[House Hearing, 109 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
H.R. 50
=======================================================================
COMPILATION OF MARKUPS
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE
ONE HUNDRED NINTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
DECEMBER 31, 2006
__________
Serial No. 109-67
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Science
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.house.gov/science
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
31-026 WASHINGTON : 2007
_____________________________________________________________________________
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512�091800
Fax: (202) 512�092250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402�090001
COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE
HON. SHERWOOD L. BOEHLERT, New York, Chairman
RALPH M. HALL, Texas BART GORDON, Tennessee, RMM*
LAMAR S. SMITH, Texas JERRY F. COSTELLO, Illinois
CURT WELDON, Pennsylvania EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas
DANA ROHRABACHER, California LYNN C. WOOLSEY, California
KEN CALVERT, California DARLENE HOOLEY, Oregon
ROSCOE G. BARTLETT, Maryland MARK UDALL, Colorado
VERNON J. EHLERS, Michigan DAVID WU, Oregon
GIL GUTKNECHT, Minnesota MICHAEL M. HONDA, California
FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma BRAD MILLER, North Carolina
JUDY BIGGERT, Illinois LINCOLN DAVIS, Tennessee
WAYNE T. GILCHREST, Maryland DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois
W. TODD AKIN, Missouri SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas
TIMOTHY V. JOHNSON, Illinois BRAD SHERMAN, California
J. RANDY FORBES, Virginia BRIAN BAIRD, Washington
JO BONNER, Alabama JIM MATHESON, Utah
TOM FEENEY, Florida JIM COSTA, California
RANDY NEUGEBAUER, Texas AL GREEN, Texas
BOB INGLIS, South Carolina CHARLIE MELANCON, Louisiana
DAVE G. REICHERT, Washington DENNIS MOORE, Kansas
MICHAEL E. SODREL, Indiana DORIS MATSUI, California
JOHN J.H. ``JOE'' SCHWARZ, Michigan
MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas
MARIO DIAZ-BALART, Florida
------
Subcommittee on Energy
JUDY BIGGERT, Illinois, Chair
RALPH M. HALL, Texas MICHAEL M. HONDA, California
CURT WELDON, Pennsylvania LYNN C. WOOLSEY, California
ROSCOE G. BARTLETT, Maryland LINCOLN DAVIS, Tennessee
VERNON J. EHLERS, Michigan JERRY F. COSTELLO, Illinois
W. TODD AKIN, Missouri EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas
JO BONNER, Alabama DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois
RANDY NEUGEBAUER, Texas JIM MATHESON, Utah
BOB INGLIS, South Carolina SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas
DAVE G. REICHERT, Washington BRAD SHERMAN, California
MICHAEL E. SODREL, Indiana AL GREEN, Texas
JOHN J.H. ``JOE'' SCHWARZ, Michigan
+SHERWOOD L. BOEHLERT, New York +BART GORDON, Tennessee
------
Subcommittee on Environment, Technology, and Standards
VERNON J. EHLERS, Michigan, Chairman
GIL GUTKNECHT, Minnesota DAVID WU, Oregon
JUDY BIGGERT, Illinois BRAD MILLER, North Carolina
WAYNE T. GILCHREST, Maryland MARK UDALL, Colorado
TIMOTHY V. JOHNSON, Illinois LINCOLN DAVIS, Tennessee
DAVE G. REICHERT, Washington BRIAN BAIRD, Washington
JOHN J.H. ``JOE'' SCHWARZ, Michigan JIM MATHESON, Utah
MARIO DIAZ-BALART, Florida
+SHERWOOD L. BOEHLERT, New York +BART GORDON, Tennessee
Subcommittee on Research
NICK SMITH, Michigan, Chairman
LAMAR S. SMITH, Texas DARLENE HOOLEY, Oregon
CURT WELDON, Pennsylvania DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois
DANA ROHRABACHER, California BRIAN BAIRD, Washington
GIL GUTKNECHT, Minnesota CHARLIE MELANCON, Louisiana
FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas
W. TODD AKIN, Missouri BRAD MILLER, North Carolina
TIMOTHY V. JOHNSON, Illinois DENNIS MOORE, Kansas
DAVE G. REICHERT, Washington DORIS MATSUI, California
MICHAEL E. SODREL, Indiana VACANCY
MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas
VACANCY
+SHERWOOD L. BOEHLERT, New York +BART GORDON, Tennessee
------
Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics
KEN CALVERT, California, Chairman
RALPH M. HALL, Texas MARK UDALL, Colorado
LAMAR S. SMITH, Texas DAVID WU, Oregon
DANA ROHRABACHER, California MICHAEL M. HONDA, California
ROSCOE G. BARTLETT, Maryland BRAD MILLER, North Carolina
FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas
J. RANDY FORBES, Virginia BRAD SHERMAN, California
JO BONNER, Alabama JIM COSTA, California
TOM FEENEY, Florida AL GREEN, Texas
MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas CHARLIE MELANCON, Louisiana
MARIO DIAZ-BALART, Florida
+SHERWOOD L. BOEHLERT, New York +BART GORDON, Tennessee
* LRanking Minority Member appointments/Full Committee and
Subcommittee assignments.
