S. 1588Senate108th Congress (2003-2005)In Committee

Environmental Health Research Act of 2003

Legislative Activity

Stay on top of the latest movement without scrolling through every action

2 earlier actions

SenateIntro Referral Latest Action

Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. (text of measure as introduced: CR S11167-11169)

Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee

September 5, 2003

View full timeline

SenateIntro Referral

Introduced in Senate

September 5, 2003

SenateIntro Referral

Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S11167)

September 5, 2003

SenateIntro Referral

Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. (text of measure as introduced: CR S11167-11169)

Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee

September 5, 2003

Floor Debate

2 members

What members said about S. 1588 on the floor

2 Democrats

Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr.D-DE · Sep 5, 2003

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce, along with my colleague Senator Specter, the ``Reducing Crime and Terrorism at America's Seaports Act of 2003.'' About a year ago, the Independent Task Force on Homeland Security Imperatives, co-chaired by former Senators Gary Hart and Warren Rudman and sponsored by the Council on Foreign Relations, released its report in which it concluded that ``America remains dangerously unprepared to prevent and respond to a catastrophic attack on U.S. soil.'' The report received considerable media fanfare and inspired eloquent proclamations about the need to strengthen America's domestic security agenda--but sadly, in the ensuing months, we have done little to protect one of the key vulnerabilities identified by the task force, this nation's seaports.

The 361 seaports in the United States serve essential national interests by facilitating the flow of trade and the movement of cruise passengers, as well as supporting the effective and safe deployment of U.S. Armed Forces. Yet, our attention to the security needs of seaport facilities and other marine areas, which cover some 3.5 million square miles of ocean area and 95,000 miles of coastline, has been inadequate--especially when you consider the sheer volume of traffic that moves through our seaports and along our waterways each year.

Annually, U.S. seaports handle more than 141 million ferry and cruise ship passengers and unfathomable amounts of waterborne commerce, more than 2 billion tons of domestic and international freight and 3 billion tons of oil. Each year, millions of truck-size cargo containers are off-loaded onto U.S. docks--yet, as the Hart-Rudman Report noted, ``only the tiniest percentage of [these] containers . . . are subject to examination--and a weapon of mass destruction could well be hidden among this cargo.'' Indeed, only about 2 percent of the nearly 6 million cargo containers that pass through the U.S. are inspected each year--and, according to some expert reports, only 30 percent of that cargo contains material that matches the cargo manifest.

The 2002 Hart-Rudman Report was both timely and important in that it shed new light on these glaring vulnerabilities and, in the process, re-energized the debate surrounding America's national security needs. However, the report's findings were hardly new. Two years earlier, the

Interagency Commission on Crime and Security at U.S. Seaports, a blue- ribbon government panel, had similarly noted that seaports and the ``maritime mode'' were especially vulnerable and that they did ``not exhibit a substantial security or anti-terrorism profile, particularly when compared with the emphasis commercial aviation places on these activities.'' The Interagency Commission concluded that ``terrorism, serious crime and inadequate cargo control are the most obvious threat vectors in seaports today.''

With that in mind, last Congress, Senator Specter and I introduced legislation designed to update Federal law to address critical security issues at U.S. seaports. We have re-tooled and re-focused that legislation, making important improvements and taking account of recent changes in the law. Today, we re-introduce the ``Reducing Crime and Terrorism at America's Seaports Act of 2003,'' which addresses all three threats identified by the Interagency Commission--terrorism, serious crime and inadequate cargo control.

Here is a summary of some of the pressing vulnerabilities that the legislation would address directly: First, the Interagency Commission concluded that ``control of access to the seaport or sensitive areas within the seaports'' poses one of the greatest potential threats to port security. Such unauthorized access continues and exposes the nation's seaports, and the communities that surround them, to acts of terrorism, sabotage or theft. In response, the Biden-Specter Bill would double the maximum term of imprisonment for anyone who fraudulently gains access to a seaport or waterfront.

