H.R. 2631House111th Congress (2009-2011)In Committee

Affordable Gas Price Act

Legislative Activity

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

6 earlier actions

HouseCommittee Latest Action

Referred to the Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources.

Energy and Mineral Resources Subcommittee

June 2, 2009

View full timeline

HouseIntro Referral

Introduced in House

May 21, 2009

HouseIntro Referral

Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E1247)

May 21, 2009

HouseIntro Referral

Referred to House Ways and Means

Ways and Means Committee

May 21, 2009

HouseIntro Referral

Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committees on Natural Resources, and Financial Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.

May 21, 2009

HouseIntro Referral

Referred to House Natural Resources

Natural Resources Committee

May 21, 2009

HouseIntro Referral

Referred to House Financial Services

Financial Services Committee

May 21, 2009

HouseCommittee

Referred to the Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources.

Energy and Mineral Resources Subcommittee

June 2, 2009

Floor Debate

7 members

What members said about H.R. 2631 on the floor

3 Republicans4 Democrats

Rep. Yvette D. ClarkeD-NY-11 · Jan 20, 2010

Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and concur in the Senate amendment to the bill (H.R. 730) to strengthen efforts in the Department of Homeland Security to develop nuclear forensics…

Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and concur in the Senate amendment to the bill (H.R. 730) to strengthen efforts in the Department of Homeland Security to develop nuclear forensics capabilities to permit attribution of the source of nuclear material, and for other purposes.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and to insert extraneous material on the bill under consideration.

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of concurring in the Senate amendment to H.R. 730.

H.R. 730, the Nuclear Forensics and Attribution Act, was first introduced in the 110th Congress by the gentleman from California (Mr. Schiff).

To strengthen our Nation's ability to prepare for and to respond to a conventional nuclear or dirty bomb threat, that measure, H.R. 2631, was marked up and adopted unanimously by the Subcommittee on Emerging Threats, Cybersecurity, and Science and Technology in October 2007, which is the subcommittee I now chair.

It was unanimously approved by the full Committee on Homeland Security on May 20, 2008, and in the House of Representatives on June 18, 2008. Though the measure was taken up, amended and passed by the Senate in late September, the stars didn't align, and it didn't clear the last hurdle to arrive on the President's desk. In this Congress, we started early and brought the measure directly to the floor where it passed on March 24, 2009. Now the Senate has acted, and it is time to pass this bill into law.

I would like to congratulate Congressman Schiff and my colleagues on the committee for recognizing the need to move quickly.

We know that our enemies, both terrorists and rogue nations, are interested in developing and using nuclear or radiological weapons. In the case of an attempted or, heaven forbid, a successful nuclear or radiological attack, rapid attribution is critical. Our government must have the capacity to quickly determine the source of the nuclear material so that key decision-makers have the information needed to respond.

The deterrent effect of a robust nuclear forensics capability should not be underestimated. Certainly, if terrorists know that we have a nuclear forensics capability that can pinpoint their role in creating a bomb, they are bound to have second thoughts. Unfortunately, today, the U.S. must rely on forensic expertise and technology developed during the Cold War to address both nuclear weapons and the emerging threat of a radiological dirty bomb.

The nuclear weapons workforce is aging just as its mission has shifted from traditional deterrent policy to the more complicated challenge of containing the terrorist threat. Our Nation's capabilities in the scientific fields of radiochemistry and geochemistry must be fostered to meet this new threat. That is the purpose of this bill. H.R. 730 expresses the sense of Congress that the President should pursue international agreements and develop protocols to share sensitive information needed to identify the source of a nuclear detonation.

I am heartened that the Obama administration has indicated its willingness to engage in and to reenergize such activities.

It also tasks the Secretary of Homeland Security with the mission of developing methods to attribute nuclear or radiological material both within the Department's Domestic Nuclear Detection Office, DNDO, and in partnership with other Federal agencies.

The legislation emphasizes that the development of a robust nuclear forensics capability depends chiefly on an expertly trained workforce in this area, and it provides support for education programs relevant to nuclear forensics.

H.R. 730 also authorizes the National Technical Nuclear Forensics Center, NTNFC, to enhance the centralized planning and integration of Federal nuclear forensics activities. It requires the Secretary to report annually to Congress on the Federal Government's efforts to enhance its nuclear forensics capabilities, including the status of workforce development programs; and it authorizes $30 million per year for the next 3 fiscal years for this effort.

H.R. 730 continues the Homeland Security Committee's practice of authorizing programs and offices within DHS that are of value to the agency's mission in order to assure that the work can continue and that progress can be achieved in the years to come.

