Rick Boucher

Mr. BOUCHER

Mr. BOUCHER. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. BOUCHER. I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I share his belief that the demonstration project that we are going to have in Wilmington, North Carolina, sometime later this year will yield valuable information. My concern is that whatever information we receive from that demonstration, should it indicate that additional steps need to be taken for technical assistance, for public education, for the replacement of either rabbit ears or external antennas, will not be information that is very useful to us in the absence of funding in order to carry out whatever steps that information suggests should be appropriate. So my recommendation today is that we begin to have a conversation about how we could use information collected from the Wilmington experience, how we could use information that we can gain very usefully from the larger experience they've already had in the United Kingdom and put that information to work to make sure that our transition is as smooth here in the United States as it has been in the U.K.

Mr. BOUCHER

Mr. BOUCHER. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to introduce today the Carbon Capture and Storage Early Deployment Act, bipartisan legislation which will establish a non-governmental fund and entity to accelerate the deployment of carbon capture and storage (CCS) technologies. CCS is a method of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by capturing and injecting underground the carbon dioxide emitted from electricity generation plants that use fossil fuels, including petroleum, natural gas and coal. 72 percent of our nation's electricity is generated through fossil fuel combustion. 51 percent is based on coal use; 20 percent is reliant on natural gas and 1.6 percent on petroleum. Given our extensive reliance on fossil fuels and the current unavailability of sufficient alternatives to them, the continued use of fossil fuels is essential to our economic security. The Carbon Capture and Storage Early Deployment Act addresses this clear need by enabling electric utilities that use coal to have the continued ability to do so when a mandatory program is implemented to control greenhouse gas emissions. I am preparing to draft a mandatory greenhouse gas control measure which will rely on cap and trade to address rising global temperatures and climate change. Power plants and industrial companies that burn fossil fuels will be required to lessen their emissions of CO2 in accordance with a schedule set in the statute. As CO2 constraints become ever more severe, not only coal using facilities will need to use CO2 capture and storage technologies, but facilities using natural gas and petroleum will as well. The use of CCS technology will enable fossil fuel users to meet the reduction requirements of the measure while continuing to use coal, oil or natural gas. The legislation I am introducing today represents a necessary first step toward the implementation of such a cap and trade system to address global climate change. If severe emissions reduction requirements in a cap and trade system take effect before the carbon capture and storage technologies are available, the effect on coal fired utilities in particular would be severe. They would rapidly switch from coal to other fuels. Such fuel switching would significantly increase electricity prices to the severe detriment of both residential and industrial electricity consumers. Fuel switching from coal would most likely result in far greater uses of natural gas for electricity generation, severely stressing an already constrained natural gas supply and dramatically increasing natural gas prices. Today, 58 percent of U.S. homes are heated with natural gas, and numerous industries are heavily reliant on it. If large scale switching by utilities from coal to natural gas occurs, tens of millions of Americans would experience deep economic pain, and many domestic industries, from fertilizer to chemicals, would be dislocated. The early arrival of CCS is essential to prevent this economic disruption in a carbon constrained economy. While some commercial CCS projects are in operation, they are small in scale and have the purpose of enhancing oil recovery. Further research, development and demonstration are necessary for the permanent storage underground of large quantities of CO2 in a variety of storage media in widely dispersed locations around the nation. In order to accelerate the deployment of CCS technologies, the Carbon Capture and Storage Early Deployment Act authorizes the establishment of a Carbon Storage Research Corporation. The nation's fossil fuel- based electricity distribution utilities would be authorized to hold a referendum for the creation of the Corporation. If the referendum results in approval by representatives of two-thirds of the fossil fuel-based electricity delivered to retail consumers, the Corporation is established. The Corporation will be operated as a division or affiliate of the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) and will be managed by a Board of not more than 12 members, which will be appointed by the EPRI and will include representatives of investor owned utilities, utilities owned by a federal or state agency or a municipality, rural electric cooperatives and fossil fuel producers. The Corporation will assess fees on distribution utilities for all fossil fuel-based electricity delivered to retail consumers. The assessment will be applied to electricity generated from coal, natural gas and oil and will reflect the relative CO2 emission rates of each fuel. The assessment will total approximately $1 billion annually. The legislation specifies that distribution utilities will be allowed to recover the costs of the fee from retail consumers, resulting in a roughly $10-$12 total annual increase in residential electricity rates. The $1 billion annual fund will be distributed by the Corporation in the form of grants and contracts to governmental, academic and private entities for projects with the purpose of accelerating the commercial demonstration or availability of CCS technologies. I would like to thank my colleagues on both sides of the aisle for working with me on and cosponsoring this legislation. The Carbon Capture and Storage Early Deployment Act enjoys bipartisan and industry support and will enable the continued use of our nation's most inexpensive and abundant resources for fuel generation when a mandatory greenhouse gas emissions reduction program is implemented. I urge my colleagues to support this measure.

