The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS” mentioning the U.S. Dept. of Energy was published in the Senate section on pages S5734-S5737 on July 31, 2012.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
By Mr. BINGAMAN (for himself, Mr. Alexander, and Mr. Durbin):
S. 3459. A bill to amend the Department of Energy High-End Computing Revitalization Act of 2004 to improve the high-end computing research and development program of the Department of Energy, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce the Department of Energy High-End Computing Improvement Act of 2012, along with my co-
sponsors, Senators Alexander and Durbin. This bipartisan bill addresses the need for ongoing high performance computing and the establishment of an exascale program within the Department of Energy, DOE.
America's leadership in high performance computing, HPC, is essential to a vast range of national priorities in science, energy, environment, health, and national security. For decades the U.S. was the leader in HPC through collaborative efforts led by the DOE between national laboratories, academia, and industry. Investments in HPC have facilitated extraordinary scientific and technological advances that have enabled a wide range of simulation and analysis saving time, money, energy and fuel, which has strengthened the U.S. economy and contributed to national security.
U.S. leadership in HPC has recently been challenged through significant governmental investment in HPC programs in Japan, China, South Korea, Russia, and the European Union, and the race to exascale computing is on. Exascale computers will be able to perform 10 to the 18th power floating point operations per second making them 1000 times more powerful than the most advanced computers today. These new computers will require the development of new software and computer architectures with improved power consumption, memory, and reliability.
This bipartisan bill updates the Department of Energy High-End Computing Revitalization Act of 2004 to preserve DOE HPC and to distinguish the exascale initiative from other high-end computing efforts. Based on input from the DOE, appropriate funding levels are established through this bill to support the exascale initiative through fiscal year 2015. This bill will ensure that the U.S. remains competitive in the race to exascale and as with previous generations of HPC systems, the resulting technological advances will further support Federal priorities like research and national security and will be integrated into electronics industries strengthening high-tech competitiveness and driving economic growth.
I would like to conclude by taking a moment to acknowledge the exceptional efforts of a few staff members who have worked diligently to help craft this important piece of legislation. Jonathan Epstein, a former staff member on my Energy and Natural Resources Committee and current staff member on the Armed Services Committee and Jennifer Nekuda Malik, a AAAS Science Policy Fellow on my Energy and Natural Resources Committee worked with Neena Imam, a Legislative Fellow on Senator Alexander's staff and Tom Craig, a staff member on the Appropriations Committee, to update the DOE's high-end computing program to account for changes since the Department of Energy High-End Computing Revitalization Act of 2004 and establish the exascale computing program. I appreciate the efforts of these staff members and I thank them for their work.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be printed in the Record, as follows:
S. 3459
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 ``Department of Energy High-End Computing Improvement Act of 2012''.
SEC. 2. RENAMING OF ACT.
(a) In General.--Section 1 of the Department of Energy High-End Computing Revitalization Act of 2004 (15 U.S.C. 5501 note; Public Law 108-423) is amended by striking ``Department of Energy High-End Computing Revitalization Act of 2004'' and inserting ``Department of Energy High-End Computing Act of 2012''.
(b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 976(a)(1) of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 16316(1)) is amended by striking ``Department of Energy High-End Computing Revitalization Act of 2004'' and inserting ``Department of Energy High-End Computing Act of 2012''.
SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.
Section 2 of the Department of Energy High-End Computing Act of 2012 (15 U.S.C. 5541) is amended--
(1) by redesignating paragraphs (2) through (5) as paragraphs (3) through (6), respectively;
(2) by striking paragraph (1) and inserting the following:
``(1) Department.--The term `Department' means the Department of Energy.
``(2) Exascale computing.--The term `exascale computing' means computing through the use of a computing machine that performs near or above 10 to the 18th power floating point operations per second.''; and
(3) in paragraph (6) (as redesignated by paragraph (1)), by striking ``, acting through the Director of the Office of Science of the Department of Energy''.
SEC. 4. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY HIGH-END COMPUTING RESEARCH AND
DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM.