I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Schiff), the author of this bill.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

In closing, I would encourage my colleagues to vote ``aye'' on the pending question. Doing so will allow this important homeland security legislation to be sent to the President's desk for his signature without delay.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Rep. Adam B. SchiffD-CA-29 · Mar 24, 2009

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank and congratulate my colleagues on the Homeland Security Committee and Chairman Thompson, and my colleague from California, Mr. Lungren. I appreciate all their…

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank and congratulate my colleagues on the Homeland Security Committee and Chairman Thompson, and my colleague from California, Mr. Lungren. I appreciate all their support. The committee has taken an important step forward in preventing nuclear terrorism by persevering with this legislation. I appreciate all the hard work that has gone into it.

Countries around the world now have access to technology that was once the realm of the few, and dangerous nuclear materials are sprinkled around the world. It seems that each week brings evidence of the connection between North Korea and a serious nascent nuclear program, and we are still unraveling the details of the nuclear smuggling ring headed by A.Q. Khan 5 years after it was uncovered.

This is not a new problem. Illicit nuclear material has been intercepted in transit out of the former Soviet Union many times since the end of the Cold War, and the material we catch is surely just a small fraction of the total amount trafficked.

Last week, Graham Allison wrote in Newsweek that ``the only thing that can keep nuclear bombs out of the hands of terrorists is a brand new science of nuclear forensics.'' During the Cold War, we forestalled a Soviet nuclear attack with the threat of retaliation. But the decentralized flexible terror networks that we face today are not as easily deterred. A terrorist attack will also not leave a missile contrail pointed back toward those responsible.

As Allison writes: ``The key to a new deterrent is coming up with some way of tracing the nuclear material backward from an explosion in New York City, for example, to the reactor that forged the fissile material, even to the mines that yielded the original uranium ore.'' The Nuclear Forensics and Attribution Act is designed to do just that. The act is aimed at decisionmakers in North Korea, Pakistan, Iran and elsewhere who could sell nuclear material, as well as the smugglers and corrupt officials around the world who could steal it. Those parts of the nuclear network can be deterred by the knowledge that if their material is found, the U.S. will find out and hold them responsible.

The first part of this bill expands our ability to determine the source of nuclear material by authorizing the National Technical Nuclear Forensic Center in the Department of Homeland Security. This center will coordinate the various agencies and ensure an efficient, combined response when nuclear material is intercepted or, God forbid, used in a weapon. It will also advance the science of nuclear forensics, bringing in new radiochemists and physicists to rejuvenate a rapidly aging workforce, and funding research on new methods to identify materials.

But this bill also has another purpose. As with fingerprints or DNA, the strength of nuclear forensics depends on the strength of our database. Nuclear material can come from many nations, some friendly, some unfriendly, and the individual recipes are closely guarded secrets. However, little of the information needed for forensics is of direct use to adversaries, so in many cases the risk of not sharing the data is much greater than the risk of sharing it.

To build a nuclear forensics database, the bill asks the President to negotiate agreements with other nations to share forensic data on their nuclear materials, both civilian and military. This effort is vital, and the National Technical Forensic Center must play a key role in the negotiations to ensure that the data we obtain is the data necessary for quick attribution and response.

Nuclear terrorism is a vague threat of devastating consequence and, therefore, difficult to guard against. But as communications and transportation revolutions bring us ever closer to our allies, they bring us closer to our enemies as well. I believe this bill will help make sure that our ability to prevent a nuclear attack keeps up with our enemies' ability to prosecute one.

Again, I want to thank Chairman Thompson for his leadership and urge all Members to support the bill.

I thank the gentleman for yielding. I just wanted to thank my colleague, Mr. McCaul, for his help when he was chairing the subcommittee and the improvements that he made to the bill. I wanted to acknowledge and appreciate all your efforts.

Rep. Daniel E. LungrenR-CA-3 · Mar 24, 2009

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, as the ranking member of the Homeland Security Subcommittee on Emerging Threats, Cybersecurity, and Science and Technology, I am…

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, as the ranking member of the Homeland Security Subcommittee on Emerging Threats, Cybersecurity, and Science and Technology, I am pleased to see this important bipartisan legislation once again come up for a vote.

In the last Congress, we spent a great deal of time discussing the efforts of the Department of Homeland Security's Domestic Nuclear Detection Office, or DNDO, to deploy radiation portal monitors at our Nation's ports of entry. These monitors, staffed by Customs and Border Protection officers, are the Nation's primary defense against illicit trafficking of nuclear and radiological material. DNDO continues to improve these technologies, and I hope that we will be supportive of their efforts.