Mr. BOUCHER

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

Mr. BOUCHER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise to urge the passage of S. 2146, a measure which was previously approved by the Senate. The House counterpart legislation was sponsored by our California colleague, Mr. Costa, and has been approved by the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. The bill allows the Environmental Protection Agency to continue using supplemental environmental projects funds to retrofit existing diesel powered engines with emission reduction controls. Diesel emissions from on and off-road vehicles and engines account for more than one-half of the nitrogen oxide and particulate matter emissions from all mobile sources. The Environmental Protection Agency has issued regulations to limit emissions from new diesel engines and vehicles, but those rules only apply to the new vehicles, not to the heavy duty diesel fleet that is on America's roads today. And given the long life of many diesel vehicles and engines, it's estimated that the existing fleet of vehicles will not be entirely cycled out of existence until about the year 2030. In order to achieve emission reductions from that very large existing diesel fleet, a number of actions have been taken in order to retrofit those vehicles with emission reduction technologies. For example, the Environmental Protection Agency has administered the Clean School Bus Program for a number of years, providing grants to school districts across the Nation for the purpose of retrofitting diesel powered school buses. As another example, Congress has provided funding for diesel retrofits under the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Program. And in addition, the Diesel Emissions Reduction Act was included as part of the Energy Policy Act of 2005. That Act authorizes the expenditure of $200 million annually over a 5-year period for grant and for loan programs funding diesel project retrofits. Most recently, $49.2 million was appropriated by the Congress for that program as a part of the fiscal year 2008 appropriations bill. In addition to these programs administered by EPA, private entities have also often funded clean diesel programs as part of settlement agreements that have been reached with the Environmental Protection Agency in cases in which the agency had alleged that the private entity had committed violations of the environmental laws. These supplemental environmental projects used for diesel emission reductions have totaled $45.5 million from fiscal year 2001 through fiscal year 2006, and they've been a very valuable source of obtaining emission reductions from the existing diesel fleet. But as matters now stand, this very valuable tool to obtain diesel emission reductions from the older vehicles can no longer be used. The Environmental Protection Agency has concluded that because Congress appropriated funds for the Diesel Emissions Reduction Act, which is targeted toward older vehicle retrofits, supplemental environmental projects for diesel retrofits may no longer be used. That decision interprets the Miscellaneous Receipts Act, which prohibits agencies from augmenting from other sources their budgets as approved by the Congress. Because of that Act, the EPA has determined that it can no longer use private funding from case settlements to accomplish diesel retrofits since Congress has directly appropriated some funds for that purpose. In view of the fact that there are 10 million heavy duty diesel vehicles and other engines in use today, the continued use of supplemental environmental projects in case settlements is both cost effective and environmentally beneficial. Mr. Costa's bill would assure their continued use. The measure enjoys bipartisan support and has been endorsed by more than 45 interested organizations, including a broad range of health, environmental and industry groups. The measure would simply grant to EPA specific authority to accept diesel emission reduction supplemental environmental projects as part of settling alleged violations of environmental laws, provided that the projects protect human health or the environment, are related to the underlying violation, do not constitute activities the defendant would otherwise legally be required to perform, and do not provide funds for the staff of the agency or contractors in order to carry out internal EPA operations. I commend Mr. Costa for his fine work in bringing this measure to the House, and I urge passage of the Senate bill which incorporates his legislation. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BOUCHER. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Costa will be speaking. He is the only other speaker which we have. After he finishes, I will be yielding back our time as well.

