering that opened the national park lands to millions of
Americans.
Yet greater mobility and easier access now threaten the very
environments that the National Park Service is mandated to protect. The
on-going tension between preservation and access has always been a
challenge for our national park system. Today, record numbers of
visitors and cars has resulted in increasing damage to our parks. The
Grand Canyon alone has five million visitors a year. It may surprise
you to know that the average visitor stay is only three hours. As many
as 6,000 vehicles arrive in a single summer day. They compete for 2,000
parking spaces. Between 32,000 and 35,000 tour buses go to the park
each year. During the peak summer season, the entrance route becomes a
giant parking lot.
In the decade from 1984 to 1994, the number of visits to America's
national parks increased 25 percent, rising from 208 million to 269
million a year. This is equal to more than one visit by every man,
woman, and child in this country. This has created an overwhelming
demand on these areas, resulting in severe traffic congestion, visitor
restrictions, and in some instances vacationers being shut-out of the
parks altogether. The environmental damage at the Grand Canyon is
visible at many other parks: Yosemite, which has more than 4 million
visitors a year; Yellowstone, which has more than 3 million visitors a
year and experiences such severe traffic congestion that access has to
be restricted; Zion; Acadia; Bryce; and many others. We need to solve
these problems now or risk permanent damage to our nation's natural,
cultural, and historical heritage.
The legislation I am introducing builds upon two previous initiatives
to address these problems. First is the study of alternative
transportation strategies in our national parks that was mandated by
the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991, ISTEA.
This study, completed by the National Park Service in May 1994, found
that many of our most heavily visited national parks are experiencing
the same problems of congestion and pollution that afflict our cities
and metropolitan areas. Yet, overwhelmingly, the principal
transportation systems that the Federal Government has developed to
provide access into our national parks are roads primarily for private
automobile access.
Second, last November, Secretary of Transportation Rodney Slater and
Secretary of the Interior Bruce Babbitt signed an agreement to work
together to address transportation and resource

[[Page S3432]]

management needs in and around national parks. The findings in the
Memorandum Of Understanding entered into by the two departments are
especially revealing:

Congestion in and approaching many National Parks is
causing lengthy traffic delays and backups that substantially
detract from the visitor experience. Visitors find that many
of the National Parks contain significant noise and air
pollution, and traffic congestion similar to that found on
the city streets they left behind.
In many National Park units, the capacity of parking
facilities at interpretive or science areas is well below
demand. As a result, visitors park along roadsides, damaging
park resources and subjecting people to hazardous safety
conditions as they walk near busy roads to access visitor use
areas.
On occasion, National Park units must close their gates
during high visitation periods and turn away the public
because the existing infrastructure and transportation
systems are at, or beyond, the capacity for which they were
designed.

The challenge for park management is two-fold: to conserve and
protect the nation's natural, historical, and cultural resources, while
at the same time ensuring visitor access and enjoyment of these
sensitive environments.
The Transit in Parks Act will go far to meeting this challenge. The
bill's objectives are to develop new and expanded mass transit services
throughout the national parks and other public lands to conserve and
protect fragile natural, cultural, and historical resources, to prevent
adverse impact on those resources, and to reduce pollution and
congestion, while at the same time facilitating appropriate visitor
access and improving the visitor experience.

This new federal transit grant program will provide funding to three
Federal land management agencies in the Department of the Interior--the
National Park Service, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the
Bureau of Land Management--that manage the 375 various parks within the
National Park System, including national battlefields, monuments and
national seashores, as well as the national wildlife refuges and
federal recreational areas. The program will allocate capital funds for
transit projects, including rail or clean fuel bus projects, joint
development activities, pedestrian and bike paths, or park waterway
access, within or adjacent to national park lands. The bill authorizes
$50 million for this new program for each of the fiscal years 1999
through 2003. It is anticipated that other resources--both public and
private--will be available to augment these amounts in the initial
phase.
The bill formalizes the cooperative arrangement entered into last
November between the Secretary of Transportation and the Secretary of
the Interior to exchange technical assistance and to develop procedures
relating to the planning, selection and funding of transit projects in
national park lands.
The projects eligible for funding shall be developed through the
ISTEA planning process and selected in consultation with the Secretary
of the Interior. The bill provides funds for planning, research, and
technical assistance that can supplement other financial resources
available to the Federal land management agencies.
It is anticipated that the Secretary of Transportation shall select
projects that are diverse in location and size. While major national
parks such as the Grand Canyon or Yellowstone are clearly appropriate
candidates for significant transit projects under this section, there
are numerous small urban and rural Federal park lands that can benefit
enormously from small projects, such as bike paths or improved
connections with an urban public transit system. Project selection
should include the following criteria: the historical and cultural
significance of a project; safety; and the extent to which the project
would conserve resources, prevent adverse impact, enhance the
environment, improve mobility, and contribute to livable communities.
The bill also identifies projects of regional or national
significance that more closely resemble the Federal transit program's
New Starts projects. Where the project costs are $25 million or
greater, the projects shall comply with the transit New Starts
requirements. No single project shall receive more than 12 percent of
the total amount available in any given year. This ensures a diversity
of projects selected for assistance.
Finally, the bill directs the Secretary of Transportation, in
coordination with the Secretary of the Interior, to undertake a
comprehensive study of alternative transportation needs in the national
parks and other public lands eligible for assistance under this
program. The objective of this study is to better identify those areas
with existing and potential problems of congestion and pollution, or
which can benefit from mass transportation services, and to identify
and estimate the project costs for these sites.
This program can create new opportunities for the Federal land
management agency to partner with local transit agencies in gateway
communities adjacent to the parks, both through the ISTEA planning
process and in developing integrated transportation systems. This will
spur new economic development within these communities, as they develop
transportation centers for park visitors to connect to transit links
into the national parks and other public lands.
The on-going tension between preservation and access has always been
a challenge for the National Park Service. Today, that challenge has
new dimensions, with overcrowding, pollution, congestion, and resource
degradation increasing at many of our national parks. This
legislation--the Transit in Parks Act--will give our Federal land
management agencies important new tools to improve both preservation
and access.
Just as we have found in metropolitan areas, transit is essential to
moving large numbers of people in our national parks--quickly,
efficiently, at low cost, and without adverse impact. At the same time,
transit can enhance the economic development potential of our gateway
communities.
So today, as we celebrate Earth Day and throughout this entire week
as we mark National Parks Week, I cannot think of a more worthy
endeavor to help our environment and preserve our national parks,
wildlife refuges, and federal recreational areas than by encouraging
alternative transportation in these areas. My bill is strongly
supported by the American Public Transit Association, the National
Parks and Conservation Association, the Surface Transportation Policy
Project, the Natural Resources Defense Council, and the Environmental
Defense Fund, and I ask unanimous consent that these letters and
additional supporting material be included in the Record immediately
following my remarks.
Mr. President, I urge my colleagues to support this important
legislation and to recognize the enormous environmental and economic
benefits that transit can bring to our national parks.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the following be printed
in the Record:
Text of the Bill;
Section-by-section summary;
Washington Post November 26, 1997, article: ``Strict Limits on Cars
set for 3 National Parks''; and
Letters of support; from the American Public Transit Association,
from the National Parks and Conservation Association, Surface
Transportation Policy Project, Natural Resources Defense Council and
Environmental Defense Fund.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:

S. 1967

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ``Transit in Parks (TRIP)
Act''.

SEC. 2. MASS TRANSPORTATION IN NATIONAL PARKS AND RELATED
PUBLIC LANDS.

(a) In General.--Chapter 53 of title 49, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

``Sec. 5339. Mass transportation in national parks and
related public lands

``(a) Policies, Findings, and Purposes.--
``(1) Development of transportation systems.--It is in the
interest of the United States to encourage and promote the
development of transportation systems for the betterment of
the national parks and other units of the National Park
System, national wildlife refuges, recreational areas, and
other public lands in order to conserve natural, historical,
and cultural resources and prevent adverse impact, relieve
congestion, minimize transportation fuel consumption, reduce
pollution (including noise and visual pollution), and enhance
visitor mobility and accessibility and the visitor
experience.

[[Page S3433]]