Second, an estimated 95 percent of the cargo shipped to the U.S. from foreign countries, other than Canada and Mexico, arrives through out seaports. Accordingly, the Interagency Commission found that this enormous flow of goods through U.S. ports provides a tempting target for terrorists and others to smuggle illicit cargo into the country, while also making ``our ports potential targets for terrorist attacks,'' In addition, the smuggling of non-dangerous, but illicit, cargo may be used to finance terrorism. Despite the gravity of the threat, we continue to operate in an environment in which terrorists and criminals can evade detection by underreporting and misreporting the content of cargo. In one review by the U.S. Customs Service, nearly 20 percent of the carrier arrivals in the sample were discrepant, i.e., carried more or fewer containers than were listed on the manifest. In an earlier review, Customs found a 53 percent discrepant rate. Even where this improperly-reported cargo is legitimate, it needlessly diverts precious resources and attention away from the job of detecting terrorists and serious criminals. To deter this problem, the Biden- Specter Bill would increase penalties for noncompliance with certain manifest reporting and record-keeping requirements, including information regarding the content of cargo containers and the country from which the shipments originated.

Third, the Coast Guard is the main Federal agency responsible for law enforcement at sea. Yet, its ability to force a vessel to stop or be boarded is limited. While the Coast Guard has the authority to use whatever force is reasonably necessary, a vessel operator's refusal to stop is not currently a crime. The Biden-Specter Bill would make it a crime for a vessel operator to fail to slow or stop a ship once ordered to do so by a federal law enforcement officer; for any person on board a vessel to impede boarding or other law enforcement action authorized by Federal law; or for any person on board a vessel to provide false information to a federal law enforcement officer.

Fourth, The Coast Guard maintains over 50,000 navigational aids on more than 25,000 miles of waterways. These aids, which are relied upon by all commercial, military and recreational mariners, are critical for safe navigation by commercial and military vessels. Accordingly, they are inviting targets for terrorists. The Biden-Specter Bill would make it a crime to endanger the safe navigation of a ship by damaging any maritime navigational aid maintained by the Coast Guard; place in the waters anything which is likely to damage a vessel or its cargo, interfere with a vessel's safe navigation, or interfere with maritime commerce; or dump a hazardous substance into U.S. waters, with the intent to endanger human life or welfare.

Fifth, each year, thousands of ships, including cruise ships, whose numbers have swelled enormously over the last half century, enter and leave the U.S. through seaports, Smugglers and terrorists exploit this massive flow of maritime traffic to transport dangerous materials and dangerous people into this country. The Biden-Specter Bill would make it a crime to use a vessel to smuggle into the United States either a terrorist or any explosive or other dangerous material for use in committing a terrorist act.

Sixth, under current Federal law, it is a crime to destroy an aircraft or aircraft facilities. Incredibly, there are no equivalent Federal prohibitions in the maritime context. Given the magnitude of the threat against America's seaports, we should provide the same protection to seaports that we do for airports. The Biden-Specter Bill would make it a crime to damage or destroy any part of a ship, a maritime facility, or anything used to load or unload cargo and passengers; commit a violent assault on anyone at a maritime facility; or knowingly communicate a hoax in a way which endangers the safety of a vessel.

Seventh, according to the Interagency Commission, ``at many seaports, the carrying of firearms is not restricted, and thus internal conspirators and other criminals are allowed armed access to cargo vessels and cruise line terminals.'' Currently, Federal law prohibits carrying firearms into airports, which is a sensible step to protect against possible terrorist attacks or other criminal activity. We should provide the same protections currently afforded to airports to our seaports and passenger vessels. The Biden-Specter Bill would prohibit the carrying of a dangerous weapon, including a firearm or explosive, at a seaport or on board a vessel.

Eighth, as a consequence of the vast amount of waterborne commerce, cargo theft has become a major problem. Yet, there is no national data collection and reporting system that captures the magnitude of serious crime at seaports. Given the importance of free-flowing commerce to our nation's economy and the reported trafficking and sale of contraband to fiance terrorist activity, it is especially important that we work to assess and correct the problem. The Biden-Specter Bill would require the reporting of cargo theft offenses. It would also instruct the Attorney General to create a database containing the reported information, which would be made available to appropriate governmental officials while respecting important privacy protections. Importantly, organizations like the American Institute of Marine Underwriters and the Inland Marine Underwriters Association have specifically expressed their strong support for this provision.