Mr. BOUCHER. Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Costa). He is the author of the legislation we are considering.

Mr. BOUCHER. Madam Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and yield back the balance of our time.

Mr. BOUCHER. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the Senate bill (S. 2146) to authorize the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to accept, as part of a settlement, diesel emission reduction Supplemental Environmental Projects, and for other purposes, as amended.

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

Mr. BOUCHER

Mr. BOUCHER. Madam Speaker, I rise today to introduce a resolution commending the Barter Theatre on the occasion of its 75th anniversary. It is the longest continuously functioning live stage theater in the U.S. The Barter Theatre is located in my hometown of Abingdon, Virginia. It was founded in 1933. In the midst of the Great Depression, money was difficult to obtain, and families were reluctant to use it on such a luxury as a theater performance. Yet founder Robert Porterfield offered a novel solution: Patrons could view live theater performances in exchange for fresh produce or livestock. This successful ``ham for Hamlet'' arrangement inspired the name, ``Barter Theatre.'' In its 75 years of existence, the Barter Theatre has established itself as a favorite destination for regional, national, and international visitors. Its popularity prompted the Virginia General Assembly in 1946 to designate the Barter Theatre as the State Theater of Virginia. As a premiere tourist attraction in southwest Virginia, the theatre makes a significant economic and cultural contribution to the region. The town of Abingdon and its surrounding localities benefit from the theatre's ability to attract more than 145,000 guests annually to its productions. The Barter Theatre is also a valuable educational resource, reaching thousands of children each season through its productions at Barter and Barter Stage II. Additionally, the Barter Players, the touring company of the theatre, travels to eight States each year performing at schools and community venues. Recently, Barter has created and implemented an innovative internet educational program which teaches students about artistic and technical theatrical elements using a Web-based interactive program available to classrooms across the region. This program exposes students to a side of a theatrical production that they might not have experienced otherwise. I commend and congratulate the Barter Theatre for its contributions to our region and for its many successes over the past 75 years. Passage of the resolution I have introduced commending the theater will be a fitting tribute to its many years of cultural contribution.

Mr. BOUCHER

Mr. BOUCHER. Madam Speaker, I have the privilege of representing Virginia's Ninth Congressional District, of which Virginia Tech is a part. One year ago, a tragedy of a scale and senselessness that defied explanation befell the university, and it came to a campus that is known across the Nation for its friendliness, peacefulness and close association among students and faculty. In the year that has passed, an incredible spirit of cohesion and determination and a generous outpouring of support from across the Nation have benefited the campus, and much healing has occurred. The university's proud traditions and its reputation as an exemplary institution of teaching, learning and research have carried on, and the resilience of students, faculty and the community has assured for Virginia Tech a strong recovery. Today as we remember the enormous loss of young lives full of promise and mature lives of major contribution from a violent and inexplicable act, we also remember the poise and dignity with which the university's faculty and administration responded in a time of uncertainty; The courage of the Virginia Tech, Montgomery County and Blacksburg first responders in a time of emergency; The heroism of those who risked personal safety to prevent further loss of life; The generosity of those who offered their support and financial contributions to the victims and their families in their time of greatest need; And the remarkable spirit of the Virginia Tech community and resilience of our region when faced with great tragedy. Today, as we remember an act of great violence, we also remember Virginia Tech's strong resurgence, and we look forward and are committed to its even greater future.