Yet terrorists could overcome even the best detection systems. As we know, no technology is 100 percent sensitive. Border areas between official ports of entry also remain vulnerable. For this reason, defense against terrorism requires a multilayered approach, as it does in so many other areas. This bill is a strategy to add another layer. It will fortify our national capabilities in technical nuclear forensics, a science that plays a key role in the attribution of nuclear material to its source. It enumerates a variety of responsibilities for the department to advance and sustain a technical nuclear forensics capability, and it authorizes the National Technical Nuclear Forensic Center to undertake this mission.

A key component is language designed to strengthen the pipeline of talented new scientists into this field. In recent years, as we know, the number of young people entering science has declined throughout this Nation. Nuclear fields in particular are suffering, especially harmful to nuclear forensics. This bill therefore instructs the Department to establish a National Nuclear Forensics Expertise Development Program devoted to developing and maintaining a vibrant and enduring pipeline of scientific professionals. The program will grant scholarships and fellowships from the undergraduate through postgraduate and doctorate level in nuclear and geochemical science specialties directly relevant to technical nuclear forensics.

Yet, Mr. Speaker, we must remember that forensics is only one component of attribution. Success also requires credible intelligence and law enforcement-style investigation. All of these components together comprise a credible attribution program that will serve as a deterrent against nuclear terrorism.

The detonation of a nuclear device in a populated region of this country would be catastrophic in the truest sense of the word. It is indeed my greatest fear. We must have a layered system of defenses to deter, detect, disrupt and recover from terrorist attacks. This legislation will reinvigorate the scientific workforce and improve our defenses against nuclear and radiological terrorism.

I urge my colleagues to support this bill and improve our much-needed U.S. nuclear forensic capability.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, at this time I would be happy to grant 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. McCaul).

Mr. Speaker, if I might inquire, does the gentleman have any other speakers?

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, this is an important piece of legislation. This deals with one aspect of what I consider to be perhaps the greater threat we have to our homeland and that is nuclear weapons, nuclear material that could be made into weapons to be utilized against the United States and its citizens.

We need to do more in the area of nuclear nonproliferation. We need to do more in the area of negotiations with Russia, it seems to me, and bringing down our overall stockpiles. We need to do more in terms of invigorating or reinvigorating Nunn-Lugar. All of those are elements of an approach that is necessary to us.

This bill takes on a slightly different aspect of that same threat that is out there. It is necessary, it is important, and I hope we will have the unanimous support of the membership for this.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Rep. Adam B. SchiffD-CA-29 · Jan 20, 2010

Madam Speaker, at the outset, I want to thank and congratulate the Homeland Security Committee and Chairman Thompson. The committee has taken an important step forward towards preventing nuclear…

Madam Speaker, at the outset, I want to thank and congratulate the Homeland Security Committee and Chairman Thompson. The committee has taken an important step forward towards preventing nuclear terrorism by persevering with this legislation, and I appreciate all of the hard work that the chairman and staff have put into it.

I also want to thank other Members who have contributed greatly to the effort, one being the ranking member, Peter King.

Mr. King, once again, I thank you for your leadership in this area.

I want to thank the former chairman of the Emerging Threats Subcommittee, an early supporter, Jim Langevin; the current chairwoman of that subcommittee, Yvette Clarke; as well as the ranking member of the subcommittee, Dan Lungren; and in the last Congress, Michael McCaul.

The Nuclear Forensics and Attribution Act will help us fight one of the most important national security threats we face, that of nuclear proliferation. Countries around the world now have access to technology that was once the realm of the few; and dangerous nuclear materials are, unfortunately, sprinkled around the world. This is not a new problem. Illicit nuclear material has been intercepted in transit out of the former Soviet Union many times since the end of the Cold War, and the material we catch is surely only a small fraction of the total amount trafficked.

Last year, Graham Allison wrote in Newsweek that the only thing that could keep nuclear bombs out of the hands of terrorists is a brand-new science of nuclear forensics. He continued that the key to a new deterrent is coming up with some way of tracing the nuclear material backward from an explosion in New York City to the reactor that forged the fissile material, even to the mines that yielded the original uranium ore.

The Nuclear Forensics and Attribution Act is designed to do just that. It is aimed at the decision-makers in

North Korea, Pakistan, Iran or elsewhere who could sell nuclear material, as well as the smugglers and corrupt officials around the world who could steal it. Those parts of the nuclear network can be deterred by the knowledge that, if their material is later intercepted, the United States will find out and will hold them responsible.

