Early Education Act of 2003

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a bill that represents an important step towards the goal of addressing the threats posed by global climate change. I am pleased to be joined on this bill by Senator Jeffords and Senator Lieberman. They were cosponsors of this legislation in the 107th Congress, they are recognized environmental leaders in the Senate, and are long-standing, outspoken advocates for taking action to mitigate climate change. I appreciate their help in introducing this legislation today.

Climate change is a complex issue. Scientifically. Economically. Politically. But complexity is no excuse for inattention or inaction. Because the health and viability of the global ecosystems upon which we all depend are at stake. And the time to act is now.

In 2001, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change released its Third Assessment Report. That report shows that climate change science is increasingly clear and alarming. We know that human activities, primarily fossil fuel combustion, have raised the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide to the highest levels in the last 420,000 years. We know that the planet is warming, and that the balance of the scientific evidence suggests that most of the recent warming can be attributed to increased atmospheric greenhouse gas levels. We know that without concerted action by the U.S. and other countries, greenhouse gases will continue to increase.

These findings were echoed by a National Academy Sciences report published later in 2001, which concluded that: ``Greenhouse gases are accumulating in Earth's atmosphere as a result of human activities, causing surface air temperatures and subsurface ocean temperatures to rise. Temperatures are, in fact, rising. The changes observed over the last several decades are likely mostly due to human activities, but we cannot rule out that some significant part of these changes is also a reflection of natural variability. . . . ``Despite the uncertainties, there is general agreement that the observed warming is real and particularly strong within the past 20 years.''

Climate science and climate modeling have improved. These models predict warming under all scenarios that have been considered. Even the smallest warming predicted by current models, 2.5 degrees Fahrenheit over the next century, would represent the greatest rate of increase in global mean surface temperature in the last 10,000 years.

If these trends continue, the results may be devastating. People in my State of New Jersey treasure their Jersey Shore. With the exception of the 50 mile northern border with New York, New Jersey is surrounded by water. The State's Atlantic coastline stretches 127 miles. Fourteen of 21 counties have estuarine or marine shorelines. Rising sea level is already having adverse impacts, by exacerbating coastal erosion, and causing inundation, flooding, and saline intrusions into ground water. The NJ coastal area also supports one of New Jersey's largest industries, tourism.

Sea level is rising more rapidly along the US coast than worldwide. Studies by EPA and others have estimated that along the Gulf and Atlantic coasts, a one-foot rise in the sea level is likely by 2050 and could occur as soon as 2025. In the next century, a two-foot rise is most likely but a four-foot rise is possible. The implications for New Jersey and many other coastal States are potentially very significant. I am concerned about this impact. And I am concerned about other climate change impacts across New Jersey, the country and the globe.

The time for inaction and delay is over. We need to take steps today to start dealing with this issue. This bill is a modest step. But I think it's an important one, and it's one that I believe we should be able to act on during the 108th Congress.

The main provisions of the bill establish a system that would require companies to estimate and report their emissions of greenhouse gases, and a place where companies can register greenhouse gas emissions reductions. In addition, the bill would require an annual report on U.S. greenhouse gas emissions. I'd like to go through each of these components in more detail.

First, the bill requires EPA to work with the Secretaries of Energy, Commerce and Agriculture, as well as the private sector and non- governmental organizations to establish a greenhouse gas emission information system. For the purposes of the bill, greenhouse gases are carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, and sulfur hexafluoride. EPA is directed to establish threshold quantities for each of these gases. The threshold quantities will trigger the requirement for a company to report to the system, and are included to enable EPA to exclude most small businesses from the reporting requirements.

Companies that emit more than a threshold quantity of each gas will be required to report their emissions on an annual basis to EPA. The requirements will be phased in, beginning with direct, stationary source emissions in 2004. The following year, in 2005, companies subject to the reporting requirements will need to submit to EPA estimates of other types of greenhouse gas

emissions, such as process emissions, fugitive emissions, mobile source emissions, forest product-sensor emissions, and indirect emissions from heat and steam. By reporting to the system, companies will be able to establish emissions baselines.

Perhaps more important than the reporting system is the greenhouse gas registry established by the bill. The bill requires EPA a greenhouse gas registry, which will enable companies to register greenhouse gas reductions. Many companies are voluntarily implementing projects to reduce emissions or sequester carbon. The registry would establish a place for companies to be able to put these projects on public record in a consistent and reliable way.

