STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS; Congressional Record Vol. 156, No. 70
(Senate - May 11, 2010)

Text available as:

Formatting necessary for an accurate reading of this text may be shown by tags (e.g., <DELETED> or <BOLD>) or may be missing from this TXT display. For complete and accurate display of this text, see the PDF.


[Pages S3539-S3542]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself and Mr. Brown of Ohio):
  S. 3336. A bill to amend the internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide 
for the treatment of bonds issued to finance renewable energy resources 
facilities, conservation and efficiency facilities, and other specified 
greenhouse gas emission technologies; to the Committee on Finance.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise to introduce the Private 
Activity Renewable Energy Bonds Act, legislation to enable low-cost 
Private Activity Bond financing for businesses and local governments 
which seek to create renewable, clean and efficient sources of energy.
  The bill is cosponsored by Senator Brown of Ohio. In the United 
States House of Representatives, Congressman Mike Thompson has 
introduced a bipartisan companion bill cosponsored by Representatives 
Dean Heller and Mary Bono Mack.
  The bill is supported by a host of business and government leaders 
and renewable energy companies including the Solar Energy Industries 
Association, Solar Millennium, Nano Solar, the National Association of 
Energy Service Companies, EnLink GeoEnergy, Johnson Controls, A123 
Systems, the Center for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Technologies, 
and the U.S. Fuel Cell Council, as well as California Treasurer Bill 
Lockyer.
  The bill provides businesses access to low interest tax free Private 
Activity Bonds, in order to fund projects that generate renewable 
energy; produce energy or water savings, or; develop highly efficient 
vehicles.
  To promote such activity in a fiscally responsible manner, the 
legislation caps the value of bonds at $2.5 billion annually. This 
represents the investment necessary to replace at least one percent of 
U.S. electricity generation with renewable sources over the next ten 
years.
  Private Activity Bonds have long been used to generate private 
involvement and investment in critically important infrastructure for 
our Nation--from wharves to airports, intercity rail to solid waste 
disposal facilities and hospitals.
  In this century, however, we have new national goals.
  Renewable, clean and efficient energy projects will produce jobs, get 
our economy back-on-track and sustain us as the global leader of a 
greener century.
  These projects, however, require significant front-end capital 
investment to which the federal government cannot be the sole provider. 
Private Activity Bonds can prove a critical tool in garnering private 
investment, because their interest rates typically run a few percent 
points under commercially available loans.
  Investors have long responded to this type of incentive. According to 
the IRS, Private Activity Bond issuance in 2007 was over $130 billion--
supplying capital to our markets, providing the financing to get 
projects off the ground.
  Projects financed in part by Private Activity Bonds include additions 
to the San Jose and San Francisco International Airports, the Capitol 
Beltway High Occupancy Vehicle lanes, infrastructure improvements to 
the Port of Seattle, and upgrades to Children's Hospital of Orange 
County, Catholic Healthcare West in San Francisco, and many, many 
important facilities and projects.
  With proper access to capital, we've already seen partnerships 
between States, municipalities and businesses develop into successful 
renewable energy programs.
  In California, Energy Financing Districts finance residents who 
choose to install clean energy projects such as distributed solar 
panels on their homes.
  The cost of the solar panel installation or other device is paid back 
through an increase in property tax only for those property owners who 
choose to participate in the program.
  Now, going solar or installing a geothermal heat pump, which once 
cost tens of thousands of dollars upfront, has little or no upfront 
cost to the property owner. It is no wonder why 150 of these programs 
have been established throughout the country.
  This low cost solar opportunity is just one example of the type of 
programs this bill seeks to support. In partnership, businesses and 
local governments will develop new and innovative was to create the new 
high quality jobs of the 21st century.
  This Congress and this President have outlined goals to ensure this 
country leads the world in the creation of a robust, green economy.
  This bill looks to connect that laudable goal with proven financing 
tools to get us there by aligning private sector investment power and 
job growth with good public policy.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be 
printed in the Record, as follows:

                                S. 3336

       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 ``Private Activity Renewable 
     Energy Bonds Act''.