This bill expands our ability to determine the source of nuclear material by authorizing the National Technical Nuclear Forensics Center in the Department of Homeland Security. This center will coordinate the various agencies, and it will ensure an efficient combined response when nuclear material is intercepted or used, God forbid, in a weapon. It will also advance the science of nuclear forensics, bringing in new radiochemists and physicists to rejuvenate a rapidly aging workforce and funding research on new methods to identify materials. It also takes an important step toward building the nuclear forensic database we will need to effectively track nuclear material.

The bill asks the President to negotiate agreements with other nations to share forensic data on their nuclear materials, both civilian and military.

This effort is vital, and the National Technical Nuclear Forensics Center must play a key role in negotiations to ensure that the data we obtain is the data we need for quick attribution and response.

Nuclear terrorism is an indistinct threat of devastating consequence and therefore difficult to guard against. But as communications and transportation revolutions bring us ever closer to our allies, they bring our enemies close as well. I believe this bill will help make sure that our ability to prevent a nuclear terror attack keeps up with our enemies' ability to attempt one.

Again, I want to thank the chairman and ranking member for their leadership and urge all Members to support the bill.

Rep. Bennie G. ThompsonD-MS-2 · Mar 24, 2009

Mr. Speaker, H.R. 730, the ``Nuclear Forensics and Attribution Act,'' was first introduced in the 110th Congress by the gentleman from California, Mr. Schiff. That measure, H.R. 2631, was marked up…

Mr. Speaker, H.R. 730, the ``Nuclear Forensics and Attribution Act,'' was first introduced in the 110th Congress by the gentleman from California, Mr. Schiff.

That measure, H.R. 2631, was marked up and adopted unanimously by the Subcommittee on Emerging Threats, Cybersecurity, and Science and Technology in October 2007.

It was unanimously approved by the Full Committee on Homeland Security on May 20 of 2008 and the House of Representatives on June 18, 2008.

Though the measure was taken up, amended, and passed by the Senate in late September, the stars didn't align and it didn't clear the last hurdle to arrive on the President's desk.

This Congress, we are getting out of the gate early, in hopes of ensuring that this critical homeland security legislation becomes law.

I would like to congratulate Congressman Schiff, my colleagues on the Committee for recognizing the need to move quickly.

We know that our enemies, both terrorists and rogue nations, are interested in developing and using nuclear or radiological weapons.

In the case of an attempted or, heaven forbid, a successful nuclear or radiological attack, rapid attribution is critical.

Our government must have the capacity to quickly determine the source of the nuclear material so that the key decision-makers have the information needed to respond.

The deterrent effect of a robust nuclear forensics capability should not be underestimated.

Certainly, if terrorists know that we have a nuclear forensics capability that can pinpoint their role in creating a bomb, they are bound to have second thoughts.

Unfortunately, today, the U.S. must rely on forensic expertise and technology developed during the Cold War to address both nuclear weapons and the emerging threat of a radiological ``dirty'' bomb.

The nuclear weapons workforce is aging just as its mission has shifted from traditional deterrence policy to the more complicated challenge of containing the terrorist threat.

Our Nation's capabilities in the scientific fields of radio-chemistry and geo-chemistry must be fostered to meet this new threat.

That is the purpose of this bill.

H.R. 730 expresses the sense of Congress that the President should pursue international agreements and develop protocols to share sensitive information needed to identify the source of a nuclear detonation.

I am heartened that the Obama Administration has indicated its willingness to engage in and re-energize such activities.

It also tasks the Secretary of Homeland Security with the mission of developing methods to attribute nuclear or radiological material--both within the Department's Domestic Nuclear Detection Office, DNDO, and in partnership with other Federal agencies.

The legislation emphasizes that the development of a robust nuclear forensics capability depends chiefly on an expertly trained workforce in this area and provides support for education programs relevant to nuclear forensics.

H.R. 730 also--authorizes the National Technical Nuclear Forensics Center, NTNFC, to enhance centralized planning and integration of Federal nuclear forensics activities; requires the Secretary to report annually to Congress on the Federal Government's efforts to enhance its nuclear forensics capabilities, including the status of workforce development programs; and authorizes $30 million per year for the next three fiscal years for this effort.

I urge my colleagues to support the bill.

Show 3 more

Rep. Christopher P. CarneyD-PA-10 · Mar 24, 2009

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 730) to strengthen efforts in the Department of Homeland Security to develop nuclear forensics capabilities to permit attribution of…

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and insert extraneous material on the bill under consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I submit for the Record an exchange of letters between the chairman of the Committee on Homeland Security and the distinguished chairs of the Committees on Foreign Affairs and Science and Technology.

Committee on Foreign Affairs,

House of Representatives,

Washington, DC, March 20, 2009.