Mr. BOUCHER

Mr. BOUCHER. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor Gary Douglas Meade and pay tribute to his 43-year public service career to the Commonwealth of Virginia. Douglas Meade, the son of a coal miner, grew up on a farm in Wise County, Virginia. He started his public service career in 1964 as a social worker in Wise County. In 1970 after receiving a master's degree in social work from Virginia Commonwealth University, Douglas worked briefly for the Virginia Department of Social Services in Richmond, Virginia, before returning back to his native roots in southwest Virginia. For the past 36 years, Douglas has been the director of the Washington County, Virginia, Department of Social Services. His office administers and provides annually over $40 million in services to citizens of Washington County. In fiscal year 2007-2008, the Washington County Department of Social Services will touch the life in some way of over 16,000 county citizens. Over the years, Douglas has served on numerous State and local task forces and committees that focused on improving the quality of life and opportunities for rural Virginians. Currently he is involved in several southwest Virginia regional initiatives that are focused on improving the job skills, employment opportunity, health care access, and educational attainment of area citizens. Through his advocacy and public policy development work, Douglas has worked extensively with the Virginia General Assembly and has done some work at the Federal level. He has been recognized as a leader in his field and has received numerous awards. In 1994, Douglas received the President's Award, the Distinguished Service Award, and a Certificate of Appreciation from the Virginia League of Social Service Executives for his work. Douglas' rural upbringing has helped form his strong work ethic, values and community spirit. His warmth and eternal optimism brighten the lives of his family and friends. In 2005, Douglas graduated from the nationally renowned University of Virginia's Sorenson Political Leadership Institute. After retiring from a 43-year career in social services, Douglas has not ruled out running for a political office or continuing, in some way, his commitment to public service. Madam Speaker, I am proud to honor the distinguished career of Douglas Meade and the outstanding public service he has given to the Commonwealth of Virginia.

Mr. BOUCHER

Mr. BOUCHER. Madam Speaker, I rise to introduce the Business Activity Tax Simplification Act of 2008, a measure that will bring much needed clarification to the circumstances under which states may impose taxes on out of state businesses. This is a bi-partisan measure in the principal sponsorship of which I am pleased to be joined by my Virginia colleague Bob Goodlatte. We are joined in sponsorship of the measure by Mr. Chabot, Mr. Artur Davis, Mr. Feeney, Mr. Gallegly, Ms. Herseth Sandlin, Ms. Jackson-Lee, Mr. Hank Johnson, Ms. Lofgren, Mr. Pence, Mr. Bobby Scott, and Mr. Wexler, many with whom we are pleased to serve on the House Judiciary Committee. Traditionally, states and localities have levied corporate income, franchise and other taxes only on those businesses that have a physical presence in the taxing jurisdiction. The growth of the Internet and other forms of advanced communications has made it possible for businesses to conduct a broad range of transactions without the constraints of geopolitical boundaries. As a result, some states have attempted to expand their tax base by assessing business activity taxes against out-of-state companies that have customers but no property or employees in the taxing state. Both large and small companies are facing an increasingly unpredictable tax environment, which hinders business expansion and threatens the continued development of e- commerce. The measure we are introducing today will bring certainty to the increasingly chaotic tax environment for businesses by clarifying that the states cannot attempt to tax the income of a company that has no physical presence within the taxing state's borders. Our legislation sets forth clear, specific standards to govern when businesses should be obliged to pay business activity taxes to a state. Generally, a business must use employees or services in a state for 15 days or more in a calendar year before it is liable to pay business activity taxes to that jurisdiction. The Business Activity Tax Simplification Act also modernizes a law which Congress enacted forty-nine years ago that set clear, uniform standards for when states could tax out-of-state businesses based upon the solicitation of orders for specified