``(2) General findings.--Congress finds that--
``(A) section 1050 of the Intermodal Surface Transportation
Efficiency Act of 1991 (Public Law 102-240) authorized a
study of alternatives for visitor transportation in the
National Park System which was released by the National Park
Service in May 1994;
``(B) the study found that--
``(i) increasing traffic congestion in the national parks
requires alternative transportation strategies to enhance
resource protection and the visitor experience and to reduce
congestion;
``(ii) visitor use, National Park Service units, and
concession facilities require integrated planning; and
``(iii) the transportation problems and visitor services
require increased coordination with gateway communities;
``(C) on November 25, 1997, the Department of
Transportation and the Department of the Interior entered
into a Memorandum of Understanding to address transportation
needs within and adjacent to national parks and to enhance
cooperation between the departments on park transportation
issues;
``(D) to initiate the Memorandum of Understanding, and to
implement President Clinton's `Parks for Tomorrow'
initiative, outlined on Earth Day, 1996, the Department of
Transportation and the Department of the Interior announced,
in December 1997, the intention to implement mass
transportation services in the Grand Canyon National Park,
Zion National Park, and Yosemite National Park;
``(E) many of the national parks and related public lands
are experiencing increased visitation and congestion and
degradation of the natural, historical, and cultural
resources;
``(F) there is a growing need for new and expanded mass
transportation services throughout the national parks and
related public lands to conserve and protect fragile natural,
historical, and cultural resources, prevent adverse impact on
those resources, and reduce pollution and congestion, while
at the same time facilitating appropriate visitor mobility
and accessibility and improving the visitor experience;
``(G) the Federal Transit Administration, through the
Department of Transportation, can assist the Federal land
management agencies through financial support and technical
assistance and further the achievement of national goals to
enhance the environment, improve mobility, create more
livable communities, conserve energy, and reduce pollution
and congestion in all regions of the country; and
``(H) immediate financial and technical assistance by the
Department of Transportation, working with Federal land
management agencies and State and local governmental
authorities to develop efficient and coordinated mass
transportation systems within and adjacent to national parks
and related public lands is essential to conserve natural,
historical, and cultural resources, relieve congestion,
reduce pollution, improve mobility, and enhance visitor
accessibility and the visitor experience.
``(3) General purposes.--The purposes of this section are--
``(A) to develop a cooperative relationship between the
Secretary of Transportation and the Secretary of the Interior
to carry out this section;
``(B) to encourage the planning and establishment of mass
transportation systems and nonmotorized transportation
systems needed within and adjacent to national parks and
related public lands, located in both urban and rural areas,
that enhance resource protection, prevent adverse impacts on
those resources, improve visitor mobility and accessibility
and the visitor experience, reduce pollution and congestion,
conserve energy, and increase coordination with gateway
communities.
``(C) to assist Federal land management agencies and State
and local governmental authorities in financing areawide mass
transportation systems to be operated by public or private
mass transportation authorities, as determined by local and
regional needs, and to encourage public-private partnerships;
and
``(D) to assist in the research and development of improved
mass transportation equipment, facilities, techniques, and
methods with the cooperation of public and private companies
and other entities engaged in the provision of mass
transportation services.
``(b) Definitions.--In this section--
``(1) the term `Federal land management agency' means the
National Park Service, the United States Fish and Wildlife
Service, or the Bureau of Land Management;
``(2) the term `national parks and related public lands'
means the national parks and other units of the National Park
System, national wildlife refuges, recreational areas, and
other public lands managed by the Federal land management
agencies;
``(3) the term `qualified participant' means a Federal land
management agency, or a State or local governmental
authority, acting alone, in partnership, or with another
Governmental or nongovernmental participant;
``(4) the term `qualified mass transportation project'
means a project--
``(A) that is carried out within or adjacent to national
parks and related public lands; and
``(B) that--
``(i) is a capital project, as defined in section
5302(a)(1) (other than preventive maintenance activities);
``(ii) is any activity described in section 5309(a)(1)(A);
``(iii) involves the purchase of rolling stock that
incorporates clean fuel technology or the replacement of
existing buses with clean fuel vehicles or the deployment of
mass transportation vehicles that introduce new technology;
``(iv) relates to the capital costs of coordinating the
Federal land management agency mass transportation systems
with other mass transportation systems;
``(v) involves nonmotorized transportation systems,
including the provision of facilities for pedestrians and
bicycles;
``(vi) involves the development of waterborne access within
or adjacent to national parks and related public lands,
including watercraft, as appropriate to and consistent with
the purposes described in subsection (a)(3); or
``(vii) is any transportation project that--

``(I) enhances the environment;
``(II) prevents adverse impact on natural resources;
``(III) improves Federal land management agency resources
management;
``(IV) improves visitor mobility and accessibility and the
visitor experience;
``(V) reduces congestion and pollution, including noise and
visual pollution;
``(VI) conserves natural, historical, and cultural
resources (other than through the rehabilitation or
restoration of historic buildings); and
``(VII) incorporates private investment; and

``(5) the term `Secretary' means the Secretary of
Transportation.
``(c) Federal Agency Cooperative Arrangements.--
``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall develop a
cooperative relationship with the Secretary of the Interior,
which shall provide for--
``(A) the exchange of technical assistance;
``(B) interagency and multidisciplinary teams to develop
Federal land management agency transportation policy,
procedures, and coordination; and
``(C) the development of procedures and criteria relating
to the planning, selection, and funding of qualified mass
transportation projects, and implementation and oversight of
the project plan in accordance with the requirements of this
section.
``(2) Project selection.--The Secretary, after consultation
with the Secretary of the Interior, shall determine the final
selection and funding of projects in accordance with this
section.
``(d) Types of Assistance.--
``(1) In general.--The Secretary may contract for or enter
into grants, cooperative agreements, or other agreements with
a qualified participant to carry out a qualified mass
transportation project under this section.
``(2) Other uses.--A grant or cooperative agreement or
other agreement for a qualified mass transportation project
under this section also is available to finance the leasing
of equipment and facilities for use in mass transportation,
subject to regulations the Secretary prescribes limiting the
grant or cooperative arrangement or other agreement to
leasing arrangements that are more cost effective than
purchase or construction.
``(e) Limitation on Use of Available Amounts.--The
Secretary may not use more than 5 percent of the amount made
available for a fiscal year under section 5338(m) to carry
out planning, research, and technical assistance under this
section, including the development of technology appropriate
for use in a qualified mass transportation project. Amounts
made available under this subsection are in addition to
amounts otherwise available for planning, research, and
technical assistance under this title or any other provision
of law.
``(f) Planning Process.--In undertaking a qualified mass
transportation project under this section--
``(1) if the qualified participant is a Federal land
management agency--
``(A) the Secretary, in cooperation with the Secretary of
the Interior, shall develop transportation planning
procedures that are consistent with sections 5303 through
5306; and
``(B) the General Management Plans of the units of the
National Park System shall be incorporated into the planning
process;
``(2) if the qualified participant is a State or local
governmental authority, or more than 1 State or local
governmental authority in more than 1 State, the qualified
participant shall comply with sections 5303 through 5306;
``(3) if the national parks and related public lands at
issue lie in multiple States, there shall be cooperation in
the planning process under sections 5303 through 5306, to the
maximum extent practicable, as determined by the Secretary,
between those States and the Secretary of the Interior; and
``(4) the qualified participant shall comply with the
public participation requirements of section 5307(c).
``(g) Government's Share of Costs.--
``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall establish the
Federal Government share of assistance to a qualified
participant under this section.
``(2) Considerations.--In establishing the Government's
share of the net costs of a qualified transportation project
under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall consider--

[[Page S3434]]

``(A) visitation levels and the revenue derived from user
fees in the national parks and related public lands at issue;
``(B) the extent to which the qualified participant
coordinates with an existing public or private mass
transportation authority;
``(C) private investment in the qualified mass
transportation project, including the provision of contract
services, joint development activities, and the use of
innovative financing mechanisms;
``(D) the clear and direct benefit to a qualified
participant assisted under this section; and
``(E) any other matters that the Secretary considers
appropriate to carry out this section.
``(3) Non-federal share.--Notwithstanding any other
provision of law, Federal funds appropriated to any Federal
land management agency may be counted toward the non-Federal
share of the costs of any mass transportation project that is
eligible for assistance under this section.
``(h) Selection of Qualified Mass Transportation
Projects.--In awarding assistance for a qualified mass
transportation project under this section, the Secretary
shall consider--
``(1) project justification, including the extent to which
the project would conserve the resources, prevent adverse
impact, and enhance the environment;
``(2) the location of the qualified mass transportation
project, to assure that the selection of projects--
``(A) is geographically diverse nationwide; and
``(B) encompasses both urban and rural areas;
``(3) the size of the qualified mass transportation
project, to assure a balanced distribution;
``(4) historical and cultural significance of a project;
``(5) safety;
``(6) the extent to which the project would enhance livable
communities;
``(7) the extent to which the project would reduce
pollution, including noise and visual pollution;
``(8) the extent to which the project would reduce
congestion and improve the mobility of people in the most
efficient manner; and
``(9) any other matters that the Secretary considers
appropriate to carry out this section.
``(i) Projects of Regional or National Significance.--
``(1) General authority.--In addition to other qualified
mass transportation projects, the Secretary may select a
qualified mass transportation project that is of regional or
national significance, or that has significant visitation, or
that can benefit from alternative transportation solutions to
problems of resource management, pollution, congestion,
mobility, and accessibility. Such projects shall meet the
criteria set forth in paragraphs (2) through (5) of section
5309(e), as applicable.
``(2) Project selection criteria.--
``(A) Considerations.--In selecting a qualified mass
transportation project described in paragraph (1), the
Secretary shall consider, as appropriate, in addition to the
considerations set forth in subsection (h)--
``(i) visitation levels;
``(ii) the use of innovative financing or joint development
strategies;
``(iii) coordination with the gateway communities; and
``(iv) any other matters that the Secretary considers
appropriate to carry out this subsection.
``(B) Certain locations.--For fiscal years 1999 through
2003, projects described in paragraph (1) may include the
following locations:
``(i) Grand Canyon National Park.
``(ii) Zion National Park.
``(iii) Yosemite National Park.
``(iv) Acadia National Park.
``(C) Limit.--No project assisted under this subsection
shall receive more than 12 percent of the total amount made
available under this section in any fiscal year.
``(D) Full funding grant agreements.--A project assisted
under this subsection whose net project cost is greater than
$25,000,000 shall be carried out through a full funding grant
agreement in accordance with section 5309(g).
``(j) Undertaking Projects in Advance.--
``(1) In general.--The Secretary may pay the Government's
share of the net project cost to a qualified participant that
carries out any part of a qualified mass transportation
project without assistance under this section, and according
to all applicable procedures and requirements, if--
``(A) the qualified participant applies for the payment;
``(B) the Secretary approves the payment; and
``(C) before carrying out that part of the project, the
Secretary approves the plans and specifications in the same
way as other projects assisted under this chapter.
``(2) Interest.--The cost of carrying out a part of a
project referred to in paragraph (1) includes the amount of
interest earned and payable on bonds issued by the State or
local governmental authority, to the extent proceeds of the
bond are expended in carrying out that part. However, the
amount of interest under this paragraph may not exceed the
most favorable interest terms reasonably available for the
project at the time of borrowing. The applicant shall
certify, in a manner that is satisfactory to the Secretary,
that the applicant has shown reasonable diligence in seeking
the most favorable financial terms.
``(3) Cost change considerations.--The Secretary shall
consider changes in project cost indices when determining the
estimated cost under paragraph (2).
``(k) Project Management Oversight.--The Secretary may use
not more than 0.5 percent of amounts made available under
this section for a fiscal year to oversee projects and
participants in accordance with section 5327.
``(l) Relationship to Other Laws.--
``(1) In general.--Except as otherwise specifically
provided in this section, but subject to paragraph (2) of
this subsection, the Secretary shall require that all grants,
contracts, cooperative agreements, or other agreements under
this section shall be subject to the requirements of sections
5307(d), 5307(i), and any other terms, conditions,
requirements, and provisions that the Secretary determines
are necessary or appropriate to carry out this section,
including requirements for the distribution of proceeds on
disposition of real property and equipment resulting from the
project assisted under this section.
``(2) Labor standards.--Sections 5323(a)(1)(D) and 5333(b)
apply to assistance provided under this section.
``(m) State Infrastructure Banks.--A project assisted under
this section shall be eligible for funding through a State
Infrastructure Bank or other innovative financing mechanism
otherwise available to finance an eligible mass
transportation project under this chapter.
``(n) Asset Management.---The Secretary may transfer the
Department of Transportation interest in and control over all
facilities and equipment acquired under this section to a
qualified participant for use and disposition in accordance
with property management rules and regulations of the
department, agency, or instrumentality of the Federal
Government.
``(o) Coordination of Research and Deployment of New
Technologies.--The Secretary may undertake, or make grants or
contracts (including agreements with departments, agencies,
and instrumentalities of the Federal Government) or other
agreements for research, development, and deployment of new
technologies that will conserve resources and prevent adverse
environmental impact, improve visitor mobility, accessibility
and enjoyment, and reduce pollution, including noise and
visual pollution, in the national parks and related public
lands. The Secretary may request and receive appropriate
information from any source. This subsection does not limit
the authority of the Secretary under any other provision of
law.
``(p) Report.--The Secretary, in consultation with the
Secretary of the Interior, shall report annually to the
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House
of Representatives and to the Committee on Banking, Housing,
and Urban Affairs of the Senate, on the allocation of amounts
to be made available to assist qualified mass transportation
projects under this section. Such report shall be included in
the report required under section 5309(m)(3).
``(q) Study of Transit Needs in National Parks and Related
Public Lands.--
``(1) In general.--The Secretary, in coordination with the
Secretary of the Interior, shall undertake a comprehensive
study of alternative transportation needs in national parks
and related public lands managed by Federal land management
agencies. The study shall be submitted to the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on Banking, Housing, and
Urban Affairs of the Senate not later than January 1, 2000.
``(2) Study elements.--The study required by paragraph (1)
shall--
``(A) identify transportation strategies that improve the
management of the national parks and related public lands;
``(B) identify national parks and related public lands with
existing and potential problems of adverse impact, high
congestion, and pollution, or which can benefit from
alternative transportation modes;
``(C) assess the feasibility of alternative transportation
modes; and
``(D) identify and estimate the costs of alternative
transportation modes for each of the national parks and
related public lands referred to in paragraph (1).
``(3) Funding.--From amounts made available under section
5338(m), $500,000 shall be made available in fiscal year 1999
to carry out this subsection.''.
(b) Authorizations.--Section 5338 of title 49, United
States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(m) Section 5339.--
``(1) In general.--There is authorized to be appropriated
to carry out section 5339 $50,000,000 for each of fiscal
years 1999 through 2003.
``(2) Availability.--Amounts made available under this
subsection for any fiscal year shall remain available until
expended until the last day of the third fiscal year
commencing after the last day of the fiscal year for which
the amounts were initially made available under this
subsection.''.
(c) Conforming Amendment.--The analysis for chapter 53 of
title 49, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end
the following:

``5339. Mass transportation in national parks and related public
lands.''.

[[Page S3435]]

Section-by-Section--Transit in Parks Act

I. Amends Federal Transit laws by adding new section 5339,
``Mass Transportation in National Parks and Related Public
Lands.''
II. Statement of Policies, Findings, and Purposes:
To encourage and promote the development of transportation
systems for the betterment of national parks and related
public lands and to conserve natural, historical, and
cultural resources and prevent adverse impact, relieve
congestion, minimize transportation fuel consumption, reduce
pollution and enhance visitor mobility and accessibility and
the visitor experience.
To that end, this program establishes federal assistance to
certain Federal land management agencies and State and local
governmental authorities to finance mass transportation
capital projects, to encourage public-private partnerships,
and to assist in the research and deployment of improved mass
transportation equipment and methods.
III. Definitions:
(1) eligible ``Federal land management agencies'' are:
National Park Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Bureau
of Land Management (all under Department of the Interior).
(2) ``national parks and related public lands''; eligible
areas under the management of these agencies.
(3) ``qualified mass transportation project''; a capital
mass transportation project carried out within or adjacent to
national parks and related public lands, including rail
projects, clean fuel vehicles, joint development activities,
pedestrian and bike paths, waterborne access, or projects
that otherwise better protect the national parks and related
public lands and increase visitor mobility and accessibility.
IV. Federal Agency Cooperative Arrangements:
Implements the Memorandum of Understanding between the
Departments of Transportation and the Interior for the
exchange of technical assistance, the development of
transportation policy and coordination, and the establishment
of criteria for planning, selection and funding of capital
projects under this section. The Secretary of Transportation
selects the projects, after consultation with Secretary of
the Interior.
V. Assistance:
To be provided through grants, cooperative agreements, or
other agreements, including leasing under certain conditions,
for an eligible capital project under this section. Not more
than 5% of the amounts available can be used for planning,
research and technical assistance, and these amounts can be
supplemented from other sources.
VI. Planning Process:
The Departments of Transportation and Interior shall
cooperatively develop a planning process consistent with the
ISTEA planning process in sections 5305 through 5306 of the
Federal Transit laws.
VII. Government's Share of the Costs:
In determining the Federal Transit Administration share of
the project costs, the Secretary of Transportation must
consider certain factors, including visitation levels and
user fee revenues, the coordination in the project
development with a public or private transit authority,
private investment, and whether there is a clear and direct
financial benefit to the applicant. The intent is to
establish criteria for a sliding scale of assistance, with a
lower Government share for large projects that can attract
outside investment, and a higher Government share for
projects that may not have access to such outside resources.
In addition, funds from the Federal land management agencies
can be counted as the local share.
VIII. Selection of Projects:
The Secretary shall consider: (1) project justification,
including the extent to which the project conserves the
resources, prevents adverse impact and enhances the
environment; (2) project location to ensure geographic
diversity and both rural and urban projects; (3) project size
for a balanced distribution; (4) historical and cultural
significance; (5) safety; (6) the extent to which the project
would enhance livable communities; (7) the reduction of
pollution, including noise and visual pollution; (8) the
reduction of congestion and the improvement of the mobility
of people in the most efficient manner; and (9) any other
considerations the Secretary deems appropriate. Projects
funded under this section must meet certain transit law
requirements.
IX. Projects of Regional or National Significance
This is a special category that sets forth criteria for
special, generally larger, projects or for those areas that
may have problems of resource management, pollution,
congestion, mobility, and accessibility that can be addressed
by this program. Additional project selection criteria
include: visitation levels; the use of innovative financing
or joint development strategies; coordination with the
gateway communities; and any other considerations the
Secretary deems appropriate. Projects under this section must
meet certain Federal Transit New Starts criteria. This
section identifies some locations that may fit these
criteria. Any project in this category that is $25 million or
greater in cost will have a full funding grant agreement
similar to Federal Transit New Starts projects. No project
can receive more than 12% of the total amount available in
any given year.
X. Undertaking Projects in Advance:
This provision applies current transit law to this section,
allowing projects to advance prior to receiving Federal
funding, but allowing the advance activities to be counted so
the local share as long as certain conditions are met.
IX. Project Management Oversight:
This provision applies current transit law to this section,
limiting oversight funds to 0.5% per year of the funds made
available for this section.
XII. Relationship to Other Laws:
This provision applies certain transit laws to all projects
funded under this section and permits the Secretary to apply
any other terms or conditions he deems appropriate.
XIII. State Infrastructure Banks:
A project assisted under this section can also use funding
from a State Infrastructure Bank or other innovative
financing mechanism that funds eligible transit projects.
XIV. Asset Management:
This provision permits the Secretary of Transportation to
transfer control over a transit asset acquired with Federal
funds under this section in accord with certain Federal
property management rules.
XV. Coordination of Research and Deployment of New
Technologies:
This provision allows grants for research and deployment of
new technologies to meet the special needs of the national
park lands.
XVI. Report:
This requires the Secretary of Transportation to submit a
report on projects funded under this section to the House
Transportation and Infrastructure Committee and the Senate
Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee, to be included
in the Department's annual project report.
XVII. Study of Transit Needs in National Park Lands:
This authorizes $500,000 for a comprehensive study of
alternative transportation needs in national parks and
related public lands to be completed by January 1, 2000, and
specifies the study elements.
XVIII. Authorization:
$50,000,000 is authorized to be appropriated for the
Secretary to carry out this program for each of the fiscal
years 1999 through 2003.
____

[From the Washington Post, Nov. 26, 1997]

Strict Limits on Cars Set for 3 National Parks--Rail and Bus Systems To
Ease Traffic Jams

(By Joby Warrick)