     SEC. 2. TREATMENT OF BONDS ISSUED TO FINANCE RENEWABLE ENERGY 
                   RESOURCE FACILITIES AND CONSERVATION AND 
                   EFFICIENCY FACILITIES AND OTHER SPECIFIED 
                   GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSION TECHNOLOGIES.

       (a) In General.--Section 142(a) of the Internal Revenue 
     Code of 1986 is amended by striking ``or'' at the end of 
     paragraph (14), by striking the period at the end of 
     paragraph (15) and inserting a comma, and by inserting after 
     paragraph (15) the following new paragraphs:
       ``(16) renewable energy resource facilities,
       ``(17) conservation and efficiency facilities and projects, 
     or
       ``(18) high efficiency vehicles and related facilities or 
     projects.''.
       (b) Renewable Energy Resource Facility.--Section 142 of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end 
     the following new subsection:
       ``(n) Renewable Energy Resource Facilities.--For purposes 
     of subsection (a)(16)--
       ``(1) In general.--The term `renewable energy resource 
     facility' means--

[[Page S3540]]

       ``(A) any facility used to produce electric or thermal 
     energy (including a distributed generation facility) from--
       ``(i) solar, wind, or geothermal energy,
       ``(ii) marine and hydrokinetic renewable energy,
       ``(iii) incremental hydropower,
       ``(iv) biogas and solids produced in the wastewater 
     treatment process, or
       ``(v) biomass (as defined in section 203(b)(1) of the 
     Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 15852(b)(1))),
       ``(B) any facility used to produce biogas, or
       ``(C) any facility or project used for the manufacture of 
     facilities referred to in subparagraph (A) or (B).
       ``(2) Special requirements for facilities producing 
     biogas.--
       ``(A) In general.--A facility shall not be treated as 
     described in paragraph (1)(B), unless the biogas produced--
       ``(i) is of pipeline quality and distributed into a vehicle 
     for transportation or into an intrastate, interstate, or LDC 
     pipeline system, or
       ``(ii) is used to produce onsite electricity or hydrogen 
     fuel for use in vehicular or stationary fuel cell 
     applications and has a British thermal unit content of at 
     least 500 per cubic foot.
       ``(B) Pipeline quality.--For purposes of subparagraph 
     (A)(i), with respect to biogas, the term `pipeline quality' 
     means biogas with a British thermal unit content of at least 
     930 per cubic foot.
       ``(3) Definitions.--For purposes of this subsection--
       ``(A) Geothermal energy.--The term `geothermal energy' 
     means energy derived from a geothermal deposit (within the 
     meaning of section 613(e)(2)) or from geothermal heat pumps.
       ``(B) Marine and hydrokinetic renewable energy.--The term 
     `marine and hydrokinetic renewable energy' has the meaning 
     given such term in section 45(c)(10).
       ``(C) Incremental hydropower.--The term `incremental 
     hydropower' means additional energy generated as a result of 
     efficiency improvements or capacity additions to existing 
     hydropower facilities made on or after the date of enactment 
     of this subsection. The term `incremental hydropower' does 
     not include additional energy generated as a result of 
     operational changes not directly associated with efficiency 
     improvements or capacity additions.
       ``(D) Biogas.--The term `biogas' means a gaseous fuel 
     derived from landfill, municipal solid waste, food waste, 
     wastewater or biosolids, or biomass (as defined in section 
     203(b)(1) of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 
     15852(b))).
       ``(4) Special rules for energy loan tax assessment 
     financing.--
       ``(A) In general.--In the case of any renewable recovery 
     energy resource facility provided from the proceeds of a bond 
     secured by any tax assessment loan upon real property, the 
     term `facility' in paragraph (1) includes--
       ``(i) a prepayment for the principal purpose of purchasing 
     electricity from renewable energy resource property, and
       ``(ii) a prepayment of a lease or license of such property, 
     but only if the prepayment agreement provides that it shall 
     not be canceled prior to the expiration of the tax assessment 
     loan.
       ``(B) Tax assessment loan.--For purposes of subparagraph 
     (A), the term `tax assessment loan' shall mean a governmental 
     assessment, special tax, or similar charge upon real 
     property.''.
       (c) Conservation and Efficiency Facility or Project.--
     Section 142 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended 
     by subsection (b), is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new subsection:
       ``(o) Conservation and Efficiency Facilities and 
     Projects.--
       ``(1) In general.--For purposes of subsection (a)(17), the 
     term `conservation and efficiency facility or project' 
     means--
       ``(A) any facility used for the conservation or the 
     efficient use of energy, including energy efficient 
     retrofitting of existing buildings, or for the efficient 
     storage, transmission, or distribution of energy, including 
     any facility or project designed to implement smart grid 
     technologies (as described in title XIII of the Energy 
     Independence and Security Act of 2007, or individual 
     components of such technologies as listed in section 1301 of 
     such Act),
       ``(B) any facility used for the conservation of or the 
     efficient use of water, including--
       ``(i) any facility or project designed to--