And, ninth, the Interagency Commission concluded that existing laws are not stiff enough to stop certain crimes, including cargo theft, at seaports. The Biden-Specter Bill would increase the maximum term of imprisonment for low-level thefts of interstate or foreign shipments from 1 year to 3 years and expand the statute to outlaw theft of goods from trailers, cargo containers, warehouses, and similar venues. The American Institute of Marine Underwriters and the Inland Marine Underwriters Association also have expressed strong support for this provision.

This comprehensive anti-crime and anti-terrorism legislation is the product of informal collaborations with ports, industry and labor groups, as well as interested federal agencies. As a result of the contributions by these groups, we believe that we have developed a strong, bipartisan bill that, once passed, will significantly improve federal criminal law; expand the array of tools available to investigators and prosecutors; and ensure that federal resources are appropriately invested.

We are delighted to have the support of organizations, like the American Association of Port Authorities (AAPA), with special knowledge and expertise in seaport and cargo security. In fact, the AAPA, which represents more than 150 public port authorities in the United States, Canada, the Caribbean and Latin America, has sent me a strong letter endorsing the legislation--a copy of which will appear in the record at the end of my statement.

In closing, in the aftermath of September 11th and given the ongoing and escalating terrorism perpetrated around the globe, surely we recognize that the conclusions contained in the Hart-Rudman Report were not mere hyperbole--but a clarion call for action. Needless to say, a terrorist attack against any one of this Nation's seaports would not only jeopardize human life, but could also bring the otherwise free flow of commerce to a screeching halt--exacting a heft toll on the U.S. economy, world shipping, and international trade. That impact could be both devastating and far-reaching, and that is not even considering the effect of America's military readiness which depends on quick access to certain strategic ports in order to ensure effective mobilization and deployment of U.S. Armed Forces.

Given the threat, we must undertake to do all that we reasonably can to discourage and/or frustrate such an attack. This legislation, while not a cure-all, is an important step in the right direction. I implore my colleagues to join our effort and move quickly to enact this bill into law. America will be better for it.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill and the letter from AAPA be printed in the Record.

Sen. Mary L. LandrieuD-LA · Sep 5, 2003

Mr. President, today I rise to introduce the Environmental Health Research Act. Science has long since shown that the environment plays an important role in an individual's health. We have made the correlation between clean drinking water and a person's well being. We know that there is a link between childhood asthma and unclean air. Through scientific research we have been able to shed light on these findings, and as a society we are healthier form knowing how our environment affects our physical condition, as we are now able to take steps to ameliorate our environment so we can improve our health.

With all of the advancements we have made in recent decades, we must still research further, especially in the area of how the environment affects women's health. There is evidence that shows that environmental factors contribute to numerous diseases in women. For example, there are synthetic chemicals in numerous regularly used pesticides and natural compounds in many plant products in our regular diet that produce compounds that mimic the female hormone estrogen. Many scientists believe that these `environmental estrogens'' may block the natural hormone. If this is true, then environmental estrogens may play a role in diseases such as cancers of the breast, uterus, and ovaries, endometriosis, uterine fibroids, and osteoporosis. As we come into contact with environmental estrogens everyday through eating, drinking, and breathing, it is very important that we have research dedicated to discovering how they may affect women's health.

In addition, 12 million American kids suffer from developmental, learning, or behavioral disabilities. Attention deficit disorder affects three to six percent of our schoolchildren. Research shows that exposure to certain environmental factors during pregnancy may increase the risk of disabilities after birth. The research called for by this bill would help us to answer the many questions raised by the incidence of birth defects in certain environments.