Taken together, these provisions of the bill will accomplish several important goals. First, they will create a reliable inventory of the sources of greenhouse gas emissions within our economy. But more importantly, these provisions will provide a powerful incentive for companies to continue to make voluntary greenhouse gas reductions. The reason is that the greenhouse registry will be a place where companies can register their greenhouse gas reductions in a consistent and uniform way. This will enable companies to publicly verify the actions they are taking to reduce their emissions. It also provides a place where farmers, ranchers and foresters can register their carbon sequestration projects. They can then trade these registered reductions with any companies that might wish to purchase them. This had the potential to create a new carbon market that our farmers can benefit from.

Prior efforts to provide ``future credits'' in a registry bill have run up against a Constitutional problem in that we cannot bind future Congresses in legislation. So the bill does not provide such credits, per se. But it does establish a robust and credible reporting system and registry. And if companies register their reductions in a strong registry, they will have as much assurance as we can provide them that their reductions will be taken into account if a mandatory greenhouse gas emission reduction program is enacted.

I believe that such a mandatory emissions reduction program will be necessary, and I already support such a program, for example, Senator Jeffords' Clean Power Act. I don't believe that a reporting and registry system such as I am proposing is a substitute for such a mandatory emissions reductions program. But a reporting and registry system is a necessary component of any such program, and is a step that Congress may be able to agree on now, despite differences of opinion about whether mandatory emissions reductions are necessary at this time. A greenhouse gas reporting system and registry is a step we ought to take now, because it would provide a structure that encourages companies to make voluntary reductions now. That's the main purpose of the bill.

In addition, the bill requires EPA to annually publish a U.S. greenhouse gas emissions inventory. This will be a national account of greenhouse gas emissions for our nation, and will incorporate the information submitted to the greenhouse gas information system and registry. EPA has issued a similar report for several years now, and this provision is intended to explicitly authorize and specify the scope of that report going forward.

I want to add that I think that many of the emissions measurement challenges have been worked out or are being worked out now. Many advances have been made in recent years, often in a cooperative way, with industry, environmental groups and governments at the table working towards measurement protocols, such as the GHG Protocol Initiative. It's my intent that in developing the systems and protocols developed under this bill that EPA take advantage of the best practices that have been and continue to be developed in this fashion.

I first introduced this bill in December 2001. Since that time, I think it's fair to say that the Bush Administration has done literally nothing of consequence to address the climate change threat. But I think that there are many in industry who disagree with the Bush policy. Last September 16, the Pew Center ran an ad in the Washington Post that was signed by 40 major companies, including energy producers such as American Electric Power, BP, Cinergy, Entergy, and Sunoco. In that ad, these companies stated their support for policies to ``disclose major sources of greenhouse gas emissions and recognize early action.'' In addition, ExxonMobil stated in their 2002 report, ``Corporate Citizenship in a Changing World,'' that they are ``working with governments and industry associations to promote development of procedures for mandatory reporting by all businesses, so that in the future we can report emissions for activities we operate and also those in which we share ownership with others.'' So there is a willingness on the part of many major U.S. corporations to move to emissions reporting. Congress needs to follow the leads of these companies.

I also want to note that I worked on a bipartisan greenhouse gas registry and reporting bill with Senator Brownback last year. That bill passed the Senate by voice vote as a Brownback-Corzine amendment to the Senate energy bill. While it did not require reporting immediately, it ensured robust participation in the reporting and registry system in the near future through a trigger mechanism. And while I preferred a mandatory system, and still do, I am primarily concerned with getting results. And the Brownback-Corzine approach had the support of the full Senate. So while I still prefer a mandatory system, as this bill would create, I remain willing and open to work with Senator Brownback on an alternative again in this Congress.

In closing, it's clear that it's up to Congress to lead on climate change. I urge my colleagues to work with me this Congress to create a credible greenhouse gas reporting and registry system that will encourage voluntary reductions. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize a most distinguished public servant, Mr. David E. Schaffer, Senior Counsel on the Transportation Committee's Aviation Subcommittee. Mr. Schaffer is retiring after twenty-six years of Federal service, including the past 20 years with the Committee. His unmatched knowledge in the field of aviation, as well as his engaging personality, will be sorely missed in the halls of Congress. David's work stands as a prime example of the good that can be accomplished through public service. The American people have been quite fortunate to have Mr. Schaffer's expertise and guidance throughout his career. Every single aviation law passed in the last two decades is marked with David's creative ideas and approaches. As an attachment to my remarks, a list of all aviation laws passed during David's tenure is included.