Section 3 of the Department of Energy High-End Computing Act of 2012 (15 U.S.C. 5542) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)(1), by striking ``program'' and inserting ``coordinated program across the Department'';
(2) in subsection (b)(2), by striking ``, which may'' and all that follows through ``architectures''; and
(3) by striking subsection (d) and inserting the following:
``(d) Exascale Computing Program.--
``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall conduct a research program (referred to in this subsection as the `program') to develop 1 or more exascale computing machines to promote the missions of the Department.
``(2) Coordination.--In carrying out the program, the Secretary shall coordinate the development of 1 or more exascale computing machines across all applicable agencies of the Department.
``(3) Codesign.--The Secretary shall carry out the program through an integration of application, computer science, and computer hardware architecture using public-private partnerships to ensure that, to the maximum extent practicable, 1 or more exascale computing machines are capable of solving Department target applications and scientific problems.
``(4) Merit review.--The development of 1 or more exascale computing machines shall be conducted through a merit review process.
``(5) Annual reports.--At the time of the budget submission of the Department for each fiscal year, the Secretary shall submit to Congress a report that describes funding for the exascale computing program as a whole by functional element of the Department and critical milestones.''.
SEC. 5. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
Section 4 of the Department of Energy High-End Computing Act of 2012 (15 U.S.C. 5543) is amended--
(1) by striking ``this Act'' and inserting ``section 3(d)''; and
(2) by striking paragraphs (1) through (3) and inserting the following:
``(1) $110,000,000 for fiscal year 2013;
``(2) $220,000,000 for fiscal year 2014; and
``(3) $300,000,000 for fiscal year 2015.''.
______
By Mr. COONS (for himself, Mr. Enzi, Mr. Schumer, and Mr. Rubio):
S. 3460. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide for startup businesses to use a portion of the research and development credit to offset payroll taxes; to the Committee on Finance.
Mr. COONS. Mr. President, to fuel American economic growth and job creation, we have to make sure our tax policy is as smart as the innovators who power our economy.
American ingenuity has always been at the core of our economic success. Behind nearly every game-changing innovation, from the light bulb to the search engine, has been critical research and development that transforms an idea into a market-ready product. The challenges of the global economy may be new, but the solution is the same--supporting and sustaining American innovators.
That is why I joined with my friend and colleague, the Senator from Wyoming, Senator Enzi, to draft legislation that gives innovative startup companies the opportunity to take advantage of the successful research and development tax credit, which would support their efforts to invest in innovation and create jobs.
Senator Enzi and I are proud to be joined by Senator Schumer of New York and Senator Rubio of Florida in introducing the Startup Innovation Credit Act of 2012, which allows qualifying companies to claim the R&D tax credit against their employment taxes instead of their income taxes, thereby opening the credit to new companies who don't yet have an income tax liability. We are also grateful to our colleagues in the House, who are working to introduce a bipartisan companion bill this week.
Over the past three decades, the research and development tax credit has helped tens of thousands of successful American companies create jobs by incentivizing investment in innovation. But with America's global manufacturing competitiveness at stake, it is time Congress shows the same type of support for entrepreneurs and young companies.
Small and startup businesses are driving our Nation's economic recovery and creating jobs by taking risks to turn their ideas into marketable products. Over the past few decades, firms that were younger than 5 years old were responsible for the overwhelming majority of new jobs in this country.
The tax code is a powerful tool in the government's toolbox, but tax credits can't help emerging companies that don't yet have tax liabilities. That takes the R&D tax credit off the table for countless promising startups and small businesses.
Over the last two years, I have talked with dozens of business leaders and experts in tax policy to refine an idea to create a new small business innovation credit that would help those young companies. My commitment to this concept has only strengthened since I introduced a version of it in my very first bill as a Senator, the Job Creation Through Innovation Act. This work continued, along with Senator Rubio, in the subsequent AGREE Act and Startup Act 2.0.
The reason I am so doggedly pursuing this idea is because it is critical for young, innovative companies in my home state of Delaware. Take, for example, DeNovix, a small company based in Wilmington. With just six employees, they design, manufacture and sell laboratory equipment that helps scientists innovate and achieve results. As a brand-new company, all of DeNovix' products are in the research and development phase. So at this point, they can't take advantage of the R&D tax credit. A new, innovative company, shut out of support they need at the time they need it most. That seems counterproductive for our economy. So let us fix it. Under the Startup Innovation Credit Act of 2012, DeNovix and companies like them across Delaware and across the country could grow and create jobs with the help of the R&D tax credit.