       ``(I) reduce the demand for water,
       ``(II) improve efficiency in use and reduce losses and 
     waste of water, including water reuse, and
       ``(III) improve land management practices to conserve 
     water, or

       ``(ii) any individual component of a facility or project 
     referred to in clause (i), or
       ``(C) any facility or project used for the manufacture of 
     facilities referred to in subparagraphs (A) and (B).
     For purposes of subparagraph (B)(i), facility or project does 
     not include any facility or project that stores water.
       ``(2) Special rules for energy loan tax assessment 
     financing.--
       ``(A) In general.--In the case of any conservation and 
     efficiency facility or project provided from the proceeds of 
     a bond secured by any tax assessment loan upon real property, 
     the term `facility' in paragraph (1)(A) includes--
       ``(i) a prepayment for the principal purpose of purchasing 
     electricity from conservation and efficiency property, and
       ``(ii) a prepayment of a lease or license of such property, 
     but only if the prepayment agreement provides that it shall 
     not be canceled prior to the expiration of the tax assessment 
     loan.
       ``(B) Tax assessment loan.--For purposes of subparagraph 
     (A), the term `tax assessment loan' shall mean a governmental 
     assessment, special tax or similar charge upon real 
     property.''.
       (d) High Efficiency Vehicles and Related Facilities or 
     Projects.--Section 142 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, 
     as amended by subsections (b) and (c), is amended by adding 
     at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(p) High Efficiency Vehicles and Related Facilities or 
     Projects.--For purposes of subsection (a)(18)--
       ``(1) High efficiency vehicles.--The term `high efficiency 
     vehicle' means any vehicle that will exceed by at least 150 
     percent the average combined fuel economy for vehicles with 
     substantially similar attributes in the model year in which 
     the production of such vehicle is expected to begin at the 
     facility.
       ``(2) Facilities related to high efficiency vehicles.--A 
     facility or project is related to a high efficiency vehicle 
     if the facility is any real or personal property to be used 
     in the design, technology transfer, manufacture, production, 
     assembly, distribution, recharging or refueling, or service 
     of high efficiency vehicles.''.
       (e) National Limitation on Amount of Renewable Energy 
     Bonds.--Section 142 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as 
     amended by subsections (b), (c), and (d), is amended by 
     adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(q) National Limitation on Amount of Renewable Energy 
     Bonds.--
       ``(1) In general.--An issue shall not be treated as an 
     issue described in paragraph (16), (17), or (18) of 
     subsection (a) if the aggregate face amount of bonds issued 
     by the State pursuant thereto (when added to the aggregate 
     face amount of bonds previously so issued during the calendar 
     year) exceeds the amount allocated to the State by the 
     Secretary under paragraph (2) for such calendar year.
       ``(2) Allocation rules.--
       ``(A) Allocation among states by population.--The Secretary 
     shall allocate authority to issue bonds described in 
     paragraph (16), (17), or (18) of subsection (a) to each State 
     by population for each calendar year in an aggregate amount 
     to all States not to exceed $2,500,000,000.
       ``(B) State allocation.--The State may allocate the amount 
     allocated to the State under subparagraph (A) for any 
     calendar year among facilities or projects described in 
     paragraphs (16), (17), and (18) of subsection (a) in such 
     manner as the State determines appropriate.
       ``(C) Unused renewable energy bond carryover to be 
     allocated among qualified states.--
       ``(i) In general.--Any unused bond allocation for any State 
     for any calendar year under subparagraph (A) shall carryover 
     to the succeeding calendar year and be assigned to the 
     Secretary for allocation among qualified States for the 
     succeeding calendar year.
       ``(ii) Unused bond allocation carryover.--For purposes of 
     this subparagraph, unused bond allocations are bond 
     allocations described in subparagraph (A) of any State which 
     remain unused by November 1 of any calendar year.
       ``(iii) Formula for allocation of unused bond allocation 
     carryovers among qualified states.--The amount allocated 
     under this subparagraph to a qualified State for any calendar 
     year shall bear the same ratio to all States from the 
     preceding calendar year under subparagraph (A), excluding 
     States which are not a qualified State.
       ``(iv) Timing of allocation.--The Secretary shall allocate 
     the unused bond allocation carried over from the preceding 
     year among qualified States not later than March 1 of the 
     succeeding year.
       ``(v) Qualified state.--For purposes of this subparagraph, 
     the term `qualified State' means, with respect to a calendar 
     year, any State--