The Clinton administration is imposing a virtual ban on
cars in busy sections of the Grand Canyon and two other
national parks as part of a strategy to ease the traffic jams
that have tarnished America's most spectacular natural
attractions.
Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt and Transportation
Secretary Rodney E. Slater yesterday jointly announced plans
for mass transit systems that will dramatically change the
way most visitors experience the Grand Canyon, Yosemite
National Park in California and Zion National Park in
southwestern Utah. The plans call for ripping up roads and
dozens of acres of existing parking lots and using buses and
trains to ferry tourists into the parks.
The transit systems--which could be introduced in other
parks--are designed to relieve the chronic congestion that is
one of the most serious challenges facing park
administrators. Because of record numbers of visitors, many
of the nation's most-beloved tourist destinations are in
danger of being ``loved to death,'' Babbitt said.
``The road to [Grand Canyon's] South Rim is now jammed with
cars,'' Babbitt said. ``The once fresh and clear air now
smells of diesel fumes and asphalt, the stunning view now
marred by filling stations and smog, the sound of breeze-
rustled pines now drowned by the echo of engines and horns.''
Ever-larger crowds forced Yosemite officials to begin
turning away visitors on the busiest days. But Babbitt said
buses and trains will allow all the parks to ``keep the
`Welcome' sign out.''
Under the pilot programs announced yesterday, visitors to
the parks could be riding trains or buses by 2001. At Grand
Canyon National Park, a $14 million light rail line would
carry up to 4,000 riders an hour from a remote parking lot to
a new visitor center at the park's South Rim. The center will
be paid for with funds from park entry fees, which are not
expected to increase.
Once in the park, visitors can travel to destinations using
a fleet of clean-burning buses that will run on electricity
or natural gas. Overnight guests could continue to use cars
to drive to hotels or campsites within the park.
Similar systems using buses will be established at Zion and
at Yosemite, which two weeks ago announced a plan designed to
cut traffic levels by 50 percent.
The announcement comes a year after President Clinton
ordered the agencies to develop alternative transportation
strategies to curb overcrowding in the most popular national
parks. The administration also has banned some flights at the
Grand Canyon.
Park officials applauded details of the new transit plans.
Robert Arnberger, superintendent of Grand Canyon National
Park, said the park's resources were being ``hammered'' by a
daily onslaught of 6,100 vehicles. Competition among
motorists for the park's 2,000 parking spaces have prompted
fights, at least one attempted murder charge and ``God knows
how many divorces.''
Environmental groups also praised the decision and urged
the administration to push for more aggressive restrictions
in air traffic around national parks.

[[Page S3436]]

``We want to see the sun reflecting off waterfalls and
canyons--not the bumper of the car in front of us,'' said
Bill Meadows, president of The Wilderness Society. ``Even in
Disney World, cars don't go right to the heart of the park.''
____

American Public

Transit Association,

Washington, DC, April 1, 1998.
Hon. Paul S. Sarbanes,
Ranking Minority Member, Committee on Banking, Housing, and
Urban Affairs, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Sarbanes: Thank you for forwarding us a draft
copy of the ``Transit in Parks (TRIP) Act'' which would amend
federal transit law at chapter 53, title 49 U.S.C.
The Act would authorize federal assistance to certain
federal agencies and state and local entities to finance mass
transit projects generally for the purpose of addressing
transportation congestion and mobility issues at national
parks. Among other things, the bill would implement the
recent Memorandum of Understanding between the Department of
Transportation and Interior regarding joint efforts of those
federal agencies to encourage the use of public
transportation at national parks.
In December 1997, I was pleased to write to the Secretaries
of Transportation and Interior in support of their MOU, and I
am just as pleased to support your efforts to improve
mobility in our national parks. Public transportation clearly
has much to offer citizens who visit these national
treasures, where congestion and pollution are significant--
and growing--problems. Moreover, this legislation should
broaden the base of support for public transportation, a key
principle APTA has been advocating for many years. In that
regard, we will be reviewing your bill with APTA's
legislative leadership.
I applaud you for introducing the legislation, and look
forward to continuing to work with you and your staff.
Sincerely,
William W. Millar,
President.
____

National Parks

and Conservation Association,

April 20, 1998.
Hon. Paul Sarbanes,
U.S. Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Sarbanes: On behalf of the National Parks and
Conservation Association and its nearly half a million
members, I want to thank you for your foresight and
leadership in proposing a bill that would enhance transit
options for access to America's national parks.
As you know, from 1975 to 1996, the national parks have
experienced a surge in visitation, from 190.4 million to
265.8 million visitors per year. With this increased public
interest in these special places has come substantial
additional burdens on the resources that have drawn such
public acclaim. As more people crowd into our national parks
(typically by auto) fragile habitat, endangered plants and
animals, unique historical treasures, and nationally
recognized symbols of our cultural heritage will become
damaged from air and water pollution, noise intrusion, and
inappropriate use.
Your bill's establishment of a new program within the
Federal Transit Administration, dedicated to enhancing
transit options in and adjacent to the national parks, can
have a powerful, positive effect on the future integrity of
the parks and their resources by reducing the need for access
by automobile. Development of transportation centers and auto
parking lots outside the parks, and the use of buses, vans,
and rail systems would provide much more efficient means of
handling the crush of visitation. As a complement to the
Federal Lands Highway Program which provides funds
principally for park road projects through the Federal
Highway Administration, your legislation would properly
recognize the critical role that mass transit can play in
protecting the parks and enhancing the visitor experience.
In accomplishing its goal, your bill would further the
Memorandum of Agreement signed by the U.S. Department of the
Interior and the U.S. Department of Transportation last
December. This memorandum would boost the role of alternative
transportation solutions for national parks, particularly
those most heavily impacted by visitation, including
Yellowstone, Yosemite, the Grand Canyon, and Zion. Your bill
would also provide an excellent opportunity for the National
Park Service to enter into public/private partnerships
between the federal government and states, localities, and
the private sector to provide a fuller range of
transportation options than exists today. These partnerships
could leverage funds that the National Park Service currently
has great difficulty accessing.
NPCA looks upon your bill as a creative new mechanism to
fulfill the principal federal mandate governing the national
parks, which is ``to conserve the scenery and the natural and
historic objects and the wildlife therein, and to provide for
the enjoyment of the same in such manner and by such means as
will leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future
generations.'' We look forward to working with you to move
this legislation to enactment.
Sincerely,
Thomas C. Kiernan,
President.
____

Surface Transportation

Policy Project,

April 21, 1998.
Hon. Paul Sarbanes,
U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Sarbanes: On behalf of the Surface
Transportation Policy Project, a coalition of over 30
national and 200 local and regional groups that work to make
transportation policy contribute to healthy communities and a
healthy environment, I would like to commend you for the
legislation you are introducing to provide a direct funding
source for alternative transportation projects in our
national parks. Your leadership in bringing attention to this
emerging issue will be a major building block in what we hope
will be a broad effort to lessen the environmental impacts of
visitation on these most important natural areas.
We believe that public transportation can be the right
choice for many parks, particularly those where visitors
enter from only one or two major access corridors, and a
majority of them visit a small number of popular destinations
within the park. In these circumstances, allowing people to
leave their cars behind will both enhance the park experience
for all visitors, who will not have to negotiate heavy
traffic in order to have a quality outdoor experience, and
will benefit visitors who will not have to fight for parking
spaces at popular attractions.
The STPP coalition appreciates your leadership on this
issue. Please let me know if there is anything we can do to
help you advance this important piece of legislation.
Sincerely,
Roy Kienitz,
Deputy Director.
____

Natural Resources Defense Council--Environmental Defense
Fund,
April 22, 1998.
Senator Paul Sarbanes,
U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Senator: On behalf of the Natural Resources Defense
Council and the Environmental Defense Fund, we are writing to
express our support for your bill, the Transit in Parks Act,
which will provide dedicated funding for transit projects in
our national parks. Too many of our parks suffer from the
consequences of poor transportation systems: traffic
congestion, air and water pollution, and disturbance of the
natural ecosystem. We believe that increased funding for
transit will help mitigate some of these problems. A good
working transit system in a number of our national parks will
make the park experience not only more enjoyable for the many
families that travel there, it will help improve
environmental conditions. High ozone (smog) levels that
impair peoples breathing and exacerbates asthma, and haze,
which can obliterate the views at our parks, will both be
abated by a decrease in the number of cars and congestion
levels.
We appreciate your leadership on this issue and your
dedication to the health of our national parks. We look
forward to working with you to move your legislation forward.
Sincerely,
John Adams,
Executive Director, Natural Resources Defense Council.
Fred Krupp,
Executive Director, Environmental Defense Fund.
______

By Mr. FORD (for himself, Mr. Rockefeller, Mr. Dorgan, Mr.
Hollings, and Mr. Harkin):
S. 1968. A bill to amend title 49, United States Code, to authorize
the Secretary of Transportation to implement a pilot program to improve
access to the national transportation system for small communities, and
for other purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation.

the air service restoration act

Mr. FORD. Mr. President, today I am pleased to introduce the Air
Service Restoration Act. Over the last several months, there has been a
growing debate about the airline industry, competition, slots and
service. This Act seeks to reshape this debate by focusing on problems
that small communities have with a deregulated aviation system.
Deregulation has provided many benefits to many communities. But, as
the General Accounting Office has noted, there are many small
communities which have been left behind.
Some of these communities, these ``pockets of pain'' as noted by the
GAO, would like nothing better than for the Congress to re-regulate the
industry. However, Mr. President, I do not believe that is the answer--
and that is not what this bill seeks to do. Rather, our legislation
proposes to facilitate public-private actions which focus on developing
market opportunities for small communities. In this way, communities
can develop air service that fits the needs and desires of the
community; rather than Washington regulating service.