** LVice Chair appointments/Full Committee and Subcommittee
assignments.
+ LThe Chairman and Ranking Minority Member shall serve as Ex-
officio Members of all Subcommittees and shall have the right
to vote and be counted as part of the quorum and ratios on all
matters before the Subcommittees.
C O N T E N T S
2005
Page
H.R. 50--National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Act.....
Proceedings of the markup held by the Subcommittee on
Environment, Technology, and Standards, March 15, 2005..... 1
Proceedings of the markup held by the Full Committee, May 17,
2005....................................................... 43
PROCEEDINGS OF THE MARKUP BY THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT,
TECHNOLOGY, AND STANDARDS ON H.R. 50, NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC
ADMINISTRATION ACT
----------
TUESDAY, MARCH 15, 2005
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Environment, Technology, and
Standards,
Committee on Science,
Washington, DC.
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 1:04 p.m., in
Room 2318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Vernon
Ehlers [Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding.
Chairman Ehlers. Good afternoon. I am pleased to welcome
you to the first--Subcommittee's first markup of the year.
Pursuant to notice, we will consider three important measures
today that together underlie the breadth of jurisdiction of the
subcommittee. Given the number of bills we need to get through
today, my opening statement will be brief, and then I will
explain each bill in more detail as it is brought up.
First we will consider H.R. 50, the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration Act. This bill, a reintroduction of
legislation I authored last Congress, would created an organic
act for NOAA. This is a term that puzzled me when I first got
here because, to me, organic had something to do with organic
chemistry or organic gardening or organic food stores; but an
organic act in the Congress is an act which is an original act
establishing an agency and outlining its functions and
purposes. This organic act for NOAA would provide the
underlying statute of missions and functions to be carried out
by NOAA, something that has not existed since the agency was
formed by executive order in 1970--established by executive
order. It has been modified by executive order and by law
since, but we have never had an organic act, so today we are
trying to remedy that.
Next, we will consider H.R. 250, the Manufacturing
Technology Competitiveness Act. This bill is nearly identical
to legislation I introduced last Congress and which passed the
House last July. Unfortunately, the bill did not receive action
in the Senate, and so we are proposing it once again.
The main focus of the bill is an authorization for the
Department of Commerce Manufacturing Extension Partnership
Program.
And finally, we will consider H.R. 798, the Methamphetamine
Remediation Research Act. This bill, introduced by Ranking
Member Gordon, Representative Calvert, and Chairman Boehlert,
would create a research program at the Environmental Protection
Agency to study the harmful effects of methamphetamine and to
provide important voluntary guidelines for states to use as
they try to clean up former meth laboratories. I suspect many
people are not aware of the extent of this problem and the
dangers involved, but meth labs are springing up, primarily in
rural areas, particularly wooded areas--and I know Oregon is
having considerable problems with them; we have in Michigan as
well because both states have substantial wooded areas where
you can conceal a shack and try to manufacture methamphetamine.