       ``(I) which allocated its entire bond allocation under 
     subparagraph (A) for the preceding calendar year, and
       ``(II) for which a request is made (not later than August 1 
     of the calendar year) to receive an allocation under clause 
     (iii).

       ``(vi) Reporting.--States shall report annually to the 
     Secretary on their use of bonds described in paragraph (16), 
     (17), and (18) of subsection (a), including description of 
     projects, amount spent per project, total amount of unused 
     bonds, and expected greenhouse gas or water savings per 
     project with a description of how such savings were 
     calculated. Such reporting shall be submitted not later than 
     November 1 of any calendar year.''.
       (f) Coordination With Section 45.--Paragraph (3) of section 
     45(b) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by 
     adding at the end the following new sentence: ``Clause (ii) 
     of subparagraph (A) shall not apply with respect to any 
     facility described in paragraph (16), (17), or (18) of 
     section 142(a).''.
       (g) Coordination With Section 45K.--Subparagraph (A) of 
     section 45K(b)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is 
     amended by adding at the end the following flush sentence:

[[Page S3541]]

     ``Subclause (II) of clause (i) shall not apply with respect 
     to any facility described in paragraph (16), (17), or (18) of 
     section 142(a).''.
       (h) Coordination With Section 48.--Subparagraph (A) of 
     section 48(a)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is 
     amended by adding at the end the following flush sentence:
     ``Clause (ii) shall not apply with respect to any facility 
     described in paragraph (16), (17), or (18) of section 
     142(a).''.
       (i) Coordination With Section 146(g)(3).--Section 146(g)(3) 
     of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking 
     ``or (15)'' and inserting ``(15), (16), (17), or (18)''.
       (j) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to obligations issued after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act.
                                 ______
                                 