We can't let tough economic times slow down the power of American ingenuity, especially when history has taught us that now is exactly the time we need to be investing in our innovators. More than half of our Fortune 500 companies were launched during a recession or bear market, so a small business founded this year could become the next General Electric or DuPont if it gets the support it needs.
America's researchers, business leaders, innovators and entrepreneurs are already working to help create jobs and ensure American competitiveness in the global economy. We just have to support and sustain their hard work, and we cannot take the rest of the year off just because there is an election coming up. Even in this difficult, partisan atmosphere, we have to find ways to work together and get things done.
Innovation will drive American economic competitiveness for generations to come, and our job is to help our innovators and entrepreneurs do their jobs. I urge my colleagues to join Senators Enzi, Schumer, Rubio and I in strong support of the Startup Innovation Credit Act of 2012.
______
By Mr. BROWN of Ohio (for himself, Mr. Wicker, Mr. Kerry, Mr.
Blumenthal, Mr. Whitehouse, and Mr. Begich):
S. 3461. A bill to amend title IV of the Public Health Service Act to provide for a National Pediatric Research Network, including with respect to pediatric rare diseases or conditions; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. President, over the last few years, our country has grappled with rising health care costs.
While we are making strides, there is one area of health care that is lagging behind: pediatric research.
Children comprise 20 percept of the U.S. population, but only about 5 percent of the National Institutes of Health, NIH, extramural research is dedicated to pediatric research.
If this rate of investment is not expanded, discoveries of new treatments and therapies for some of the most devastating childhood diseases and conditions will be hindered, and the next generation of researchers will be discouraged from entering into the field of pediatrics.
That is why I have introduced the National Pediatric Research Network Act. This act seeks to reverse this trend by strengthening and expanding NIH's investments into pediatric research.
This expanded investment will help accelerate new discoveries and directly affect the health and well-being of children throughout our Nation.
My home State of Ohio is home to world-class researchers at topnotch research hospitals and universities.
We must give these institutions, including Cincinnati Children's, Rainbow Babies, Children's Hospital, and Nationwide Children's Hospitals, the resources to partner with other leading researchers across the country.
This legislation creates such an opportunity.
The centerpiece of the legislation will be the authorization of up to 20 National Pediatric Research Consortia.
They are modeled after the exemplary National Cancer Institute, NCI, Centers to help finance efficient and effective, inter-institutional pediatric research.
While NIH is working to advance translational research through Clinical & Translational Science Awards, those centers are far-reaching and focused primarily on adult diseases and clinical research. In contrast, these pediatric centers would be solely dedicated toward pediatric research.
Unlike existing NIH initiatives in which only the largest research institutions receive funds, the legislation envisions that each center will operate in a ``hub and spoke'' framework with one central academic center coordinating research and/or clinical work at numerous auxiliary sites. Encouraging collaboration can help ensure efficiency.
Furthermore, this legislation will encourage research in pediatric rare diseases.
While each rare disease or disorder affects a small patient population, it is important to note that 7,000 rare diseases--such as epidermolysis bullosa, sickle cell anemia, spinal muscular atrophy, Down syndrome, Duchene's muscular dystrophy, and many childhood cancers--affect a combined 30 million Americans and their families.
What is even more devastating is the fact that children with rare genetic diseases account for more than half of the rare disease population in the United States.
As anyone with a rare disease or disorder knows, these patient populations face unique challenges.
It is my hope the National Pediatric Research Network Act will increase our understanding of pediatric diseases, improve treatment and therapies, and create better health care outcomes for our nation's children.
I thank Senators Wicker, Whitehouse, Kerry, Blumenthal, and Begich for joining me as original cosponsors.
______
By Mr. LEAHY (for himself, Mr. Grassley, and Mr. Kohl):
S. 3462. A bill to provide anti-retaliation protections for antitrust whistleblowers; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I am pleased to join with Senator Grassley and today introduce the Criminal Antitrust Anti-Retaliation Act. This legislation will provide important protections to employees who come forward and disclose to law enforcement price fixing and other criminal antitrust behavior that harm consumers. Senator Grassley and I have a long history of working together on whistleblower issues, and I am glad we can continue this partnership today.