[[Page S3437]]

This bill is not about competition, but rather the lack of service.
As the General Accounting Office noted, since deregulation, communities
have seen a decline in the types of service and quality of service.
That decline can be attributed to a variety of factors: airports nearby
with better, or cheaper, service, the loss of a major employer in the
community, or a lack of information about what it takes to create a
market.
But, there are ways to reverse these trends. Let me give you an
example. One town in Virginia had about 18,000 enplanements annually,
but gradually declined to under 10,000. The airport set out very
aggressively to find out what happened, and why. Ultimately, the
enplanements went back up, and service is now increasing.
Unfortunately, Mr. President, not all our communities have the
resources to aggressively pursue or create market needs. The Federal
government must play a role in helping our small communities. It can
not stand by as communities lose service, or get cut off from the
national air transportation system. Travel, tourism and businesses are
too dependent on the system, and each of our small communities must be
a part of the system.
This legislation brings together the Federal government, local
government, airports, air carriers and the business communities in
partnership to develop ways to increase the use of our nation's small
airports. Without these services, small communities can not attract new
jobs. It is that simple. We have too much invested in our small towns
to let them simply lose their access to the national air transportation
system.
In Owensboro, Kentucky, our airport, in conjunction with community
business leaders, is developing an air park: attracting businesses, and
creating jobs. That type of activity should be encouraged.
There are a number of carriers that will not like some of the
provisions in the bill--for example, the bill gives DOT the authority
to require joint fares and interlining. These provisions may be
necessary to make sure that a small community has the ability to
connect with major hubs. Such authority would only be required in
limited circumstances.
Mr. President, we need to begin to look at solutions to the problems
faced by our small communities--and the need for these communities to
have access to our national aviation transportation system. The
economic survival of these communities in a global marketplace depends
on the ability to connect to the marketplace. It is my hope and belief
that this legislation re-focuses the debate on this issue--connecting
America's small communities to the greatest, most efficient, and safest
air transportation system in the world.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be
printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:

S. 1968

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION. 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ``Air Service Restoration
Act''.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

The Congress finds that--
(1) a national transportation system providing safe, high
quality service to all areas of the United States is
essential to interstate commerce and the economic well-being
of cities and towns throughout the United States;
(2) taxpayers throughout the United States have supported
and helped to fund the United States aviation infrastructure
and have a right to expect that aviation services will be
provided in an equitable and fair manner to every region of
the country;
(3) some communities have not benefited from airline
deregulation and access to essential airports and air
services has been limited;
(4) air service to a number of small communities has
suffered since deregulation;
(5) studies by the Department of Transportation have
documented that, since the airline industry was deregulated
in 1978--
(A) 34 small communities have lost service and many small
communities have had jet aircraft service replaced by
turboprop aircraft service;
(B) out of a total of 320 small communities, the number of
small communities being served by major air carriers declined
from 213 in 1978 to 33 in 1995;
(C) the number of small communities receiving service to
only one major hub airport increased from 79 in 1978 to 134
in 1995; and
(D) the number of small communities receiving multiple-
carrier service decreased from 136 in 1978 to 122 in 1995;
and
(6) improving air service to small and medium-sized
communities that have not benefited from fare reductions and
improved service since deregulation will likely entail a
range of Federal, State, regional, local, and private sector
initiatives.

SEC. 3. PURPOSE.

The purpose of this Act is to facilitate, through a pilot
program, incentives and projects that will help communities
to improve their access to the essential airport facilities
of the national air transportation system through public-
private partnerships and to identify and establish ways to
overcome the unique policy, economic, geographic, and
marketplace factors that may inhibit the availability of
quality, affordable air service to small communities.

SEC. 4. ESTABLISHMENT OF SMALL COMMUNITY AVIATION DEVELOPMENT
OFFICE.

Section 102 of title 49, United States Code, is amended by
adding at the end thereof the following:
``(g) Small Community Air Service Development Office.--
``(1) Establishment.--The Secretary shall establish within
the Department of Transportation an Office of Aviation
Development. The Office shall be headed by a Director,
designated by the Secretary.
``(2) Functions.--The Director shall--
``(A) function as a facilitator between small communities
and air carriers;
``(B) carry out section 41743 of this title;
``(C) carry out the airline service restoration program
under subchapter III of chapter 417 of this title;
``(D) ensure that the Bureau of Transportation Statistics
collects data on passenger information to assess the service
needs of small communities;
``(E) work with and coordinate efforts with other Federal,
State, and local agencies to increase the viability of
service to small communities and the creation of aviation
development zones; and
``(F) provide policy recommendations to the Secretary and
the Congress that will ensure that small communities have
access to quality, affordable air transportation services.
``(3) Reports.--The Director shall provide an annual report
to the Secretary and the Congress beginning in 1999 that--
``(A) analyzes the availability of air transportation
services in small communities, including, but not limited to,
an assessment of the air fares charged for air transportation
services in small communities compared to air fares charged
for air transportation services in larger metropolitan areas
and an assessment of the levels of service, measured by types
of aircraft used, the availability of seats, and scheduling
of flights, provided to small communities;
``(B) identifies the policy, economic, geographic and
marketplace factors that inhibit the availability of quality,
affordable air transportation services to small communities;
and
``(C) provides policy recommendations to address the
policy, economic, geographic, and marketplace factors
inhibiting the availability of quality, affordable air
transportation services to small communities.''.

SEC. 5. COMMUNITY-CARRIER AIR SERVICE PROGRAM.

(a) In General.--Subchapter II of title 49, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end thereof the following:

``Sec. 41743. Air service program for small communities

``(a) Communities Program.--Under advisory guidelines
prescribed by the Secretary of Transportation, a small
community or a consortia of small communities or a State may
develop an assessment of its air service requirements, in
such form as the Director of the Office of Aviation
Development may require, and submit the assessment and
service proposal to the Office.
``(b) Selection of Participants.--In selecting community
programs for participation in the communities program under
subsection (a), the Director shall apply criteria, including
geographical diversity and the presentation of unique
circumstances, that will demonstrate the feasibility of the
program.
``(c) Carriers Program.--The Director shall invite part 121
air carriers and regional/commuter carriers (as such terms
are defined in section 41715(d) of this title) to offer
service proposals in response to, or in conjunction with,
community aircraft service assessments submitted to the
office under subsection (a). A service proposal under this
paragraph shall include--
``(1) an assessment of potential daily passenger traffic,
revenues, and costs necessary for the carrier to offer the
service;
``(2) a forecast of the minimum percentage of that traffic
the carrier would require the community to garner in order
for the carrier to start up and maintain the service; and
``(3) the costs and benefits of providing jet service by
regional or other jet aircraft.
``(d) Office Support Function.--The Director shall work
with small communities and air carriers, taking into account
their proposals and needs, to facilitate the initiation of
service. The Director--
``(1) may work with communities to develop innovative means
and incentives for the initiation of service;
``(2) may obligate funds available to carry out this
subchapter to make up the difference between the carrier's
forecast and

[[Page S3438]]

the community's ability to generate the necessary percentage
of traffic;
``(3) shall continue to work with both the carriers and the
communities to develop a combination of community incentives
and carrier service levels that--
``(A) are acceptable to communities and carriers; and
``(B) do not conflict with other Federal or State programs
to facilitate air transportation to the communities;
``(4) may designate an airport in the program as an Air
Service Development Zone and work with the community on means
to attract business to the area surrounding the airport, to
develop land use options for the area, and provide data,
working with the Department of Commerce and other agencies;
``(5) may take such other action under subchapter III of
this chapter as may be appropriate.
``(e) Limitations.--
``(1) Community support.--The Director may not provide
financial assistance under subsection (c)(2) to any community
unless the Director determines that--
``(A) a public-private partnership exists at the community
level to carry out the community's proposal;
``(B) the community will make a substantial financial
contribution that is appropriate for that community's
resources;
``(C) the community has established an open process for
soliciting air service proposals; and
``(D) the community will accord similar benefits to air
carriers that are similarly situated.
``(2) Amount.--The Director may not provide financial
assistance under subsection (d)(2) to any community in excess
of the lesser of--
``(A) up to 75 percent of the financial contribution made
by the community; or
``(B) $500,000 per year.
``(f) Report.--The Director shall report through the
Secretary to the Congress annually on the progress made under
this section during the preceding year in expanding
commercial aviation service to small communities.''.
``(b) Conformaing Amendment.--The chapter analysis for
chapter 417 of such title is amended by inserting after the
item relating to section 41742 the following:

``41743. Air service program for small communities''.

(c) Waiver of Local Contribution.--Section 41736(b) of
title 49, United States Code, is amended by inserting after
paragraph (4) the following:
``Paragraph (4) does not apply to any community approved for
service under this section during the period beginning
October 1, 1991, and ending December 31, 1997.''.

SEC. 6. AIRLINE SERVICE RESTORATION PILOT PROGRAM.

(a) In General.--Chapter 417 of title 49, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end thereof the following:

``SUBCHAPTER III. AIRLINE SERVICE RESTORATION

``41761. Pilot program project authority
``41762. Assistance to communities for service
``41763. Additional authority
``41764. Air traffic control services pilot program

``Sec. 41761. Pilot program project authority

``(a) In General.--The Director of the Office of Aviation
Development shall establish a pilot program--
``(1) to assist communities and States with inadequate
access to the national transportation system to improve their
access to that system; and
``(2) to facilitate better link-ups to support the improved
access.
``(b) Project Authority.--Under the pilot program
established pursuant to subsection (a), the Director may--
``(1) provide financial assistance by way of grants to
small communities under section 41743; and
``(2) take such other action as may be appropriate.
``(c) Other Action.--Under the pilot program established
pursuant to subsection (a), the Director may facilitate
service by--
``(1) working with airports and air carriers to ensure that
appropriate facilities are made available at essential
airports;
``(2) requiring interline or joint-fare agreements between
air carriers for domestic United States service if necessary
to facilitate access to essential facilities for participants
in the program subject to the right of a carrier being
required to enter into such agreements to impose reasonable
safety, service, and other obligations on the potential
partner;
``(3) collecting data on air carrier service to small
communities; and
``(4) providing policy recommendations to the Secretary to
stimulate air service and competition to small communities.

``Sec. 41762. Assistance to communities for service

``(a) In General.--Financial assistance provided under
section 41743 during any fiscal year as part of the pilot
program established under section 41761(a) shall be
implemented for not more than--
``(1) 4 communities within any State at any given time; and
``(2) 40 communities in the entire program at any time.