One in three women will be diagnosed with cancer at some point in their lives. Uterine fibroids are present in between 20 and 30 percent of women over the age of 30. Endometriosis affects an estimated 10 to 15 percent of pre-menopausal women. Millions of women are affected every year with diseases that are more than likely linked to the environment. We must further our scientific knowledge in this area. For this reason I ask for your support for the Environmental Health Research Act. Thank you.

I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Sen. Mary L. LandrieuD-LA · Sep 5, 2003

I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Bill Text

Latest available legislative text

Reading Mode

Raw Text PDF

Introduced in SenateIssued September 5, 2003

        [Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1588 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

108th CONGRESS
1st Session
S. 1588

To authorize the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences to
develop multidisciplinary research centers regarding women's health and
disease prevention and conduct and coordinate a research program on
hormone disruption, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

September 5, 2003

Ms. Landrieu introduced the following bill; which was read twice and
referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions

_______________________________________________________________________

A BILL

To authorize the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences to
develop multidisciplinary research centers regarding women's health and
disease prevention and conduct and coordinate a research program on
hormone disruption, and for other purposes.

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 ``Environmental Health Research Act of
2003''.

SEC. 2. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SCIENCES; AWARDS FOR
DEVELOPMENT AND OPERATION OF MULTIDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH
CENTERS REGARDING WOMEN'S HEALTH AND DISEASE PREVENTION.

Subpart 12 of part C of title IV of the Public Health Service Act
(42 U.S.C. 285l et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following
section:

``multidisciplinary research centers regarding women's health and
disease prevention

``Sec. 463B. (a) In General.--The Director of the Institute shall
make grants to public or nonprofit private entities for the development
and operation of not more than 6 centers whose purpose is conducting
multidisciplinary research on environmental factors that may be related
to the development of women's health conditions (as defined in section
486). The Director of the Institute shall carry out this section in
consultation with the Director of the Office of Research on Women's
Health and with the advisory council for the Institute.
``(b) Research, Training, and Information and Education.--
``(1) In general.--Each center under subsection (a) shall,
with respect to the purpose described in such subsection--
``(A) conduct basic and clinical research;
``(B) develop protocols for training physicians,
scientists, nurses, and other health and allied health
professionals;
``(C) conduct training programs for such
individuals;
``(D) develop model continuing education programs
for such professionals; and
``(E) disseminate information to such professionals
and the public.
``(2) Priority for prevention activities.--In carrying out
the activities described in paragraph (1), each center under
subsection (a) shall give priority to activities that are
directed toward preventing the development in women of the
diseases and conditions involved.
``(3) Stipends for training of health professionals.--A
center under subsection (a) may use funds under such subsection
to provide stipends for health and allied health professionals
enrolled in programs described in paragraph (1)(C).
``(c) Collaboration With Community.--Each center under subsection
(a) shall establish and maintain ongoing collaborations with community
organizations in the geographic area served by the center, including
those that represent women with disorders that appear to stem from
environmental factors.
``(d) Coordination of Centers; Reports.--The Director of the
Institute shall, as appropriate, provide for the coordination of
information among centers under subsection (a) and ensure regular
communication between such centers.
``(e) Structure of Center.--Each center assisted under subsection
(a) shall use the facilities of a single institution, or be formed from
a consortium of cooperating institutions, meeting such requirements as
may be prescribed by the Director of the Institute.
``(f) Duration of Support.--Support of a center under subsection
(a) may be for a period not exceeding 5 years. Such period may be
extended for 1 or more additional periods not exceeding 5 years if the
operations of such center have been reviewed by an appropriate
technical and scientific peer review group established by the Director
of the Institute and if such group has recommended to the Director that
such period should be extended.
``(g) Authorization of Appropriations.--For the purpose of carrying
out this section, there are authorized to be appropriated such sums as
may be necessary for fiscal years 2004 through 2007.''.

SEC. 3. AMENDMENT TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE ACT TO PROVIDE FOR
RESEARCH ON HORMONE DISRUPTION.