Hon. Bennie G. Thompson,

Chairman, Committee on Homeland Security, Ford House Office

Building, Washington, DC.

Dear Mr. Chairman: I am writing to you regarding H.R. 730,

the Nuclear Forensics and Attribution Act, introduced on

January 27, 2009, by Congressman Adam B. Schiff. This

legislation was initially referred to the Committee on

Homeland Security and, in addition, to the Committee on

Foreign Affairs.

In the interest of permitting your Committee to proceed

expeditiously to floor consideration of this important

legislation, I am willing to waive further consideration of

H.R. 730. I do so with the understanding that by waiving

consideration of the bill, the Committee on Foreign Affairs

does not waive any future jurisdictional claim over the

subject matters contained in the bill which fall within its

rule X jurisdiction.

Further, I request your support for the appointment of

Foreign Affairs Committee conferees during any House-Senate

conference convened on this legislation. I also ask that a

copy of this letter and your response be placed in the

committee report for H.R. 730 and in the Congressional Record

during consideration of this bill.

I look forward to working with you as we move this

important measure through the legislative process.

Sincerely,

Howard L. Berman,

Chairman.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California, the author of the bill, Mr. Schiff.

I yield the gentleman an additional 90 seconds.

Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve.

I do not believe we have any more speakers.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from California (Mr. Schiff).

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I might consume.

Mr. Speaker, I urge passage of H.R. 730, the Nuclear Forensics and Attribution Act. I would like to congratulate Congressman Schiff, Emerging Threats Subcommittee Chairwoman Yvette Clarke, and her predecessor, Jim Langevin, for the thoughtful approach they have taken on this critical homeland security concern.

I would like to thank our members on the other side as well. This is a bipartisan issue that certainly does not cross party lines. It affects everyone. Given the catastrophic consequences of a nuclear weapon, it is imperative that the U.S. have a state-of-the-art nuclear forensics capability.

While a nuclear bomb is commonly referred to as a weapon of mass destruction, a radiological dirty bomb is better described as a weapon of mass disruption. A dirty bomb, if detonated, will likely kill few people. The main damage it would cause would be economic because it could render important commercial areas unusable due to radioactive contamination. In either case, we must build and sustain a nuclear forensics capability and workforce to address the nuclear and radiological threats that we face today. That is why I urge a ``yes'' vote on H.R. 730.

I yield back my time.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Rep. Peter T. KingR-NY-3 · Jan 20, 2010

I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, again, let me thank Congresswoman Clarke for her leadership on this. Let me also thank Ranking Member Dan Lungren for his work. Let me…

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, again, let me thank Congresswoman Clarke for her leadership on this. Let me also thank Ranking Member Dan Lungren for his work.

Let me especially thank Mr. Schiff for his efforts on this and for so many other efforts on behalf of our national security. I have the privilege of serving with Mr. Schiff on the Intelligence Committee, so I have firsthand knowledge of the dedication which he brings to issues such as this.

Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 730. Let me just say that, in many ways, this is the other side of the same coin. We just adopted H.R. 2611, which is to prevent nuclear attacks against our cities. H.R. 730 will enable us to detect where those nuclear devices came from. It's absolutely essential that we deal with the process of determining the source of confiscated nuclear material. This is a grave, grave threat to our homeland, and it must be addressed immediately and robustly. We must have a rigorous attribution program to find the culprits of these crimes and to offer a deterrent to nuclear terrorism.

The one concern I do have is that the bill, as amended, coming back from the Senate does not authorize the appropriation of $30 million. I believe that is important. It is essential that we have it; but, again, this is a major step forward, so I am pleased to support the legislation even though I wish that the $30 million had been included in it.

This bill targets an ongoing threat in a unique way. It will reinvigorate the workforce pipeline to guarantee the Nation a resource of technical experts in this vital and critical field, and it will strengthen America's attribution capabilities.

Again, this is a bipartisan effort. It's the Homeland Security Committee working with Mr. Schiff and the Intelligence Committee. It is important that we pass this and that we really, again, send a strong signal of how we do believe in layered defenses, of how we realize the need of staying ahead of the terrorist threat and of doing all we can to protect the American people in a way which certainly transcends Republican or Democrat lines or liberal-conservative lines. It is an issue that should galvanize all Americans.

So, with that, I strongly urge support of H.R. 730.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I would like to close by stating that all of us realize that a terrorist attack is a nightmare scenario.

The fact that we came so close to the loss of life on Christmas Day reminded us dramatically of the dangerous world in which we live. Those of us from New York will never forget September 11, 2001. But just think of the ultimate nightmare scenario, and that would be a nuclear attack. That is almost beyond our imagination. That is why everything must be done to stop those attacks, and to also have the deterrent, as Congressman Schiff said, the deterrent of retaliation against any country, against any entity, against any individual, any organization, which was in any way involved in providing nuclear weaponry to be used against the United States.