kinds of sales. Reflecting the economy of its time, the scope of Public Law 86-272 was limited to income taxes on the sale of tangible personal property. Our nation's economy has changed dramatically over the past half-century, and the statute must be modernized to apply equally to the sale of intangible property and services, and to other business activity taxes. I want to emphasize that the Business Activity Tax Simplification Act does not diminish the ability of states and localities to collect tax revenue. Rather, it rationalizes and makes more predictable the process of doing so. The lack of clarity in current law has led to sometimes absurd results. A collection agent with the New Jersey Department of Taxation stopped a refrigerated truck loaded with product belonging to Smithfield Foods, a company headquartered in my state of Virginia, on the New Jersey turnpike. The agent held the truck and its driver for several hours and demanded that, to release the truck, Smithfield had to wire $150,000 immediately to the New Jersey Department of Taxation. The agent claimed that he had the right to hold the truck and its contents because Smithfield had failed properly to file New Jersey tax returns. Smithfield informed the New Jersey agent that his claim was unfounded. It explained that Public Law 86-272 protected it from New Jersey income taxation because it only engaged in solicitation by advertising in New Jersey and had no physical operations in the state. The agent refused to accept this explanation; however, he finally agreed to release the truck and its driver in return for $8,000. Smithfield appealed this aggressive and incorrect application of Public Law 86-272 to the New Jersey State tax commissioner. Ultimately, New Jersey accepted Smithfield's contention that it has no physical presence in the state and is, therefore, not subject to New Jersey income tax. It issued Smithfield a refund and an apology for its roadside justice system, but not before Smithfield had invested much time and expense in resolving a situation which should not have arisen. Our measure will help avoid such scenarios in the future by clarifying the physical presence standard embodied in Public Law 86-272. New Jersey has used similar tactics against out-of-state companies selling intangible goods to its residents, a situation not covered by Public Law 86-272. It has argued that a mom-and-pop South Carolina software company, with no physical presence in any states besides South Carolina and Georgia, owes a minimum of $600 per year in corporate income taxes and fees based only on the sale of licensed software to a New Jersey entity, and that the company would owe such tax every year that its software was in use in the state, even for those years in which the company had no income from any customer in New Jersey. The Louisiana Department of Revenue has threatened to assess business activity taxes on several out-of-state companies based merely on the fact that they broadcast programming into the state, arguing that the companies are exploiting the Louisiana market because the programming is seen or heard by individuals in Louisiana. Several states attempt to assess business activity taxes on out-of- state credit card companies based solely on the fact that people use the companies' credit cards in the taxing jurisdiction and enjoy the ``substantial privilege of carrying on business'' in the state. Some localities have attempted to impose personal property taxes on property orbiting in space. For example, Los Angeles County attempted to impose a property tax on a county-based company which owned eight communications satellites permanently orbiting in space. The city of Virginia Beach, Virginia, also attempted to impose personal property taxes on three transponders attached to satellites orbiting in space which were owned by a city-based cable company. If states were to use the same approach to impose business activity taxes, on the basis that a satellite orbiting above the state creates a physical presence there or because a business generates income in a state because its satellite passes over the state, there would be significant consequences for many industries. The Business Activity Tax Simplification Act offers Members the opportunity to put an end to nonsensical situations like these. In doing so, we will provide certainty to both U.S. businesses and to states, thereby fostering economic growth and development. I thank Mr. Goodlatte and the original cosponsors of the Business Activity Tax Simplification Act for their support, and I urge each of our colleagues to join with us in passing this bi-partisan measure.