(a) Findings.--The Congress finds as follows:
(1) Many compounds found or introduced into the environment
by human activity are capable of disrupting the hormone system
of humans and animals. The consequences of such disruption can
be profound because of the crucial role hormones play in
controlling development. No standardized and validated screens
or tests have been developed to routinely and systematically
assess chemicals for disruptive effects on hormone systems.
(2) In the last 30 years, the United States has experienced
an increase in the incidence of such human disorders as
childhood cancers, testicular cancer, hypospadias, juvenile
diabetes, attention deficit-like hyperactivity disorders,
autism, thyroid disorders, and auto-immune disorders. Exposure
to hormone-disrupting chemicals may be contributing to these
increases. The impact on children's health as a result of
prenatal exposures in particular needs further research.
(3) In 2001, the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention's ``National Report on Human Exposure to
Environmental Chemicals'' reported on human exposure to 27
chemicals, and found unexpectedly high levels of certain chemicals used
in consumer products. The hazards to humans of these chemicals, singly
and in combination, are not well understood.
(4) Many wildlife populations have been affected by
hormone-disrupting substances, including birds, fish, reptiles,
and mammals. The effects vary among species and compounds.
(5) The effects in wildlife include thyroid dysfunction,
decreased fertility, decreased hatching success, gross birth
deformities, metabolic and behavioral abnormalities,
demasculinization and feminization of male organisms,
deformation and masculinization of female organisms, and
compromised immune systems. These effects may signal hazards to
human health.
(6) Laboratory studies have corroborated studies of effects
in wildlife and have identified biological mechanisms to
explain the effects shown.
(7) Since the chemicals found in wildlife are also found in
humans, humans are exposed to the same chemicals as wildlife.
(8) Hormone disruption can occur at very low doses,
especially when exposure occurs in the womb or immediately
after birth, periods during which rapid development is
occurring.
(9) In the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 (21 U.S.C.
301 note), Congress recognized the special vulnerability of
infants and children to pesticides and requested that the
Environmental Protection Agency establish a program to screen
and test hormone-disrupting chemicals. The Environmental
Protection Agency has not yet required such screening or tests.
(10) In 1998, a research committee on hormone disrupters,
organized under the auspices of the Office of Science and
Technology Policy, concluded that ``scientific knowledge is
inadequate to fully inform public policy, and a government-wide
coordinated research effort that addresses the key scientific
uncertainties . . . is needed''.
(11) In 1999, in response to a request from Congress and
funded through the Environmental Protection Agency and the
Department of the Interior, the National Academy of Sciences
compiled a lengthy list of research, monitoring, and testing
priorities related to hormone disruption.
(12) The National Institute of Environmental Health
Sciences conducts much of the Federal Government's research on
hormone disruption, often working in partnership with other
agencies.
(13) While recognizing the many contributions of animal
testing to understanding toxic hazards, the Congress also
recognizes the desirability of speeding the use of validated
nonanimal screens and tests (to reduce animal suffering and to
reduce costs) and expediting judgments about hazards from toxic
chemicals.
(14) The United States Geological Survey (referred to in
this section as the ``USGS'') has considerable experience
assessing the occurrence of chemicals in the environment,
ecological health, and the hazards to wildlife health and
associated human health posed by chemicals in the environment,
as a result of monitoring by the USGS of the Nation's water
resources and wildlife disease, and research by the USGS on the
effects of chemicals on wildlife.
(15) The National Academy of Sciences has recognized the
expertise of the USGS in such areas as food web contamination
and water quality assessment and has encouraged more
coordinated work on human health between the USGS and the
National Institutes of Health.
(b) Amendment.--Subpart 12 of part C of title IV of the Public
Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 2851 et seq.), as amended by section 2,
is further amended by adding at the end the following:

``directed national program of research on hormone disruption

``Sec. 463C. (a) Research.--
``(1) In general.--The Director of the Institute shall
establish within the Institute a comprehensive program to--
``(A) conduct research on the impact of chemicals
that affect human health through disruption of the
hormone systems;
``(B) conduct research on the occurrence of
hormone-disrupting chemicals in the environment and
their effects on ecological and wildlife health, in
cooperation with the United States Geological Survey
(referred to in this section as the `USGS');
``(C) coordinate the design of a multiagency
research initiative on hormone disruption;
``(D) coordinate research on hormone disruption in
the United States with such research conducted in other
nations; and
``(E) report to the public every 2 years on the
extent to which hormone disruption by chemicals in the
environment poses a threat to human health and the
environment.
``(2) Issues.--The program established under paragraph (1)
shall provide for the following:
``(A) Collection, compilation, publication, and
dissemination of scientifically valid information on--
``(i) possible human health effects of
hormone-disrupting chemicals, with emphasis on
exposures to low doses of individual chemicals
and chemical mixtures during critical life
stages of development, particularly effects of
prenatal exposures on children's health;
``(ii) the extent of human exposure to
hormone-disrupting chemicals, with particular
emphasis on exposures during critical life
stages of development and in residential and
occupational settings; and
``(iii) exposure of wildlife species to
hormone-disrupting chemicals and possible
health effects associated with such exposures.
``(B) Research on mechanisms by which hormone-
disrupting substances interact with biological systems.
``(C) Research on improved in vitro and in vivo
methods to screen and test hormone disruption.
``(D) Research on the identity, levels, transport,
and fate of hormone-disrupting chemicals in the
environment.
``(b) Director's Duties.--
``(1) In general.--The Director of the Institute shall have
principal responsibility, in consultation with the Director of
the USGS, for conducting and coordinating research on the
effects of hormone-disrupting chemicals on human health and the
environment.
``(2) Agreement.--Not later than 6 months after the date of
enactment of the Environmental Health Research Act of 2003, the
Director of the Institute and the Director of the USGS shall
enter into an agreement to carry out the research program
established under subsection (a).
``(3) Transfer of funds.--The Director of the Institute may
transfer funds to other Federal agencies to carry out the
Director's responsibilities under paragraph (1).
``(4) Report.--The Director of the Institute, in
consultation with the Director of the USGS, shall make
available to the public, every 2 years following the date of
enactment of the Environmental Health Research Act of 2003,
findings and conclusions on the extent to which hormone
disruption by chemicals in the environment poses a threat to
human health and the environment.
``(c) Interagency Commission.--
``(1) Establishment.--The Secretary shall establish a
commission to be known as the Hormone Disruption Research
Interagency Commission (referred to in this section as the
`Interagency Commission') to advise the Director of the
Institute and the Director of the USGS on the development of a
comprehensive agenda for conducting research on hormone
disruption.
``(2) Membership.--The Interagency Commission shall be
composed of 12 members, as follows:
``(A) The Director of the Institute, who shall
serve as the Chairperson.
``(B) The Director of the USGS, who shall serve as
the Vice Chairperson.
``(C) The Commissioner of the Food and Drug
Administration.
``(D) The Director of the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention.
``(E) The Administrator of the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration.
``(F) The Director of the National Institute for
Occupational Safety and Health.
``(G) The Administrator of the Agency for Toxic
Substances and Disease Registry.
``(H) The Director of the Fish and Wildlife
Service.
``(I) The Secretary of Defense.
``(J) The Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency.
``(K) The Chairman of the Consumer Product Safety
Commission.
``(L) The Director of the National Science
Foundation.
``(3) Staff.--Each department or agency represented by a
member on the Interagency Commission shall provide appropriate
staff to carry out the duties of the Interagency Commission.
``(4) Recommendations.--Not later than 12 months after the
date of enactment of the Environmental Health Research Act of
2003, the Interagency Commission shall recommend to the
Director of the Institute and the Director of the USGS a
research program, including levels of funding for intramural
and extramural research.
``(5) Public comment.--The Director of the Institute,
through publication of notice in the Federal Register, shall
provide the general public with an opportunity to comment on
the recommendations of the Interagency Commission.
``(6) Report.--Not later than 4 years after the date of