I strongly urge the adoption of this legislation.

I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Rep. Michael T. McCaulR-TX-10 · Mar 24, 2009

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 730, the Nuclear Forensic and Attribution Act. This act deals with the process of determining the source of confiscated nuclear material. It is a…

Bill Text

Latest available legislative text

Reading Mode

Raw Text PDF XML

Introduced in HouseIssued May 21, 2009

111th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. R. 2631

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

May 21, 2009

Mr. Paul introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committees on Natural Resources and Financial Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

A BILL

To reduce the price of gasoline by allowing for offshore drilling, eliminating Federal obstacles to constructing refineries and providing incentives for investment in refineries, suspending Federal fuel taxes when gasoline prices reach a benchmark amount, and promoting free trade.

Short title; table of contents

(a)

Short title

This Act may be cited as the Affordable Gas Price Act.

(b)

Table of contents

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.

Sec. 2. Findings.

Sec. 3. Termination of restrictions on oil and natural gas development on Federal lands.

Sec. 4. Limitation of suits under National Environmental Policy Act of 1969.

Sec. 5. Incentives for investment in oil refineries.

Sec. 6. Suspension of fuel taxes on highway motor fuels when weekly United States retail gasoline prices exceed benchmark.

Sec. 7. Increase in mileage reimbursement rates.

Sec. 8. Termination of application of title IV of the Trade Act of 1974 to the Russian Federation and Kazakhstan.

Sec. 9. Study on effects of oil prices on monetary policy.

Findings

Congress finds the following:

(1)

High fuel costs retard economic growth and diminish the quality of life for all Americans.

(2)

The trucking industry is particularly hard hit by high fuel prices.

(3)

Attempts to address the issue of high gasoline costs by increasing government involvement in the market through measures such as price controls will only lead to shortages, rationing, and a return of gasoline lines.

(4)

The Federal regulations restricting drilling impose prohibitive costs on the development of new sources of energy, artificially inflating the price of gas.

(5)

Federal gas taxes increase the price of oil thus burdening American families, business, and truckers.

(6)

Allowing private parties to delay, or even halt, the construction of new refineries through litigation over the National Environmental Protection Act’s Environmental Impact Statement requirement reduces the supply of gas thus raising gas prices.

(7)

The so-called Jackson-Vanik (freedom-of-emigration) amendment (section 402 of the Trade Act of 1974) was a United States reaction to the Soviet Union’s highly restrictive emigration policy of the time.

(8)

By 2005, some 15 years after the end of communist rule over the Soviet Union, successor states Russia and Kazakhstan allow their citizens the right and opportunity to emigrate, free of any heavy tax on the visas or other documents required for emigration and free of any other tax, levy, fine, fee, or other charge on any citizens as a consequence of the desire of such citizens to emigrate to the country of their choice.

(9)

Elimination of the Jackson-Vanik amendment’s threat of trade-restricting provisions would increase the United States access to oil supplies from non-Arab countries, thus lowering gas prices.

(10)

The adoption of a monetary system of fiat currency unbacked by any ties to gold may have contributed to the raise in gas prices.

Termination of restrictions on oil and natural gas development on Federal lands

(a)

Outer Continental Shelf

(1)

Termination of laws prohibiting expenditures for natural gas leasing and preleasing activities

All provisions of existing Federal law prohibiting the spending of appropriated funds to conduct oil or natural gas leasing and preleasing activities for any area of the Outer Continental Shelf shall have no force or effect.

(2)

Revocation of existing Presidential withdrawals

All existing withdrawals by the President under the authority of section 12 of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1341) are hereby revoked and are no longer in effect with respect to the leasing of areas for exploration for, and development and production of, oil or natural gas.

(b)

Coastal plain of Alaska

Sections 1002(i) and 1003 of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (16 U.S.C. 3142(i) and 3143) are repealed.

Limitation of suits under National Environmental Policy Act of 1969

Section 102 of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332) is amended by inserting (a) In general.— before the first sentence, and by adding at the end the following:

(b)

Limitation on suits

A statement required under subsection (a)(2)(C) is not subject to judicial review.

Incentives for investment in oil refineries

(a)

Increase of expensing for refineries

(1)

In general

Subsection (a) of section 179C of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to election to expense certain refineries) is amended by striking 50 percent and inserting 100 percent.

(2)

Effective date

The amendments made by this subsection shall take effect as if included in section 1323 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005.