For purposes of this subsection, a consortium of communities
shall be treated as a single community.
``(b) Eligibility.--In order to participate in a pilot
project under this subchapter, a State, community, or group
of communities shall apply to the Secretary in such form and
at such time, and shall supply such information, as the
Secretary may require, and shall demonstrate to the
satisfaction of the Secretary that--
``(1) the applicant has an identifiable need for access, or
improved access, to the national air transportation system
that would benefit the public;
``(2) the pilot project will provide material benefits to a
broad section of the travelling public, businesses,
educational institutions, and other enterprises whose access
to the national air transportation system is limited;
``(3) the pilot project will not impede competition; and
``(4) the applicant has established, or will establish,
public-private partnerships in connection with the pilot
project to facilitate service to the public.
``(c) Coordination With Subchapter II.--The Secretary shall
carry out this subchapter in such a manner as to complement
action taken under subchapter II of this chapter. To the
extent the Secretary determines to be appropriate, the
Secretary may adopt criteria for implementation of this
subchapter that are the same as, or similar to, the
criteria developed under subchapter II for determining
which airports are eligible under that subchapter. The
Secretary shall also, to the extent possible, provide
incentives where no direct, viable, and feasible
alternative service exists, taking into account
geographical diversity and appropriate market definitions.
``(d) Maximization of Participation.--The Secretary shall
structure the program established pursuant to section
41761(a) in a way designed to--
``(1) permit the participation of the maximum feasible
number of communities and States over a 5-year period by
limiting the number of years of participation or otherwise;
and
``(2) obtain the greatest possible leverage from the
financial resources available to the Secretary and the
applicant by--
``(A) progressively decreasing, on a project-by-project
basis, any Federal financial incentives provided under this
chapter over the 5-year period; and
``(B) terminating as early as feasible Federal financial
incentives for any project determined by the Secretary after
its implementation to be--
``(i) viable without further support under this subchapter;
or
``(ii) failing to meet the purposes of this chapter or
criteria established by the Secretary under the pilot
program.
``(e) Success Bonus.--If Federal financial incentives to a
community are terminated under subsection (d)(2)(B) because
of the success of the program in that community, then that
community may receive a one-time incentive grant to ensure
the continued success of that program.
``(f) Program to Terminate in 5 Years.--No new financial
assistance may be provided under this subchapter for any
fiscal year beginning more than 5 years after the date of
enactment of the Air Service Restoration Act.

``Sec. 4163. Additional authority

``In carrying out this chapter, the Secretary--
``(1) may provide assistance to States and communities in
the design and application phase of any project under this
chapter, and oversee the implementation of any such project;
``(2) may assist States and communities in putting together
projects under this chapter to utilize private sector
resources, other Federal resources, or a combination of
public and private resources;
``(3) may accord priority to service by jet aircraft;
``(4) take such action as may be necessary to ensure that
financial resources, facilities, and administrative
arrangements made under this chapter are used to carry out
the purposes of the Air Service Restoration Act; and
``(5) shall work with the Federal Aviation Administration
on airport and air traffic control needs of communities in
program.

``Sec. 4164. Air traffic control services pilot program

``(a) In General.--To further facilitate the use of, and
improve the safety at, small airports, the Administrator of
the Federal Aviation Administration shall establish a pilot
program to contract for Level I air traffic control services
at 20 facilities not eligible for participation in the
Federal Contract Tower Program.
``(b) Program Components.--In carrying out the pilot
program established under subsection (a), the Administrator
may--
``(1) utilize current, actual, site-specific data, forecast
estimates, or airport system plan data provided by a facility
owner or operator;
``(2) take into consideration unique aviation safety,
weather, strategic national interest, disaster relief,
medical and other emergency management relief services,
status of regional airline service, and related factors at
the facility;
``(3) approve for participation any facility willing to
fund a pro rata share of the operating costs used by the
Federal Aviation Administration to calculate, and, as
necessary, a 1:1 benefit-to-cost ratio, as required for
eligibility under the Federal Contract Tower Program; and
``(4) approve for participation any facility willing to
fund a pro rata share of construction used by the Federal
Aviation Administration to calculate, and, as necessary, a
1:1

[[Page S3439]]

benefit-to-cost ratio, as required for eligibility under the
Federal Contract Tower Program.
``(c) Report.--One year before the pilot program
established under subsection (a) terminates, the
Administrator shall report to the Congress on the
effectiveness of the program, with particular emphasis on the
safety and economic benefits provided to program participants
and the national air transportation system.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The chapter analysis for chapter
417 of title 49, United States Code, is amended by adding at
the end thereof the following:

``SUBCHAPTER III. AIRLINE SERVICE RESTORATION

``41761. Pilot programs
``41762. Financial assistance to States
``41763. Additional authority
``41764. Air traffic control services pilot program''.

SEC. 7. FUNDING AUTHORITY.

(a) In General.--The Secretary of Transportation may
obligate not more than $20,000,000 for each of fiscal years
1999 through 2002 to carry out subchapter III of chapter 417
of title 49, United States Code, out of funds otherwise
available for aviation programs other than funds
appropriated, obligated, or made available to carry out
subchapter II of such chapter.
(b) Success Bonus.--If the Secretary determines that the
program carried out under such subchapter III is successful
in providing enhanced air carrier service to small
communities, then the Secretary may obligate an additional
amount, not in excess of $5,000,000, for each of fiscal years
2001 and 2002 to carry out that subchapter out of such funds.

SEC. 8. JOINT FARES AND INTERLINE AGREEMENTS.

(a) In General.--Subchapter I of chapter 417 of title 49,
United States Code, is amended by adding at the end thereof
the following:

``Sec. 4176. Joint fares and interline agreements for
domestic transportation

``(a) In General.--In order to more effectively facilitate
service to small communities, the Secretary of Transportation
may, if necessary, require an air carrier that serves an
essential airport facility in the United States and an air
carrier that offers service in an under-served market within
the United States to enter into an agreement with a
qualifying air carrier that files a request with the
Secretary, in such form and manner and at such time as the
Secretary may require.
``(b) Secretary May Compel Joint Fare Structure.--If the
Secretary determines that it is necessary in order to
facilitate service to small communities, the Secretary may
require any air carrier to enter into a joint-fare or
interline agreement with any qualifying air carrier that
serves an under-served market to facilitate air
transportation.
``(c) Application Limited to Service to Communities
Receiving DOT Assistance.--The Secretary may not require an
air carrier to enter into an agreement under subsection (a)
or (b) except to the extent determined by the Secretary to
be necessary to the provision of air service to a
community receiving financial assistance under section
41761. Nothing in this section provides authority for the
Secretary to establish air fares for service to which this
section applies.
``(d) Definitions.--For purposes of this section--
``(1) Qualifying air carrier.--The term `qualifying air
carrier' means an air carrier that operates pursuant to a
certificate of public convenience and necessity under chapter
411 of this title.
``(2) Under-served market.--The term `under-served market'
means a commercial service airport that is a nonhub airport
(as defined in section 41731(4) of this title), a small hub
airport (as defined in section 41731(5) of this title), or an
airport that is smaller than a nonhub or small hub airport.
``(3) Essential airport facility.--The term `essential
airport facility' means a hub airport (as defined in section
41731(a)(3) of this title).''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The chapter analysis for chapter
417 of title 49, United States Code, is amended by inserting
after the item relating to section 41715 the following:

``41716. Joint fares and interline agreements for domestic
transportation''.

SEC. 9. REVITALIZATION OF AIR SERVICE TO RURAL AREAS.

Section 40101(a) of title 49, United States Code, is
amended by adding at the end thereof the following:
``(16) ensuring that consumers in all regions of the United
States, including those in small communities and rural and
remote areas, have access to affordable, regularly scheduled
air service.
``(17) ensuring that any slots given to air carriers to
provide small community air service are withdrawn if the
carrier fails to provide the service.''.

SEC. 10. MARKETING PRACTICES.

Section 41712 of title 49, United States Code, is amended
by--
``(1) inserting ``(a) In General.--'' before ``On''; and
(2) adding at the end thereof the following:
``(b) Marketing Practices That Adversely Affect Service to
Small or Medium Communities.--Within 180 days after the date
of enactment of the Air Service Restoration Act, the
Secretary shall review the marketing practices of air
carriers that may inhibit the availability of quality,
affordable air transportation services to small and medium-
sized communities, including--
``(1) marketing arrangements between airlines and travel
agents;
``(2) code-sharing partnerships;
``(3) computer reservation system displays;
``(4) gate arrangements at airports; and
``(5) any other marketing practice that may have the same
effect.
``(c) Regulations.--If the Secretary finds, after
conducting the review required by subsection (b), that
marketing practices inhibit the availability of such service
to such communities, then, after public notice and an
opportunity for a hearing, the Secretary shall promulgate
regulations that address the problem.''.

Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, I rise today to join a number of my
colleagues, and most especially Senators Hollings, Ford, and Dorgan, in
introducing the ``Air Service Restoration Act of 1997.'' This
legislation is the result of many months of effort, first, to
understand what has happened to air service in small and rural
communities in the last twenty years and, then, to develop a
comprehensive strategy for restoring and promoting air service to these
areas--many of which have suffered such a dramatic decline in service
and increase in fares that the U.S. Department of Transportation refers
to them as ``pockets of pain.''
By most accounts the 1978 deregulation of the airline industry has
been a huge success--with lower fares, better service, and more
competition enjoyed by most of the nation, as well as an airline
industry that has reached unprecedented levels of financial success and
stability. But for all its successes, airline deregulation has one,
potentially fatal, flaw--the creation of an ever-widening gap between
the air transportation ``haves'' and ``have-nots'', with small and
rural communities across the nation left to choose between high-cost,
poor-quality service or no service at all. Clearly we have not and are
not meeting our responsibility to foster and maintain a truly national
air transportation system.
West Virginia's communities are unquestionably among the hardest hit
in the nation when it comes to air service declines. Prior to
deregulation, West Virginia was served by at least five major
commercial air carriers. We enjoyed a comprehensive route structure and
comfortable levels of jet service at competitive prices. In the twenty
years since, every major carrier, with the notable exception of U.S.
Airways, abandoned its direct service to West Virginia. Jet service all
but disappeared. Three airports--Elkins, Martinsburg, and Wheeling--
lost commercial passenger service altogether.
At the same time, West Virginia passengers experienced fare increases
of 20-30 percent, in real terms, with service from regional or commuter
airlines using smaller, turboprop planes. Some of these are solid
airlines and offer good service, and we are thankful that they have
stayed with us. But for many years their West Virginia product has been
far inferior to that provided other communities--their planes are
small, their schedules thin and their prices high. Not surprisingly,
West Virginia businesses and passengers have responded by flying less
or going elsewhere. At a time when the rest of the nation has
experienced a 75 percent increase in air traffic, passenger
enplanements in our state have declined at every airport, with a
statewide decrease of nearly 40 percent.
My top priority over the past twenty years--the same twenty years as
airline deregulation--has been to bring good jobs and opportunity to
West Virginia. Whether it's a specific project or a broad policy issue,
from trade to connecting schools to the information highway, most of my
work is about creating economic growth in my home state. In the last
several years I have begun to see and hear more and more that the lack
of convenient and affordable air service is holding us back, stunting
economic growth in West Virginia just as it is in small and rural
communities across the country. And unless we act now to restore and
promote air service to under-served areas, we will never be able to
close the economic development gaps in any meaningful and sustained
way.
Part of the change that I believe needs to take place can and must
occur at the state and local level, where business and community
leaders know

[[Page S3440]]

what their needs are and can develop a real stake in the future of
their airports by educating consumers, attracting air service, and
filling airplanes. But aviation is a national issue, with global
implications. No small or rural community should be expected to
overcome the cumulative effect of twenty years of deregulation on its
own. They need help, they've asked for help, and they deserve help.
The legislation that we introduce today is part of what I hope will
be a new era in our national aviation policy--an era that builds on the
successes of deregulation and takes responsibility for its failures.
The centerpiece of the bill is a five-year $100 million pilot program
for up to 40 communities, with grants of up to $500,000 to each
community for local initiatives to attract and promote service.
Communities would provide local matching funds of up to 25 percent, and
could do so directly or indirectly, through mechanisms such as seat
guarantees. The Department of Transportation would have the authority
to facilitate links between pilot communities and major airports by
requiring joint fares and interline agreements between dominant
airlines and new service providers.
To administer the grant program and provide a resource for small
communities both in and out of the pilot program, the bill creates a
new Office of Small Community Air Service Development at the Department
of Transportation dedicated to promoting and restoring air service to
small communities. Among other tasks, this office would be responsible
for ensuring that accurate and meaningful passenger traffic data is
available regarding service to small communities, as it is today for
larger communities.

To clarify the priority for small communities in receiving and
retaining service to slot-controlled airports, the bill directs the
Department to ensure that any slots given to air carriers for small
community air service will be withdrawn if the carrier fails to provide
the service.
To address a major infrastructure concern of small and rural
airports, the bill establishes a pilot program allowing communities
that face the loss of an air traffic control tower to instead share the
cost of funding the tower, on a contract basis, in proportion to the
cost-benefit ratio of the tower.
Finally, the bill calls on the Department to review the airline
industry's current marketing practices--practices which many believe
are exacerbating the decline in air service to small communities--and,
if necessary, promulgate regulations to curb abuses that inhibit market
entry.
The legislation we introduce today will begin to afford small and
rural community air service the priority they deserve in our national
transportation policy. It is my hope and intent to pursue this
legislation in the context of the 1998 reauthorization of the Federal
Aviation Administration and Airport Improvement Program, and I look
forward to working together with others of my colleagues, several of
whom have shown a real commitment to achieving needed solutions in this
area.
In the global marketplace of today air service has become perhaps the
single most important mode of mass transportation. When it comes to
economic growth, there is no substitute for good air service. If we are
to ensure that all communities throughout the nation are prepared to
compete in the next century, we have no choice but to improve their
transportation options.
______

By Mr. KENNEDY:
S. 1969. A bill to provide health benefits for workers and their
families; to the Committee on Labor and Human Resources.

THE HEALTH CARE FOR WORKING FAMILIES ACT

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I rise to introduce the Health Care for
Working Families Act.
Today we resume the battle for health insurance for all Americans.
We face a continuing crisis in health care for millions of workers
and their families. Forty-one million Americans are uninsured. The
number grew by more than one million last year, and if we do nothing,
it will continue to grow at the same alarming rate.
The vast majority--85%--of these uninsured Americans--are workers or
members of their families. These citizens work hard--40 hours a week,
52 weeks of the year in most cases--but all their hard work cannot buy
them the health insurance they need to protect their families, because
they can't afford it and their employers won't provide it.
Every uninsured American is an American tragedy waiting to happen.
Infants lose their chance to grow up strong and healthy because they do
not get critical prenatal care. A young family loses its livelihood
because a breadwinner cannot afford essential medical services. Middle-
aged parents see the savings set aside to send their children to
college or pay for their retirement swept away by a tidal wave of
medical debt.
These conditions should be unacceptable in America today. The time
has come to take a simple but important step toward the day when every
job carries with it a guarantee of affordable family health care.
Every business is expected to pay a minimum wage, and to obey the
child labor laws. Every business is expected to provide safe and
healthy working conditions, and to protect against injury on the job
through worker's compensation. Every business is expected to contribute
to retirement through Social Security, and to the health needs of the
elderly through Medicare. It is long past time for businesses also to
contribute to the cost of basic health insurance coverage for their
workers.
Some small firms have special problems that may call for special
solutions. But there can be no excuse for large firms to shirk their
responsibility to provide affordable health insurance for their
workers.
Under the bill we are introducing today, businesses with 50 or more
workers will be required to provide health insurance coverage.
Approximately half of all uninsured employees and their families--15
million people--will gain the coverage they need and deserve. This
legislation is a giant step toward the day when every American will be
guaranteed the fundamental right to health care.
Many--even most--businesses already provide insurance. The vast
majority of large business, in particular, fulfill this obligation. But
too many others do not. In more and more cases, unfair competition from
firms that refuse to provide insurance for their workers is compelling
other firms to reduce health benefits or drop coverage altogether.
Health insurance for working Americans does not have to mean
complicated regulations or excessive government intervention. The
legislation we are introducing today is simple--less than ten pages. It
will not cost taxpayers a dime. It includes no specific mandated
benefits or burdensome red tape. It simply says that every business
with 50 workers or more must offer its employees coverage equal in
value to the Blue Cross/Blue Shield Standard Option Plan that is
available to every Senator and Representative and must pay at least 72%
of the cost--the same proportion that taxpayers contribute for every
member of Congress.
The American people deserve health care for their families that is
every bit as good as the health care they provide to every member of
Congress. The incremental reform enacted in recent years has helped
many families, but it is far from sufficient. The time has come for
Congress to take a larger step.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be
printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:

S. 1969

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ``Health Care for Working
Families Act''.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

Congress finds that--
(1) every industrialized country in the world except the
United States guarantees the fundamental right to health care
to all its citizens;
(2) 41,000,000 Americans are without health insurance
coverage;
(3) the number of uninsured Americans is growing every
year;

[[Page S3441]]

(4) the vast majority of uninsured Americans are workers or
dependents of workers;
(5) for more than half a century, Congress has enacted laws
to ensure that work is appropriately rewarded, including laws
establishing a minimum wage and a 40 hour work week, laws
ensuring safe and healthy working conditions, and laws
requiring employers to contribute to the cost of retirement
security through Social Security and Medicare; and
(6) as the United States approaches the 21st century, it is
time to enact requirements guaranteeing that jobs carry with
them affordable, adequate health insurance benefits.

SEC. 3. HEALTH BENEFITS FOR EMPLOYEES AND THEIR FAMILIES.

(a) In General.--The Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (29
U.S.C. 201 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end thereof
the following new title:
``TITLE II--HEALTH BENEFITS FOR EMPLOYEES AND THEIR FAMILIES

``SEC. 201. HEALTH BENEFITS.