enactment of the Environmental Health Research Act of 2003, the
Interagency Commission shall conduct a review of the program
established under subsection (a) and submit a report on the
results of such review to the Director of the Institute and to
the Hormone Disruption Research Panel established under
subsection (e).
``(7) Termination.--The Interagency Commission shall
terminate not later than the end of the 5-year fiscal period
described in subsection (h)(1).
``(d) Financial Assistance.--The Director of the Institute may
provide financial assistance and enter into grants, contracts, and
interagency memoranda of understanding to conduct activities under this
section. Research conducted pursuant to interagency memoranda of
understanding may be conducted through intramural and extramural agency
research programs, subject to appropriate scientific peer review.
``(e) Hormone Disruption Research Panel.--
``(1) Establishment.--There is established in the Institute
a Hormone Disruption Research Panel (referred to in this
subsection as the `Panel').
``(2) Duties.--The Panel shall advise the Director of the
Institute concerning the scientific content of the program
established under subsection (a), the progress of such program,
and public outreach, and shall provide such other advice as
requested by the Director of the Institute.
``(3) Membership.--The Panel shall be composed of the
following:
``(A) 15 voting members to be appointed by the
President, in consultation with the Director of the
Institute.
``(B) Such nonvoting, ex officio members as the
Director of the Institute determines to be appropriate.
``(4) Voting members.--Of the 15 voting members of the
Panel--
``(A) at least 2 members shall be from
environmental protection organizations;
``(B) at least 2 members shall be from public
health and consumer organizations;
``(C) at least 2 members shall be from industry;
``(D) at least 1 member shall be from an animal
welfare organization; and
``(E) a majority of the members shall be selected
from among scientists and environmental health
professionals who--
``(i) are not officers or employees of the
United States;
``(ii) represent multiple disciplines,
including clinical, basic, public, and
ecological health sciences;
``(iii) represent different geographical
regions of the United States;
``(iv) are from practice settings, academic
settings, and for-profit or not-for-profit
research settings; and
``(v) have experience in review of research
on endocrine disruption.
``(5) Terms.--The members of the Panel shall be appointed
for an initial term of 3 years and shall be eligible for
reappointment for 1 additional term of 2 years.
``(6) Chairperson.--The members of the Panel appointed
under paragraph (3) shall elect a chairperson from among such
members.
``(7) Meetings.--The Panel shall meet at the call of the
chairperson or upon the request of the Director of the
Institute, but in no case less often than once each year.
``(8) Administrative support.--The Institute shall provide
administrative support to the Panel.
``(9) Termination.--The Panel shall terminate not later
than the end of the 5-year fiscal period described in
subsection (h)(1).
``(f) Conflicts of Interest.--All grants and contracts entered into
under this section shall include conflict-of-interest provisions that
require any person conducting a project under this section to disclose
any other source of funding received by the person to conduct other
related projects.
``(g) Definitions.--For purposes of this section:
``(1) Hormone.--The term `hormone' means a substance
produced in a cell or tissue that triggers a biological
response. Hormone activity may be localized to the cell in
which the substance is produced, or may be in nearby or distant
tissues or organs.
``(2) Hormone disruption.--The term `hormone disruption'
means interference by a substance with the synthesis,
secretion, transport, binding, action, or elimination of
natural hormones in the body that are responsible for the
maintenance of homeostasis, reproduction, development,
function, or behavior.
``(h) Authorization of Appropriations.--
``(1) General authorization.--There are authorized to be
appropriated such sums as may be necessary for the 5-fiscal-
year period beginning with fiscal year 2004 to carry out this
section. Amounts appropriated pursuant to this paragraph shall
remain available until expended.
``(2) Restrictions on use of funds.--
``(A) Construction and rehabilitation of facilities
and equipment.--Not more than 0.5 percent of the funds
made available under this section may be used for the
construction or rehabilitation of facilities or fixed
equipment.
``(B) Administrative expenses of the director.--Of
the total amount of funds made available under this
section for any fiscal year, not more than 2 percent of
such funds may be used for administrative expenses of
the Director of the Institute in carrying out this
section.
``(C) Public outreach.--Of the total amount of
funds made available under this section for any fiscal
year, at least 1 percent, but not more than 5 percent,
shall be used for outreach to the public concerning the
activities and results of the program.''.
<all>