Whistleblowers are instrumental in alerting the public, Congress, and law enforcement to wrongdoing. In many cases, their willingness to step forward has resulted in important reforms and even saved lives. Congress must encourage employees with reasonable beliefs about criminal activity to report such fraud or abuse by offering meaningful protection to those who blow the whistle rather than leaving them vulnerable to reprisals.
The legislation we introduce today was inspired by a recent report and recommendation from the Government Accountability Office which, based on interviews with key stakeholders, found widespread support for anti-retaliatory protection in criminal antitrust cases. It is modeled on the successful anti-retaliation provisions of the Sarbanes Oxley Act, and is carefully drafted to ensure that whistleblowers have no economic incentive to bring forth false claims.
I have long supported vigorous enforcement of the antitrust laws, which have been called the ``Magna Carta of free enterprise.'' Today's legislation is a necessary complement to them. It has bipartisan support and was recommended by the Government Accountability Office. I urge the Senate to quickly take up and pass this important legislation.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be printed in the Record, as follows:
S. 3462
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 ``Criminal Antitrust Anti-Retaliation Act''.
SEC. 2. AMENDMENT TO ACPERA.
The Antitrust Criminal Penalty Enhancement and Reform Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-237; 15 U.S.C. 1 note) is amended by adding after section 215 the following:
``SEC. 216. ANTI-RETALIATION PROTECTION FOR WHISTLEBLOWERS.
``(a) Whistleblower Protections for Employees, Contractors, Subcontractors, and Agents.--
``(1) In general.--No person, or any officer, employee, contractor, subcontractor or agent of such person, may discharge, demote, suspend, threaten, harass, or in any other manner discriminate against a whistleblower in the terms and conditions of employment because--
``(A) the whistleblower provided or caused to be provided to the person or the Federal Government information relating to--
``(i) any violation of, or any act or omission the whistleblower reasonably believes to be a violation of the antitrust laws; or
``(ii) any violation of, or any act or omission the whistleblower reasonably believes to be a violation of another criminal law committed in conjunction with a potential violation of the antitrust laws or in conjunction with an investigation by the Department of Justice of a potential violation of the antitrust laws; or
``(B) the whistleblower filed, caused to be filed, testified, participated in, or otherwise assisted an investigation or a proceeding filed or about to be filed
(with any knowledge of the employer) relating to--
``(i) any violation of, or any act or omission the whistleblower reasonably believes to be a violation of the antitrust laws; or
``(ii) any violation of, or any act or omission the whistleblower reasonably believes to be a violation of another criminal law committed in conjunction with a potential violation of the antitrust laws or in conjunction with an investigation by the Department of Justice of a potential violation of the antitrust laws.
``(2) Limitation on protections.--Paragraph (1) shall not apply to any whistleblower if--
``(A) the whistleblower planned and initiated a violation or attempted violation of the antitrust laws;
``(B) the whistleblower planned and initiated a violation or attempted violation of another criminal law in conjunction with a violation or attempted violation of the antitrust laws; or
``(C) the whistleblower planned and initiated an obstruction or attempted obstruction of an investigation by the Department of Justice of a violation of the antitrust laws.
``(3) Definitions.--In the section:
``(A) Person.--The term `person' has the same meaning as in subsection (a) of the first section of the Clayton Act (15 U.S.C. 12(a)).
``(B) Antitrust laws.--The term `antitrust laws' means section 1 or 3 of the Sherman Act (15 U.S.C. 1, 3) or similar State law.
``(C) Whistleblower.--The term `whistleblower' means an employee, contractor, subcontractor, or agent protected from discrimination under paragraph (1).
``(b) Enforcement Action.--
``(1) In general.--A whistleblower who alleges discharge or other discrimination by any person in violation of subsection
(a) may seek relief under subsection (c) by--
``(A) filing a complaint with the Secretary of Labor; or
``(B) if the Secretary has not issued a final decision within 180 days of the filing of the complaint and there is no showing that such delay is due to the bad faith of the claimant, bringing an action at law or equity for de novo review in the appropriate district court of the United States, which shall have jurisdiction over such an action without regard to the amount in controversy.
``(2) Procedure.--
``(A) In general.--A complaint filed with the Secretary of Labor under paragraph (1)(A) shall be governed under the rules and procedures set forth in section 42121(b)of title 49, United States Code.