``(a) Offer to Enroll.--
``(1) In general.--Each large employer, in accordance with
this title, shall offer to each of its employees the
opportunity to enroll in a qualifying health benefit plan
that provides coverage for the employee and the family of the
employee.
``(2) Qualifying health benefit plan.--For purposes of this
title, the term `qualifying health benefit plan' means a plan
that provides benefits for health care items and services
that are actuarily equivalent or greater in value than the
benefits offered as of January 1, 1998 under the Blue Cross/
Blue Shield Standard Plan provided under the Federal
Employees Health Benefit Program under chapter 89 of title 5,
United States Code, and that meets the requirements of title
XXVII of the Public Health Service Act applicable to the
plan.
``(b) Contribution and Withholding.--
``(1) In general.--Each large employer, in accordance with
this title, shall--
``(A) contribute to the cost of any qualifying health
benefit plan offered to its employees under subsection (a);
and
``(B) withhold from the wages of an employee, the employee
share of the premium assessed for coverage under the
qualifying health benefit plan.
``(2) Required contribution.--Except as provided in
paragraphs (3) and (4), the portion of the total premium to
be paid by a large employer under paragraph (1)(A) shall not
be less than the portion of the total premium that the
Federal Government contributes under the Blue Cross/Blue
Shield Standard Plan provided under the Federal Employees
Health Benefit Program under chapter 89 of title 5, United
States Code.
``(3) Part-time employees.--With respect to an employee who
works less than 30 hours per week, the employer contribution
required under paragraph (2) shall be equal to the product
of--
``(A) the contribution required under paragraph (2); and
``(B) the ratio of number of hours worker by the employee
in a typical week to 30 hours.
``(4) Limitation.--No employer contribution shall be
required under this subsection with respect to an employer
who works less than 10 hours per week.
``(c) Employee Obligation Under Certain Programs.--
``(1) In general.--With respect to an employee covered
under a Federal health insurance program (as defined in
paragraph (3)), such employee shall accept an offer of health
insurance coverage under subsection (a) and agree to the
appropriate payroll withholdings under subsection (b)(1)(B)
for such coverage or provide for the payment of the employee
share of premiums under paragraph (2), except that this
subsection shall not apply--
``(A) with respect to an employee who is otherwise covered
under an employment-based qualified health benefit plan; or
``(B) with respect to the coverage of a family member of an
employee if the employee does not elect coverage for such
family member and the family member is otherwise covered
under an employment-based qualified health benefit plan.
``(2) Payment of premiums.--At the request of an employee
to which paragraph (1) applies, the relevant Federal
administrator of the Federal health insurance program
involved shall provide for the payment of the employee share
of the premium assessed for coverage under the qualifying
health benefit plan involved. For purposes of title XIX of
the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396 et seq.), the
requirement of this paragraph shall be deemed to be a
requirement under the appropriate State plan under such title
XIX.
``(3) Federal health insurance program.--As used in this
subsection, the term `Federal health insurance program'
means--
``(A) the medicare or medicaid program under title XVIII or
XIX of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395 or 1396 et
seq.);
``(B) the Federal employee health benefit program under
chapter 89 of title V, United States Code; or
``(C) the Civilian Health and Medical Program of the
Uniformed Services (CHAMPUS), as defined in section 1073(4)
of title 10, United States Code.
``(d) Large Employers.--
``(1) In general.--The provisions of this title shall only
apply to large employers.
``(2) Definition.--
``(A) In general.--As used in paragraph (1), the term
`large employer' means, with respect to a calendar year and
plan year, an employer that employed an average of at least
50 full-time employees on business days during the preceding
calendar year and who employs not less than 50 employees on
the first day of the plan year.
``(B) Exception.--The provisions of this title shall apply
with respect to an employer that is not a large employer
under subparagraph (A) if the majority of the services
performed by such employer consist of services performed on
behalf of a single large employer.
``(3) Contract workers.--For purposes of this title, a
contract worker of an employer shall be considered to be an
employee of the employer.

``SEC. 202. REQUIREMENTS RELATING TO TIMING OF COVERAGE AND
WITHHOLDING.

``(a) Date of Initial Coverage.--In the case of an employee
enrolled under a qualifying health benefit plan provided by a
large employer, the coverage under the plan must begin not
later than 30 days after the day on which the employee first
performs an hour of service as an employee of that employer.
``(b) Withholding Permitted.--No provision of State law
shall prevent an employer of an employee enrolled under a
qualifying health benefit plan established under this title
from withholding the amount of any premium due by the
employee from the payroll of the employee.

``SEC. 203. ENFORCEMENT.

``(a) Civil Money Penalty Against Private Employers.--The
provisions of section 502--
``(1) relating to the commencement of civil actions by the
Secretary under subsection (a) of such section;
``(2) relating to civil money penalties under subsection
(c)(2) of such section; and
``(3) relating to the procedures for assessing, collecting
and the judicial review of such civil money penalties;

shall apply with respect to any large employer that does not
comply with this title.
``(b) Injunctive Relief.--The provisions of section 17
shall apply with respect to violations of this title.

``SEC. 204. PREEMPTION.

``Nothing in this title shall be construed to prevent a
State from establishing, implementing, or continuing in
effect standards and requirements relating to employer
provided health insurance coverage unless such standards and
requirements prevent the application of a requirements of
this title.

``SEC. 205. DEFINITION AND EFFECTIVE DATE.

``(a) Definition.--In this title the terms `family' and
`family member' mean, with respect to an employee, the spouse
and children (including adopted children) of the employee.
``(b) Effective Date.--
``(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2),
this title shall apply with respect to employers on January
1, 1999.
``(2) Collective bargaining agreements.--This title shall
apply with respect to employees covered under a collective
bargaining agreement on the first day of the first plan year
beginning after the date of enactment of this Act, or January
1, 1999, whichever occurs later.''.
(b) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) The Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 is amended by
striking out the first section and inserting in lieu thereof
the following:

``SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

``This Act may be cited as the `Fair Labor Standards Act of
1938'.
``TITLE I--WAGES AND HOURS''.
(2) The Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 is amended by
striking out ``this Act'' each place it occurs and inserting
in lieu thereof ``this title''.
(3) Section 17 of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (29
U.S.C. 217) is amended by inserting ``or violations of title
II'' before the period.

SEC. 4. AMENDMENT TO PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE ACT.

Title II of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 202 et
seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:

``SEC. 247. REQUIREMENT FOR HEALTH INSURANCE COVERAGE.

``A health insurance issuer (as defined in section 2791(a))
that offers health insurance coverage (as defined in section
2791(a)) to an employer on behalf of the employees of such
employer shall ensure that such coverage complies with the
requirements of title II of the Fair Labor Standards Act of
1938.''.
______

By Mr. ABRAHAM for himself and Mr. Daschle:
S. 1970. A bill to require the Secretary of the Interior to establish
a program to provide assistance in the conservation of neotropical
migratory birds; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.

the neotropical migratory bird conservation act of 1998

Mr. ABRAHAM. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the
``Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act of 1998.'' This
legislation, which I am introducing today with my distinguished
colleague, Senator Daschle, is designed to protect over 90 endangered
species of bird spending certain seasons in the United States and other
seasons

[[Page S3442]]

in other nations of the Western Hemisphere. I think it is fitting that
we introduce this legislation on Earth Day, that day we have dedicated
to increasing awareness of environmental issues.
Every year, approximately 25 million Americans travel to observe
birds, and 60 million American adults watch and feed birds at home.
Birdwatching is a source of great pleasure to many Americans, as well
as a source of important revenue to states, like my own state of
Michigan, which attract tourists to their scenes of natural beauty.
Birdwatching and feeding generates fully $20 billion every ear in
revenue across America.
Birdwatching is a popular activity in Michigan, and its increased
popularity is reflected by an increase in tourist dollars being spent
in small, rural communities. Healthy bird populations also prevent
hundreds of millions of dollars in economic losses each year to farming
and timber interests. They help control insect populations, thereby
preventing crop failures and infestations.
Despite the enormous benefits we derive from our bird populations,
many of them are struggling to survive. Ninety species are listed as
endangered or threatened in the United States. Another 124 species are
of high conservation concern. The primary reason for these declines is
the degradation and loss of bird habitat.

What makes this all the more troubling is that efforts in the United
States to protect these birds' habitats can only be of limited utility.
Among bird watches' favorites, many neotropical birds are endangered or
of high conservation concern. And several of the most popular
neotropical species, including bluebirds, robins, goldfinches, and
orioles, migrate to and from the Caribbean and Latin America.
Because neotropical migratory birds range across a number of
international borders every year, we must work to establish safeguards
at both ends of their migration routes, as well as at critical stopover
areas along their way. Only in this way can conservation efforts prove
successful.
Mr. President, that is why Senator Dashle and I have introduced the
``Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act.'' This legislation will
protect bird habitats across international boundaries by establishing
partnerships between the business community, nongovernmental
organizations and foreign nations. By teaming businesses with
international organizations concerned to protect the environment we can
combine capital with know-how. By partnering these entities with local
organizations in countries where bird habitat is endangered we can see
to it that local people receive the training they need to preserve this
habitat and maintain this critical natural resource.
This act establishes a three year demonstration project providing $4
million each year to help establish programs in Latin America and the
Caribbean. These programs will manage and conserve neotropical
migratory bird populations. Those eligible to participate will include
national and international nongovernmental organizations and business
interests, as well as U.S. government entities.
The key to this act is cooperation among nongovernmental
organizations. The federal share of each project's cost is never to
exceed 33 percent, and half the nonfederal contribution must be in
cash, not in-kind contributions.
The approach taken by this legislation differs from that of current
programs in that it is proactive and, by avoiding a crisis management
approach, will prove significantly more cost effective. In addition,
this legislation does not call for complicated and expensive
bureaucratic structures such as councils, commissions or multi-tiered
oversight structures. Further, this legislation will bring needed
attention and expertise to areas now receiving relatively little
attention in the area of environmental degradation.
This legislation has the support of the National Audobon Society, the
American Bird Conservancy and the Ornithological Council. These
organizations agree with Senator Daschle and I that, by establishing
partnerships between business, government and nongovernmental
organizations both here and abroad we can greatly enhance the
protection of migratory bird habitat.
I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, it is my pleasure today to join Senator
Spencer Abraham to introduce the Neotropical Migratory Bird
Conservation Act.
First, let me commend my colleague, Senator Abraham, for all of his
work to develop this legislation. This bill addresses some of the
critical threats to wildlife habitat and species diversity and
demonstrates his commitment, which I strongly share, to solving the
many challenges we face in this regard.
The Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act will help to ensure
that some of our most valuable and beautiful species of birds--those
that most of us take for granted, including bluebirds, goldfinches,
robins and orioles--may overcome the challenges posed by habitat
destruction and thrive for generations to come. It is not widely
recognized that many North American bird species once considered common
are in decline. In fact, a total of 90 species of migratory birds are
listed as endangered or threatened in the United States, and another
124 species are considered to be of high conservation concern.
The main cause of this decline is the loss of critical habitat
throughout our hemisphere. Because these birds range across
international borders, it is essential that we work with nations in
Latin America and the Caribbean to establish protected stopover areas
during their migrations. This bill achieves that goal by fostering
partnerships between businesses, nongovernmental organizations and
other nations to bring together the capital and expertise needed to
preserve habitat throughout our hemisphere.
As we celebrate Earth Day, I urge my colleagues to support this
legislation. It has been endorsed by the National Audobon Society, the
American Bird Conservancy and the Ornithological Council. I believe
that it will substantially improve upon our ability to maintain
critical habitat in our hemisphere and help to halt the decline of
these important species.

____________________