Mr. BOUCHER

Mr. BOUCHER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Chairman, I want to say thank you to the gentleman from California for his kind remarks and for the strong support he has stated for this measure, and I want to thank the gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller) and his outstanding staff for their leadership on the overall issue and also their strong support of this undertaking. It is critically important that we empower the individuals who are delivering services to miners who are affected by drug abuse, who are affected by drug addiction, so that they can become productive once again, remain in the mines working, and that their families can benefit from their productive existence. This amendment takes that important step, and I urge adoption of it.

Mr. BOUCHER. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. BOUCHER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. As the gentleman from California pointed out in his recent comments, there was a compelling article on the front page of The Washington Post on Sunday that details the level of drug dependency and drug addiction that takes place among coal miners who have, because of their work, become injured, received medications, and then that has led to drug dependency, oftentimes to drug addiction, and it is a major and a growing problem. And in the Central Appalachians, where much of our Nation's coal is mined, that problem is one of the largest affecting our communities. Among the major victims of the epidemic we are experiencing are, in fact, coal miners. But the problems in our communities are not limited just to coal miners. As the article published on Sunday indicated, the toll that this sometimes unseen epidemic is taking is worse now than ever before, and it is growing year by year. In 2006, a record 248 people died from drug overdoses in the region that I have the privilege of representing. In that year, accidental pain pill overdoses killed more people in one of the coal mining counties in my congressional district that has a population of 44,000 than died from drug overdoses in Virginia's largest county, Fairfax County, that has a population of 1.1 million. So obviously this problem is disproportionately affecting the coal-producing counties not only in Virginia, but it is happening throughout the Central Appalachian region where coal is mined. The devastation to families and communities in the district that I represent is graphic, and that devastation was so well portrayed in the article that the gentleman from California referenced that was published in The Washington Post on Sunday. And for those who have not read that article, let me commend it because it points out the severity that this problem is imposing on our rural areas. Methadone has now replaced OxyContin as the most abused and the deadliest drug, but the epidemic spans a wide range of pain medications. So the amendment that I'm putting forward really is the action that Mr. McKeon called for just a moment ago in his comments. It is an important step in addressing the mental health needs of the miners who suffer from work-related drug dependency. They are not the sole victims of the epidemic, but they are disproportionately affected by it. The amendment authorizes the expenditure of $10 million in grant awards in regions of the Nation most affected by prescription drug abuse among coal miners in order to provide drug counseling and drug rehabilitation services to them. And that article pointed out the severe lack of those very services that exist in the coal-producing regions of Virginia, and the authorities who are responsible for delivering those kinds of services talked about the inadequacy of resources with which they are currently having to contend. And we take with this amendment one small step in making sure that those resources are enhanced so they can do their jobs better. I urge adoption of the amendment as one important step in addressing an urgent need that we have in the coal mining communities of the Eastern United States. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BOUCHER. Mr. Chairman, at this time I am pleased to yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller).

Mr. BOUCHER

Mr. BOUCHER. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of the measure which I am pleased to cosponsor with the gentlelady from New York, Mrs. McCarthy, and the gentleman from Michigan, Mr. Dingell. I want to thank both of my colleagues for their careful and constructive work on the legislation. The bill before us today is a well-tailored response to the tragedy that occurred earlier this year in my Congressional District at Virginia Tech University. It also meets a nationwide need for better reporting of mental health records to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, against which prospective gun purchases are checked to determine whether they are eligible to purchase firearms. Under existing federal law, which was also in effect at the time of the Virginia Tech tragedy, persons who have been adjudicated to be a risk to others or to themselves because of a mental condition are barred from purchasing firearms. The perpetrator of the Virginia Tech tragedy had been adjudicated to be a risk to himself and committed for outpatient mental evaluation. Accordingly, under federal law in effect at the time, he should have been barred from purchasing the firearms he used. However, at the time the purchases were made, Virginia did not submit to the National Instant Background Check System mental health records of persons who were committed for outpatient as opposed to inpatient mental evaluation. Therefore, the disqualifying adjudication that the perpetrator was a risk to himself was not submitted to the background check system, and he was able to purchase firearms. Ironically, at the time Virginia had the best record among the States for submitting mental health records to the national system. Since the tragedy, Virginia's mental health record submissions have been made much more thorough by an executive order signed by Tim Kaine, the Commonwealth's Governor. Nationwide, the number of mental health records submitted by the States to the federal database has doubled since the tragic events of April. I am pleased by this progress, but there are further improvements to be made, as 18 states currently do not submit names to the federal database. The bill we will pass today will further improve the submission of mental health records nationwide by providing grants to States which undertake projects to make more thorough record submissions. I also support the changes made by the Senate which strengthen the appeal process provided by the bill for individuals to have their names removed from the database if their mental health records are inaccurate or outdated. These changes will further ensure the accuracy of the National Instant Background Check System. I commend Mrs. McCarthy for her longstanding effort to take these necessary and constructive steps, and I urge passage of the bill.