``(B) Exception.--Notification made under section 42121(b)(1) of title 49, United States Code, shall be made to the person named in the complaint and to the employer.
``(C) Burdens of proof.--A complaint filed with the Secretary of Labor under paragraph (1) shall be governed by the legal burdens of proof set forth in section 42121(b) of title 49, United States Code.
``(D) Statute of limitations.--A complaint under paragraph
(1)(A) shall be filed with the Secretary of Labor not later than 180 days after the date on which the violation occurs.
``(E) Civil actions to enforce.--If a person fails to comply with an order or preliminary order issued by the Secretary of Labor pursuant to the procedures in section 42121(b), the Secretary of Labor or the person on whose behalf the order was issued may bring a civil action to enforce the order in the district court of the United States for the judicial district in which the violation occurred.
``(c) Remedies.--
``(1) In general.--A whistleblower prevailing in any action under subsection (b)(1) shall be entitled to all relief necessary to make the whistleblower whole.
``(2) Compensatory damages.--Relief for any action under paragraph (1) shall include--
``(A) reinstatement with the same seniority status that the whistleblower would have had, but for the discrimination;
``(B) the amount of back pay, with interest; and
``(C) compensation for any special damages sustained as a result of the discrimination including litigation costs, expert witness fees, and reasonable attorney's fees.
``(d) Rights Retained by Whistleblowers.--Nothing in this section shall be deemed to diminish the rights, privileges, or remedies of any whistleblower under any Federal or State law, or under any collective bargaining agreement.''.
______
By Mr. FRANKEN (for himself, Mr. Lugar, Mr. Rockefeller, Ms.
Collins, Mrs. Shaheen, Mr. Wyden, Mr. Blumenthal, and Mr. Brown of Ohio):
S. 3463. A bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to reduce the incidence of diabetes among Medicare beneficiaries; to the Committee on Finance.
Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, I am pleased to join today with my colleagues, Senator Franken, Senator Lugar, Senator Collins, Senator Shaheen, Senator Wyden, Senator Blumenthal, and Senator Brown of Ohio, to introduce an important piece of bipartisan legislation, the Medicare Diabetes Prevention Act of 2012. Our legislation makes a wise investment in seniors' health by extending the proven success of the National Diabetes Prevention Program to Medicare. Nearly 26 million American adults have diabetes, and if this disturbing trend doesn't stop, over half of the adult population will either have Type 2 diabetes or its precursor, ``prediabetes,'' by 2020.
Sadly, my home State of West Virginia has one of the highest diabetes rates in the Nation. In 2009, approximately 174,000 adults, which is 11 percent of West Virginia adults, had diabetes. According to Centers for Disease Control estimates, as many as 50 percent of the nearly 380,000 people with Medicare in West Virginia may be at risk of developing this serious, but preventable, illness. If current trends continue, one in three children born in West Virginia after the year 2000 will develop diabetes within his or her lifetime and people with diabetes risk developing terrible complications down the road, including heart disease, stroke, blindness, and amputations.
Diabetes is also one of the main cost drivers in our health care system. The direct economic burden of diabetes was $116 billion for medical expenses and indirect costs totaled $58 billion due to disability, work loss, or premature death in 2007. The costs associated with this preventable disease for Medicare beneficiaries are expected to grow to $2 trillion over the 2011 to 2020 period.
We simply cannot stand idly by in the face of such overwhelming statistics--and fortunately, there is a way to prevent Type 2 diabetes. The National Diabetes Prevention Program, NDPP, is an innovative approach that has demonstrated its effects in preventing the onset of Type 2 diabetes. The NDPP is a proven, community-based intervention that focuses on changing lifestyle behaviors of prediabetic overweight or obese adults through activities that improve dietary choices and increase physical activity in a group setting. In a large-scale clinical trial that has been replicated in community settings, NDPP successfully reduced the onset of diabetes by 58 percent overall and 71 percent in adults over 60.
Because of the impressive success of the National Diabetes Prevention Program, I believe our seniors should have access to its benefits. The Medicare Diabetes Prevention Act of 2012 will help seniors prevent Type 2 diabetes by allowing Medicare to provide the National Diabetes Prevention Program through community settings like the YMCA, local health departments, or even the local church, reaching people with Medicare wherever they live. In the past, physicians have had few tools for their patients who are found to be at risk of diabetes. Under this bill, if a senior is found at risk for diabetes, for example, through their annual wellness visit, their doctor will be able to refer them to an NDPP program in their area.