      Mr. UDALL of New Mexico:
  S. 3340. A bill to create jobs, increase energy efficiency, and 
promote technology transfer, and for other purposes; to the Committee 
on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
  Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the 
NIST GREEN JOBS Act, to provide NIST Grants for green jobs, improved 
energy efficiency, and small business growth.
  It has never been easy to be an entrepreneur or small business owner, 
and this is especially true since the recession began 2 years ago. Many 
small firms in the manufacturing sector, in particular, have struggled 
during a time of tight credit markets and reduced consumer demand. In 
the last 2 years, the manufacturing sector lost over 2 million jobs.
  Twenty years ago, when Americans worried about how our small 
companies would compete globally in the face of stiff competition from 
Asia, Congress established the Hollings Manufacturing Extension 
Partnership, MEP, Program to assist small manufacturers.
  The MEP program has since helped thousands of small- and medium-sized 
manufacturers across the nation increase their profit-lines and 
streamline their business processes through lean manufacturing 
techniques. The National Institute of Standards and Technology, NIST, 
is the Federal steward for the nationwide MEP network, which has MEP 
Centers in all 50 States.
  The New Mexico Manufacturing Extension Partnership in Albuquerque was 
one of the first such centers, and it provides small- and medium-sized 
manufacturers with the tools they need to grow, improve productivity 
and expand capacity. Since its creation, the New Mexico MEP has helped 
create or maintain more than 2,600 jobs in the State and achieve $24 
million in annual cost savings for partner companies.
  Today, as the U.S. continues to emerge from the worst recession since 
the Great Depression, the resources and expertise MEP provides 
manufacturers are more valuable than ever. Our MEP Centers do great 
work--and I believe they can do even more as companies look for ways to 
take advantage of new opportunities in a clean energy economy that 
promotes energy efficiency and independence for our country.
  Since manufacturing now plays an increasingly important role in the 
construction industry, there is an important opportunity for the MEP 
program to strengthen its support of small manufacturers while also 
promoting green jobs and energy independence.
  Builders today already rely on manufactured components and sub-
assemblies. Manufacturing will become even more important to 
construction as homes are increasingly ``assembled'' on site from 
components made in a factory. Now that lean, high-quality manufacturing 
is applicable to construction, it is not a stretch for MEP Centers to 
teach the same skills to the construction industry, where small firms 
are the norm.
  Technologies exist today for green building construction and 
retrofitting that can reduce energy use and greenhouse gas emissions. 
Yet many small firms, especially in the construction sector, do not 
have the skills or expertise to take advantage of new technologies to 
improve the energy efficiency. Moreover, NIST researchers at the 
Buildings and Fire Research Lab already help develop standards and 
technologies to improve buildings. Buildings today consume 73 percent 
of electricity and 40 percent of overall energy.
  These companies would benefit from the type of training and business 
analysis activities that MEP Centers already provide to manufacturers. 
The MEP system could thus be a powerful and transformational force to 
create green jobs, increase energy efficiency, and promote 
technological transfer in the construction industry.
  That is why I ask for the support of my Senate colleagues for the 
NIST GREEN JOBS Act, to fund MEP Center pilot projects for green jobs 
related to energy efficiency. This proposal builds on provisions 
already authorized by America COMPETES legislation.
  My bill simply broadens this existing competitive grant program for 
MEP pilot projects to include activities related to energy efficiency. 
It also allows MEP Centers to extend services to companies in the 
construction industry working in these areas. Awarded on a competitive 
basis, these pilot projects could last up to 3 years and would be 
located in each region of the country. The pilot projects would thus 
create models for new MEP activities and services that could be 
replicated at MEP Centers regionally or nationwide.
  The NIST GREEN JOBS Act authorizes $7 million in annual funding for 3 
years. This funding would allow at least one MEP Center in each region 
to conduct a pilot project. The MEP Centers would not need to provide 
local matching funds for these competitively awarded pilot projects.
  I believe this modest proposal would be a positive step toward both 
helping create and retain jobs in the manufacturing sector and 
improving our Nation's energy independence.
  I therefore urge the support of all my colleagues for this 
legislation.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. DURBIN:
  S. 3342. A bill to amend the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch 
Act to establish a demonstration project to promote collaborations to 
improve school nutrition; to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, 
and Forestry.
  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, childhood obesity is a growing concern in 
the U.S. and I am pleased that the President and First Lady have 
decided to tackle this issue with the goal of solving the problem in a 
generation. Today, one in three children is overweight or obese, which 
means that they are at a greater risk of developing diabetes, heart 
disease and cancer over the course of their lives. We are spending 
nearly $150 billion a year to treat obesity-related medical conditions, 
and this problem will only become worse if we don't do something about 
it now.
  One way that the Federal Government can play an important role in 
addressing this problem is by helping to make schools healthier. 
Students spend an average of nearly 7 hours a day at school, and it is 
one of the places where kids formally learn and then can practice 
healthy habits related to nutrition and physical activity. While 
education is primarily funded by the states, the Federal government 
plays a significant role in this issue as well because of its funding 
of the National School Lunch Program. This year, the U.S. Department of 
Agriculture, USDA, will spend $10.2 billion on the school lunch 
program, which serves 31 million children across the country every day. 
In my home State of Illinois, 1.1 million students in over 4,000 
schools participate.
  The National School Lunch Program was started after World War II, 
because our leaders then understood the importance of investing in good 
nutrition to ensure that the country's youth were well nourished and 
healthy. When President Harry Truman signed the National School Lunch 
Act, he said that ``in the long view, no nation is healthier than its 
children.''
  Today, we know that the program is making a real difference in 
millions of kids' lives, by ensuring they don't go hungry during the 
school day and are ready to learn. We also know that there are some 
clear nutritional benefits of the program. USDA reports that research 
on the school lunches consistently shows that participants consume more 
milk and vegetables at lunch; have higher vitamin intakes; and consume 
fewer sweets, sweetened beverages, and snack foods than 
nonparticipants.
  However, much of the difference in vegetable consumption may be due 
to a higher consumption of French fries and other potato products, and 
many lunches contain a higher percentage of calories from fat than 
currently recommended. USDA's current nutrition