Mr. BOUCHER

Mr. BOUCHER. I thank the gentleman from Michigan for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Senate amendment now pending before the House, and I urge its approval by the House. We are poised today to make a landmark advance in national energy policy. By 2020, vehicle fuel economy will increase by 40 percent, reaching 35 miles per gallon when averaging together cars and light trucks. I want to commend Chairman Dingell of our Energy and Commerce Committee and the outstanding committee staff who have worked so long and hard in order to bring this advance before the House today in the form of legislation that has a bipartisan base of support and that, in fact, will be signed by the President. Under our energy efficiency provisions, future greenhouse gas emissions will be lessened by 10 billion tons over the next two decades. In the year 2030 alone, our efficiency provisions will reduce CO2 emissions by an amount equal to the annual emissions of all of the cars and trucks on America's highways today and the grounding of all airplanes now flying in the United States for a total of 5 years. We make more than 40 separate energy efficiency improvements. They set new standards for lighting many multiples beyond today's requirements. They set higher standards for future models of an array of consumer products from refrigerators to freezers to dishwashers to clothes washers to residential boilers, electric motors and electric fans. They create a process to capture much of the heat that is wasted today in America's industrial operations, enabling us to generate potentially as much as 60 gigawatts of electricity from that wasted industrial heat; and that could be done without emitting any carbon dioxide beyond what is emitted today. The bill that we bring to the House creates a Federal support policy in support of a smart grid and electricity demand response leading to the day when homeowners can save money by consuming more electricity at times of lower demand when prices are less and then not consuming electricity during the high peak hours when electricity is considerably more costly. We promote plug-in hybrids and advanced auto batteries to bring closer the day when most transportation in the United States will be electrically powered. The bill requires a major increase in the use of biofuels, enhancing our energy security and further reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The measure is a landmark energy achievement, and I strongly encourage its adoption. Mr. Speaker, I want to commend the Speaker of the House, Ms. Pelosi, who from the day that she took office as our Speaker has strongly encouraged this energy advance. I don't think it would have happened without her strong leadership. And I again want to thank the chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee for all of the work he has done and the landmark achievements that this bill represents.

Mr. BOUCHER

Mr. BOUCHER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 3454, bipartisan legislation which will authorize the conveyance by the Forest Service to the Central Advent Christian Church in Alleghany County, Virginia of a small parcel of land containing a cemetery currently operated by the church. The church and the land in question are located in my Congressional District. For 66 years, the Central Advent Christian Church has been operating its cemetery through a Special Use permit granted by the U.S. Forest Service. The historic cemetery contains more than 300 graves, two- thirds of which are located on land owned by the U.S. Forest Service. In recent years, maintenance of this land has become difficult for the Forest Service, taking valuable staff time to remove discarded flowers and other items. It is the desire of the families of those buried in the cemetery, the members of Central Advent Christian Church and the Forest Service that the cemetery be transferred into church ownership, and the bill before the House takes the entirely appropriate step of authorizing the conveyance. This measure authorizes the transfer of the 6.08 acres constituting the cemetery and a small additional tract, which would otherwise be landlocked by this transfer, to the church. The total amount of land to be conveyed to the church will not exceed 8 acres. Conveyance of the property will be contingent on the completion of a survey acceptable to the Forest Service at the church's expense. I appreciate the efforts of Chairman Peterson and his staff as well as my colleague from Virginia, Mr. Goodlatte, in working with me on this legislation, and I thank Mr. Goodlatte, who also represents a portion of Alleghany County, for cosponsoring the bill with me. H.R. 3454 enjoys bipartisan support in the House and its passage would benefit both the Forest Service and the members of the Central Advent Christian Church. I urge approval of the measure.

Mr. BOUCHER

Mr. BOUCHER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 1 minute (Mr. BOUCHER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. BOUCHER. Mr. Speaker, at this time I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Gordon), chairman of the House Committee on Science and Technology.

Mr. BOUCHER. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman), the chairman of the Committee on Oversight of the House.

Mr. BOUCHER. Mr. Speaker, while I do not favor the renewable electricity mandate, because some areas of the country simply do not have the resources available to meet its requirements, the bill before us makes a substantial and important contribution to national energy policy and I rise in support of the measure. Its 40 separate energy efficiency provisions will reduce future greenhouse gas emissions by 10 billion tons by the year 2030. In the year 2030 alone, the reduction will equal the annual CO2 emissions of all of the vehicles on America's highways at the present time. The agreement on vehicle fuel efficiency is truly a landmark achievement. The renewable fuels mandate will substantially lessen our reliance upon imported oil, and the bill advances the introduction of electrically powered vehicles and much needed CO2 separation and storage technologies. I urge the passage of this measure. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.