(b)

Class Life for Refineries

(1)

In general

Subparagraph (B) of section 168(e)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to 5-year property) is amended by striking and at the end of clause (vi), by striking the period at the end of clause (vii) and inserting , and, and by inserting after clause (vii) the following new clause:

(viii)

any petroleum refining property.

(2)

Petroleum refining asset

Section 168(i) of such Code is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:

(20)

Petroleum refining property

(A)

In general

The term petroleum refining property means any asset for petroleum refining, including assets used for the distillation, fractionation, and catalytic cracking of crude petroleum into gasoline and its other components.

(B)

Asset must meet environmental laws

Such term shall not include any asset which does not meet all applicable environmental laws in effect on the date such asset was placed in service. For purposes of the preceding sentence, a waiver under the Clean Air Act shall not be taken into account in determining whether the applicable environmental laws have been met.

(C)

Special rule for mergers and acquisitions

Such term shall not include any asset with respect to which a deduction was taken under subsection (e)(3)(B) by any other taxpayer in any preceding year.

(3)

Effective date

(A)

In general

The amendments made by this subsection shall apply to refineries placed in service after the date of the enactment of this Act.

(B)

Exception

The amendments made by this section shall not apply to any refinery with respect to which the taxpayer has entered into a binding contract for the construction thereof on or before the date of the enactment of this Act.

Suspension of fuel taxes on highway motor fuels when weekly United States retail gasoline prices exceed benchmark

(a)

In general

Section 4081 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to imposition of tax on motor and aviation fuels) is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:

(f)

Suspension of highway motor fuel taxes when retail gasoline exceeds benchmark

(1)

In general

During any suspension period, the tax imposed by this section or section 4041 on highway motor fuel shall be suspended.

(2)

Definitions and special rule

For purposes of this subsection—

(A)

Suspension period

The term suspension period means the period—

(i)

beginning on the date on which the weekly United States retail gasoline price, regular grade (as published by the Energy Information Administration, Department of Energy), inclusive of such tax, is greater than $3.00 per gallon, and

(ii)

ending on the date on which such price (as so published), without regard to this subsection, does not exceed $3.00 per gallon.

(B)

Highway motor fuel

The term highway motor fuel means any fuel subject to tax under this section or section 4041 other than aviation gasoline and aviation-grade kerosene.

(b)

Maintenance of trust funds deposits; amounts appropriated to trust funds treated as taxes

(1)

In general

There is hereby appropriated (out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated) to each trust fund which would (but for this subsection) receive reduced revenues as a result of a suspension in a rate of tax by reason of section 4081(f)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (as added by this section) an amount equal to such reduction in revenues. Amounts appropriated by the preceding sentence to any trust fund—

(A)

shall be transferred from the general fund at such times and in such manner as to replicate to the extent possible the transfers which would have occurred had such section 4081(f)(1) not been enacted, and

(B)

shall be treated for all purposes of Federal law as taxes received under the appropriate section referred to in such section 4081(f)(1).

(c)

Effective date

The amendment made by this section shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act.

(d)

Floor stock refunds

(1)

In general

If—

(A)

before the tax suspension date, tax has been imposed under section 4081 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 on any highway motor fuel, and

(B)

on such date such fuel is held by a dealer and has not been used and is intended for sale,

there shall be credited or refunded (without interest) to the person who paid such tax (hereafter in this subsection referred to as the taxpayer) an amount equal to the excess of the tax paid by the taxpayer over the tax which would be imposed on such fuel had the taxable event occurred on such date.

(2)

Time for filing claims

No credit or refund shall be allowed or made under this subsection unless—

(A)

claim therefor is filed with the Secretary of the Treasury before the date which is 6 months after the tax suspension date based on a request submitted to the taxpayer before the date which is 3 months after the tax suspension date by the dealer who held the highway motor fuel on such date, and

(B)

the taxpayer has repaid or agreed to repay the amount so claimed to such dealer or has obtained the written consent of such dealer to the allowance of the credit or the making of the refund.

(3)

Exception for fuel held in retail stocks

No credit or refund shall be allowed under this subsection with respect to any highway motor fuel in retail stocks held at the place where intended to be sold at retail.

(4)

Definitions

For purposes of this subsection—

(A)

Tax suspension date

The term tax suspension date means the first day of any suspension period in effect under section 4081(f) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (as added by subsection (a) of this section).

(B)

Other terms

The terms dealer and held by a dealer have the respective meanings given to such terms by section 6412 of such Code.

(5)

Certain rules to apply

Rules similar to the rules of subsections (b) and (c) of section 6412 of such Code shall apply for purposes of this subsection.