[[Page S3542]]

standards for school meals have not been updated since 1995 and are not 
in line with the most recent Dietary Guidelines for Americans. I think 
we need to take President Truman's words to heart, and make long-term 
investments in this program to ensure that kids are eating healthy 
meals.
  I support the President's goal of increased funding, so that schools 
can afford to purchase healthier ingredients to make school lunches. 
However I know that the nutritional quality of school meals varies 
greatly across the country, and providing every school with adequate 
funding to improve their meals will be challenging. Some schools have 
already shown that even with limited resources they can make real 
improvements in the nutritional quality of their school meals, and make 
other changes to make school environments healthier.
  I would like to build on that concept, which is why I am pleased 
today to introduce the Healthy School Partnerships Act of 2010. This 
bill will create a competitive grant program at USDA to allow public 
schools to explore innovative, sustainable programs that improve the 
nutritional profile of school meals and make other improvements to make 
school environments healthier. The bill authorizes $2 million per year 
for 5 years to fund collaborations of academic experts, dieticians and 
nutrition professionals, community partners, and local schools to 
implement and evaluate innovative models to improve food quality, 
student choices in food, and healthy school environments. This could 
include starting programs to improve the nutritional content of school 
meals; providing more nutrition education; changing school policies to 
promote greater access to healthier foods and physical activity; 
training teachers, school administrators and nurses; or making other 
changes to make school environments healthier. We need grass roots 
involvement and real-world models to solve the childhood obesity 
problem going forward, and this bill provides the funding to develop 
those.
  Childhood obesity is a complex problem, and to effectively tackle it 
we will need the commitment of the public and private sectors. The 
Healthy Schools Partnerships Act of is one part of the solution. By 
tapping local resources and expertise, we can promote collaborations 
and develop sustainable and replicable models for making systemic 
changes that promote good nutrition and healthy living among students.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be 
printed in the Record, as follows:

                                S. 3342

       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 ``Healthy Schools Partnerships 
     Act of 2010''.