David's ability to work with people on both sides of the aisle serves as a major reason for the overwhelming bipartisan support aviation legislation has gathered over the last twenty years. His evenhanded and steady demeanor, as well as his thoughtful approach to a matter ensures that all ideas are heard, and that every opinion is considered. The relationships that David has cultivated among both government and industry officials has allowed for a free exchange of ideas on a wide variety of issues. Such exchanges have helped foster the growth of our nation's aviation industry. He has earned an immeasurable amount of respect from everyone with whom he has worked, including Members of Congress, staff, and those in the transportation community.

David began his career in public service in 1978, when he joined the Office of General Counsel of the Civil Aeronautics Board as an attorney, specializing in rules, legislation, and litigation involving small community air service, international air service, consumer protection, and charters. In 1984, he began work with the Aviation Subcommittee as an Assistant Minority Counsel, becoming the Chief Minority Counsel in 1992, and Majority Counsel in 1995. Throughout his tenure with the Aviation Subcommittee, he has been involved in all aspects of aviation legislation, including safety, security, airline competition, international air service, the Airport Improvement Program, air traffic control modernization, Federal Aviation Administration reform, and oversight of the Federal Aviation Administration, Transportation Security Administration, and the National Transportation Safety Board.

David's leadership proved critical in the weeks following the events of September 11, 2001. His experience played an essential role in creating the Aviation and Transportation Security Act, which helped restore confidence to the flying public. In a most precarious time for our nation, we were extremely fortunate to have someone like David Schaffer assisting us. Most recently, his assistance led to the successful passage of Vision 100, the FAA Reauthorization Act, which will have a lasting effect on the aviation industry for years to come.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all of my colleagues to join me in celebrating the retirement of David Schaffer, and wish him well in whatever venture he seeks next. I would also like to offer an extended note of gratitude on behalf of the previous Chairmen of the Transportation Committee and Aviation Subcommittee whom David has served with great distinction. We wish you good luck and again say thank you for all you have done for both the Congress as well as the American people.

Aviation Laws Passed During David Schaffer's Tenure

108th Congress

H.R. 2115, Vision 100--Century of Aviation Reauthorization

Act

S. 579, National Transportation Safety Board

Reauthorization Act of 2003

107th Congress

H.R. 2926, Air Transportation Safety and System

Stabilization Act

S. 1447, Aviation and Transportation Security Act

106th Congress

H.R. 1000, Wendell H. Ford Aviation Investment and Reform

Act for the 21st Century

S. 2440, Airport Security Improvement Act of 2000

105th Congress

H.R. 2476, To amend title 49, United States Code, to

require the National Transportation Safety Board and

individual foreign air carriers to address the needs of

families of passengers involved in aircraft accidents

involving foreign air carriers.

H.R. 2626, To make clarifications to the Pilot Records

Improvement Act of 1996, and for other purposes.

H.R. 2843, Aviation Medical Assistance Act of 1998

104th Congress

H.R. 3159, National Transportation Safety Board Amendments

of 1996

H.R. 3539, Federal Aviation Authorization Act of 1996

103rd Congress

H.R. 904, To amend the Airport and Airway Safety, Capacity,

Noise Improvement, and Inter-nodal Transportation Act of 1992

with respect to the establishment of the National Commission

to Ensure a Strong Competitive Airline Industry.

H.R. 2440, Independent Safety Board Act Amendments of 1994

H.R. 2739, Federal Aviation Administration Authorization

Act of 1994

S. 1458, General Aviation Revitalization Authorization Act

of 1994

102nd Congress

H.R. 5481, FAA Civil Penalty Administrative Assessment Act

of 1992

H.R. 6168, Airport and Airway Safety, Capacity, Noise

Improvement, and Intermodal Transportation Act of 1992

101st Congress

H.R. 968, Noise Reduction Reimbursement Act of 1989

H.R. 5732, Aviation Security Improvement Act of 1990

H.R. 3671, To amend the Federal Aviation Act of 1958 to

extend the civil penalty assessment demonstration program.