(e)

Floor stocks tax

(1)

Imposition of tax

In the case of any highway motor fuel which is held on the tax restoration date by any person, there is hereby imposed a floor stocks tax equal to the excess of the tax which would be imposed on such fuel had the taxable event occurred on such date over the tax (if any) previously paid (and not credited or refunded) on such fuel.

(2)

Liability for tax and method of payment

(A)

Liability for tax

The person holding highway motor fuel on the tax restoration date to which the tax imposed by paragraph (1) applies shall be liable for such tax.

(B)

Method of payment

The tax imposed by paragraph (1) shall be paid in such manner as the Secretary shall prescribe.

(C)

Time for payment

The tax imposed by paragraph (1) shall be paid on or before the 45th day after the tax restoration date.

(3)

Definitions

For purposes of this subsection—

(A)

Tax restoration date

The term tax restoration date means the first day after the suspension period (as defined in section 4081(f) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986).

(B)

Highway motor fuel

The term highway motor fuel has the meaning given to such term by section 4081(f) of such Code.

(C)

Held by a person

A highway motor fuel shall be considered as held by a person if title thereto has passed to such person (whether or not delivery to the person has been made).

(D)

Secretary

The term Secretary means the Secretary of the Treasury or the Secretary’s delegate.

(4)

Exception for exempt uses

The tax imposed by paragraph (1) shall not apply to any highway motor fuel held by any person exclusively for any use to the extent a credit or refund of the tax is allowable for such use.

(5)

Exception for certain amounts of fuel

(A)

In general

No tax shall be imposed by paragraph (1) on any highway motor fuel held on the tax restoration date by any person if the aggregate amount of such highway motor fuel held by such person on such date does not exceed 2,000 gallons. The preceding sentence shall apply only if such person submits to the Secretary (at the time and in the manner required by the Secretary) such information as the Secretary shall require for purposes of this subparagraph.

(B)

Exempt fuel

For purposes of subparagraph (A), there shall not be taken into account any highway motor fuel held by any person which is exempt from the tax imposed by paragraph (1) by reason of paragraph (4).

(C)

Controlled groups

For purposes of this subsection—

(i)

Corporations

(I)

In general

All persons treated as a controlled group shall be treated as 1 person.

(II)

Controlled group

The term controlled group has the meaning given to such term by subsection (a) of section 1563 of such Code; except that for such purposes the phrase more than 50 percent shall be substituted for the phrase at least 80 percent each place it appears in such subsection.

(ii)

Nonincorporated persons under common control

Under regulations prescribed by the Secretary, principles similar to the principles of subparagraph (A) shall apply to a group of persons under common control if 1 or more of such persons is not a corporation.

(6)

Other laws applicable

All provisions of law, including penalties, applicable with respect to the taxes imposed by section 4081 of such Code shall, insofar as applicable and not inconsistent with the provisions of this subsection, apply with respect to the floor stock taxes imposed by paragraph (1) to the same extent as if such taxes were imposed by such section.

Increase in mileage reimbursement rates

(a)

Business

For purposes of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, after the date of the enactment of this Act, the optional standard mileage rates to be used for computing the deductible costs of operating an automobile for business purposes shall be not less than 70 cents per mile.

(b)

Medical, moving, and charitable contribution rates

For any day during the period under which highway motor fuel taxes are suspended under section 4081(f) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986—

(1)

the optional standard mileage rates to be used for computing the deductible costs of operating an automobile for medical, moving, and charitable purposes shall be the same rate which is in effect for such day for business purposes, and

(2)

the rate under section 170(i) shall not apply.

Termination of application of title IV of the Trade Act of 1974 to the Russian Federation and Kazakhstan

(a)

Presidential Determinations and Extensions of Nondiscriminatory Treatment

Notwithstanding any provision of title IV of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2431 et seq.), the President may—

(1)

determine that such title should no longer apply to both the Russian Federation and Kazakhstan; and

(2)

after making a determination under paragraph (1) with respect to the Russian Federation and Kazakhstan, proclaim the extension of nondiscriminatory treatment (normal trade relations treatment) to the products of those countries.

(b)

Termination of Application of Title IV

On and after the effective date of the extension under subsection (a)(2) of nondiscriminatory treatment to the products of the Russian Federation and Kazakhstan, title IV of the Trade Act of 1974 shall cease to apply to those countries.

Study on effects of oil prices on monetary policy

Not later than 6 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Treasury and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System shall produce a study on the relationship between the increase in the price of oil and the monetary system of fiat currency. The results of this study shall be submitted to the Chairman of the Committee on Financial Services of the House of Representatives and the Chairman of the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs of the Senate.