     SEC. 2. HEALTHY SCHOOLS PARTNERSHIPS DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM.

       Section 18 of the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 1769) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(j) Healthy Schools Partnerships Demonstration Program.--
       ``(1) Definition of eligible entity.--In this section, the 
     term `eligible entity' means a school food authority that 
     demonstrates that the school food authority has collaborated, 
     or will collaborate, with 1 or more local partner 
     organizations (including academic experts, registered 
     dietitians or other nutrition professionals, community 
     partners, or non-profit organizations) to achieve the 
     purposes described in paragraph (2).
       ``(2) Purposes.--The purposes of the demonstration project 
     established under this subsection are--
       ``(A) to assist schools in improving the nutritional 
     standards of school meals and the overall school environment; 
     and
       ``(B) to use local resources and expertise to promote 
     collaborations and develop sustainable and replicable models 
     for making systemic changes that promote good nutrition and 
     healthy living among students.
       ``(3) Establishment.--The Secretary shall establish a 
     demonstration project under which the Secretary shall make 
     grants to eligible entities to fund collaborations of 
     academic experts, nonprofit organizations, registered 
     dietitians or other nutrition professionals, community 
     partners, and local schools to test and evaluate innovative 
     models to improve nutrition education, student decision 
     making, and healthy school environments.
       ``(4) Application.--
       ``(A) In general.--An eligible entity shall submit to the 
     Secretary an application at such time, in such manner, and 
     containing such information as the Secretary may require.
       ``(B) Contents.--In addition to any other requirements of 
     the Secretary, each application shall--
       ``(i) identify the 1 or more problems that the eligible 
     entity will address;
       ``(ii) identify the activity that the grant will be used to 
     fund;
       ``(iii) describe the means by which the activity will 
     improve the health and nutrition of the school environment;
       ``(iv) list the partner organizations that will participate 
     in the activity funded by the grant; and
       ``(v) describe the metrics used to measure success in 
     achieving the stated goals.
       ``(5) Priority.--In making grants under this subsection, 
     the Secretary shall give priority to eligible entities that 
     demonstrate--
       ``(A) a severe need to improve the school environment, as 
     demonstrated by high numbers of students receiving free or 
     reduced price lunches, high levels of obesity or other 
     indicators of poor health status, and health disparities in 
     the community served by the school;
       ``(B) a commitment by community partners to make in-kind or 
     cash contributions; and
       ``(C) the ability to measure results.
       ``(6) Use of funds.--An eligible entity shall use a grant 
     received under this subsection--
       ``(A) to assess the problem of childhood obesity and poor 
     nutrition in the school environment;
       ``(B) to develop an innovative plan or intervention to 
     address specific causes of the problem in coordination with 
     outside partners, including by developing and testing 
     innovative models to improve student health and nutrition as 
     measured by--
       ``(i) changes that result in healthier school environments, 
     including more nutritious food being served in cafeterias and 
     available a la carte;
       ``(ii) increased nutrition education;
       ``(iii) improved ability of students to identify healthier 
     choices;
       ``(iv) changes in attitudes of students towards healthier 
     food;
       ``(v) student involvement in making school environments 
     healthier;
       ``(vi) increased access to physical activity, physical 
     education, and recess;
       ``(vii) professional development and continuing education 
     opportunities for school administrators, teachers, and school 
     nurses; and
       ``(viii) changes in school policies that promote access to 
     healthier food and physical activity;
       ``(C) to implement the plan or intervention in partnership 
     with outside partners;
       ``(D) to measure and evaluate effectiveness of the 
     intervention; or
       ``(E) to assess the sustainability and replicability of 
     this model.
       ``(7) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this subsection $2,000,000 
     for each of fiscal years 2011 through 2015.''.

                          ____________________