H.R. 5131, To amend the Federal Aviation Act of 1958 to

extend the civil penalty assessment demonstration program,

and for other purposes.

100th Congress

H.R. 2310, Airport and Airway Improvement Amendments of

1987

S. 623, Independent Safety Board Act Amendments of 1987

S. 1628, An original bill to extend the Aviation Insurance

Program for 5 years

99th Congress

S. 2703, Air Carrier Access Act of 1986

98th Congress

H.R. 5297, Civil Aeronautics Board Sunset Act of 1984

S. 197, A bill to direct the Secretary of the Department of

Transportation to conduct an independent study to determine

the adequacy of certain industry practices and Federal

Aviation Administration rules and regulations, and for other

purposes.

S. 1146, Aviation Drug-Trafficking Control Act

Mr. President, today I rise with my colleagues--Senators McCain, Stevens, Hollings and Miller to introduce the Digital & Wireless Network Technology Program Act of 2003.

Access to the Internet is no longer a luxury, but a necessity. Because of the rapid advancement and growing dependence on technology, being digitally connected becomes more essential to economic and educational advancement. 60 percent of all jobs require information technology skills and jobs in information technology pay significantly higher salaries than jobs in non-information technology fields. People who lack access to information technology tools are at an increasing disadvantage. Consequently, it is important that all institutions of higher education provide their students with access to the most current information technology and digital equipment.

As Governor of Virginia, I implemented a technology plan that created a blueprint of technology resources throughout the Virginia Community College System, VCCS. All 38 community college campuses are wired and each community college has a dedicated Commonwealth Classroom for compressed video distance education classes. Arrangements with Old Dominion University, Christopher Newport University, Virginia Tech and other institutions are offering senior level courses through distance education that actually take place on the community college campus.

Minority Serving Institutions, however, still lack basic information and digital technology infrastructure. A study completed by the Department of Commerce and the National Association for Equal Opportunity in Higher Education showed that most Historically Black Colleges and Universities do not have high-speed Internet access, and only 3 percent of these colleges and universities indicated that financial aid was available to help their students close the computer ownership gap, the digital divide.

The Digital & Wireless Network Technology Program Act of 2003 seeks to address the technology gap that exists at many Minority Serving Institutions, MSIs. Our legislation establishes a new grant program within the National Science Foundation, NSF, that provides up to $250 million to help Historically Black Colleges and Universities, Hispanic Serving Institutions, and Tribal Colleges bridge the digital divide.

The legislation allows eligible institutions the opportunity through grants, contracts or cooperative agreements to acquire equipment, instrumentation, networking capability,

hardware and software, digital network technology and wireless technology/infrastructure, such as wireless fidelity or WiFi, to develop and provide educational services. Additionally, the grants could be used for such activities as equipment upgrades, technology training and hardware/software acquisition. A Minority Serving Institution also could use the funds to offer its students universal access to campus networks, dramatically increase their connectivity rates, or make necessary infrastructure improvements.

Virginia has five Historically Black Colleges and Universities: Hampton University, Norfolk State University, St. Paul's College, Virginia Union University and Virginia State University.

The best jobs in the future will go to those who are the best prepared. However, I am increasingly concerned that when it comes to high technology jobs which pay higher wages this country runs the risk of economically limiting many college students in our society. It is important for ALL Americans that we close this opportunity gap. Since my election to the Senate, my goal has always been to continue the work that I began as Governor, to look for ways to improve education, create jobs and seek out new opportunities to benefit Virginia and its citizens. By improving technology-education programs, we can accomplish all three for students throughout our nation.

I want to thank my colleagues for joining me today cosponsoring this legislation and look forward to working with fellow Senators to push this important measure across the goal-line so that many more college students are provided access to better technology and education, and most importantly, even greater opportunities in life.

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

During this era of economic slowdown and global threat, it is imperative that our Nation's institutions of higher education are prepared to produce a technologically advanced workforce. Rita Colwell, Director of the National Science Foundation, NSF, stated in a recent letter to new Members of Congress that ``. . . American science and technology is failing to tap a vast pool of talent among our women and ethnic minorities.''