Unlike Medicare, which needs a Federal legislative change to cover this program, State Medicaid programs already have the authority to pay for this innovative initiative, and it is my hope that more states will do so. By 2020, Medicaid is expected to cover 13 million people with diabetes and about 9 million people who may have pre-diabetes, and states will spend an estimated $83 billion on individuals with diabetes or pre-diabetes. The National Diabetes Prevention program presents an opportunity for States to reduce the incidence of diabetes among individuals enrolled in their Medicaid programs, an especially strategic investment when combined with the expansion of the Medicaid program under health reform.
The coverage of proven solutions under Medicare is nothing new. Yet, rather than providing a traditional drug or procedure, NDPP allows at-
risk individuals to change their lifestyles through a community intervention. Implementing NDPP is a unique response to the alarming and escalating rates of diabetes. This public health solution has demonstrated tangible results that can enable our country to prevent diabetes, while reducing health care costs. The NDPP is a strategic and cost-effective intervention that costs less than $500 per person to deliver, compared to the estimated $15,000 per year spent on each Medicare beneficiary with diabetes. According to the Urban Institute, implementing the NDPP nationally could save $191 billion over the next 10 years, with 75 percent of the savings, $142.9 billion, going to the Medicare and Medicaid programs.
Better yet, the National Diabetes Prevention Program is a job creator, bringing diabetes trainers to more communities nationwide to provide the program. West Virginia has already received funding from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention through a Community Transformation Grant that will allow the State to train at least 100 community health workers to help disseminate the Diabetes Prevention Program in the State over the next 5 years.
The Medicare Diabetes Prevention Act has been endorsed by the American Diabetes Association, American Heart Association, American Public Health Association, National Association of Chronic Disease Directors, National Association of State Long-Term Care Ombudsman Programs, National Council on Aging, Novo Nordisk, Trust for America's Health, the YMCA of the USA, and State YMCA affiliates in over 45 States. With so many Americans at risk for developing diabetes and its potentially severe complications, today is the right time for Medicare to extend the proven National Diabetes Prevention Program as a covered benefit to seniors.
I urge my colleagues to support this timely and important piece of legislation.
______
By Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota:
S. 3464. A bill to amend the Mni Wiconi Project Act of 1988 to facilitate completion of the Mni Wiconi Rural Water Supply System, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota. Mr. President, today I introduced legislation to facilitate completion of the Mni Wiconi Rural Water System. The Mni Wiconi Project provides quality drinking water to three Indian Reservations and a non-tribal rural water system in western South Dakota that have historically faced insufficient and, in too many cases, unsafe drinking water.
I have been involved with this project for the entirety of my 25 year congressional career, including sponsoring authorizing legislation that was ultimately enacted in 1988. In authorizing the project, Congress found that the United States has a trust responsibility to ensure that adequate and safe water supplies are available to meet the economic, environmental, water supply, and public health needs of the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation, Rosebud Indian Reservation, and Lower Brule Indian Reservation. With treated drinking water from the Missouri River now reaching most of the three reservations, as well as the 7 county area of the West River/Lyman-Jones Rural Water System, we are very close to completing this critically important project.
Unfortunately, appropriations have failed to keep pace with projected timelines, and additional costs have cut into construction funding. Accordingly, the project requires an increase in the cost ceiling and extension of its authorization in order to be completed and serve the design population. Without an adjustment to the cost ceiling, some portions of the Oglala Sioux Rural Water Supply System and Rosebud Sioux Rural Water System will remain incomplete. The legislation I have introduced today addresses this shortfall and other important aspects of the project. The legislation also directs other Federal agencies that support rural water development to assist the Bureau of Reclamation in improving and repairing existing community water systems that are important components of the project.
Our Federal responsibility to address the tremendous need for adequate and safe drinking water supplies on the Pine Ridge, Rosebud and Lower Brule Indian Reservations remains as important today as it was 25 years ago. I look forward to working with my colleagues to advance this modest but important legislation.
____________________