As the demographics of the Nation become more and more diverse, minority institutions of higher education take on an even greater importance. It is estimated that in 10 years, minorities will comprise 40 percent of the college-age Americans, the pool from which the Nation's future engineers and scientists will emerge. Therefore, to tap this underutilized pool of future engineers and scientists, it is essential to provide assistance to these minority institutions. The hundreds of minority-serving institutions, MSI, which include Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU), Hispanic-serving institutions, and tribal colleges and universities, should be provided with the resources to ensure that we are indeed utilizing their large student populations.

I am pleased to join Senator Allen and the other sponsors in introducing the Digital and Wireless Network Technology Act of 2003. This legislation would create an office at the NSF to draw upon its resources to strengthen the ability of MSIs to provide instructions in digital and wireless network technologies.

The legislation is not the result of any special interest groups or highly financial lobbying efforts. It is based upon data provided by 80 of the 118 HBCUs in a study, entitled ``HBCU Technology Assessment Study,'' funded by the U.S. Department of Commerce and conducted by a national black college association and minority business. The study assessed the computing resources, networking, and connectivity of HBCUs and other institutions that provide educational services to predominately African-American populations.

The study concluded that ``during this era of continuous innovation and change, continual upgrading of networking and connectivity systems is critical if HBCUs are to continue to cross the digital divide and not fall victim to it. Failure to do this may result in what is a manageable digital divide today, evolving into an unmanageable digital gulf tomorrow.'' I believe there is reason to conclude that the findings from the study also would apply to Hispanic-serving institutions, and tribal colleges and universities.

This bill would build upon the work of Senator Cleland and many others during the last Congress. In testimony before the Commerce Committee last year, the president of the United Negro College Fund, Congressman William Gray, stated that we can ill afford to promote college graduates who enter the workforce without mastering the basic computer skills and understanding how information technology applies to their work or profession.

I feel it is imperative that we do all we can to improve the quality of education for students at our minority serving institutions. These institutions will continue to play an important role in providing the Nation with a well-educated and talented workforce.

Mr. President, I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Mr. President, today I am introducing the Underground Storage Tank Compliance Act of 2003. While this bill is being introduced today, it already has a long history. The Superfund Subcommittee conducted two hearings on the bill last year. We have received solid testimony and input from interested parties throughout this process, and I believe that this measure goes a long way toward solving the problems we face with leaking underground storage tanks. In addition, the language in this bill was approved unanimously by the Environment and Public Works Committee in the 107th Congress.

The chief reason for pursuing this legislation today is to improve compliance with the December 22, 1998 deadline for tank owners and operators to upgrade, replace, or close tanks that didn't meet minimum Federal requirements. To assess the situation, I asked the U.S. General Accounting Office in April, 2000 to examine compliance of tanks with Federal requirements. GAO concluded in May, 2001 that approximately 76,000 tanks have never been upgraded to meet minimum Federal standards. In addition, GAO found that more than 200,000 tanks are not being operated and maintained properly due, in part, to infrequent tank inspections and limited funding.

Leaking tanks can have severe impacts on local communities. For example, the village of Pascoag, Rhode Island learned the hard way that the problems GAO outlined are real and have serious consequences. Twelve hundred households were without water with which to drink, bathe, or cook for over four months because MTBE contaminated fuel from a local gasoline station was leaking into the town's drinking water supply.

I believe the Underground Storage Tank Compliance Act of 2003 will assist communities that are grappling with these problems and will prevent such problems from recurring. The high cost of clean-up once a tank has leaked, demands the emphasis on prevention included in this legislation. The bill requires the inspection of all underground storage tanks every two years and for the first time focuses on the training of tank operators. It simply does not make sense to install modern, protective equipment if the people who operate them do not have the proper training. The bill also provides the Federal Government and States with the tools necessary to ensure that all parties are meeting Federal standards. In addition, the legislation emphasizes compliance of tanks owned by Federal, State, and local governments, and provides $125 million per year for cleanup of sites contaminated by MTBE.

This bill enjoys broad support, including the support of the regulated community and the environmental community. We have worked extensively with the Administration to address issues raised by the Environmental Protection Agency. I believe that this legislation goes a long way toward solving many of the problems relating to leaking tanks, and I thank all of my colleagues for working with me on this.

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