There are several aspects of danger there. One is that very
frequently, because of the danger of the components--and in
fact, the explosive nature of the components--frequently an
explosion occurs, which obliterates the shack and the people
within it, so we lose a number of young people every year who
are engaged in this dangerous pursuit. Even more frequently,
they use a particular structure for this; it becomes very--it
collects a lot of toxic materials because there is a great deal
of toxic material going into the production of methamphetamine.
They actually become not quite superfund sites, but pretty
close to it, and local governments are having a great deal of
trouble cleaning them up to a reasonable standard, and the
expense is substantial for small units of government.
Now, I am pleased that Mr. Wu has introduced this bill,
which will deal with this problem, not only in Oregon and
Michigan, but throughout the country. With that, I am proud to
introduce Mr. Wu from Oregon, the Subcommittee's new Ranking
Member. I have worked before with Mr. Wu on a number of issues.
I know he has a strong interest and considerable experience in
the issues before the Subcommittee. I am very happy that he has
joined us in this position.
I want to thank Mr. Udall. He is on the way but not here
yet. I want to thank Mr. Udall from Colorado, who was a Ranking
Member for the past four years. We had a very productive
relationship, and now he is Ranking Member of the Space
Subcommittee, where spacey Members end up. And I am sorry to
lose him for that purpose, but delighted that Mr. Wu is his
replacement. I am pleased that Mr. Udall will continue to be a
Member of the Subcommittee.
I am now pleased to yield to Mr. Wu for an opening
statement.
[The prepared statement of Chairman Ehlers follows:]
Prepared Statement of Chairman Vernon J. Ehlers
Good afternoon! Welcome to the Subcommittee's first markup of the
year. Pursuant to notice, we will consider three important measures
today that together underlie the breadth of jurisdiction of the
Subcommittee. Given the number of bills we need to get through today,
my opening statement will be brief and then I will explain each bill in
more detail as it is brought up.
First, we will consider H.R. 50, the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Act. This bill, a reintroduction of
legislation I authored last Congress, would create an ``organic act''
for NOAA. This organic act would provide the underlying statute of
missions and functions to be carried out by the NOAA, something that
has not existed since the agency was formed by executive order in 1970.
Next, we will consider H.R. 250, the Manufacturing Technology
Competitiveness Act. This bill is nearly identical to legislation I
introduced last Congress, and which passed the House last July. The
main focus of the bill is an authorization for the Department of
Commerce's Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) program.
And finally, we will consider H.R. 798, the Methamphetamine
Remediation Research Act. This bill, introduced by Ranking Member
Gordon, Representative Calvert and Chairman Boehlert, would create a
research program at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to study
the harmful effects of methamphetamine and provide important voluntary
guidelines for states to use as they try to clean up former ``meth''
laboratories.
I am proud to introduce Mr. Wu from Oregon, the Subcommittee's new
Ranking Member. I know that Mr. Wu has a strong interest and
considerable experience in the issues before the Subcommittee, and I am
very happy that he has joined us. I want to thank Mr. Udall, from
Colorado, who was our Ranking Member for the past four years. We had a
very productive relationship and now he is the Ranking Member of our
Space Subcommittee. I am pleased he will still be a Member of our
subcommittee.
I now yield to Mr. Wu for an opening statement.
Mr. Wu. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. And I look
forward to working with you in a very productive relationship
concerning the broad range of this subcommittee's jurisdiction
in technology transfer, competitiveness, and other crucial
issues for our research, our tech transfer, and our economy.
And in your spirit, Mr. Chairman, I will be brief, even
laconic. I am very pleased to be here with you to participate
in our subcommittee's first markup, markup of the NOAA Organic
Act, the Manufacturing Technology Competitiveness Act, and the
Methamphetamine Remediation Research Act. And with that, Mr.
Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Chairman Ehlers. I thank the gentleman and would just
correct myself. I mentioned this was your bill; it is actually
Mr. Gordon's bill, joined with the methamphetamine. But it is
certainly a bill which is worthy of your attention.
Mister--without object, all Members--all other Members may
place statements in the records, and I ask unanimous consent to
recess the Subcommittee at any point, and without objection it
is so ordered; I hear no objection.
We will now consider the bill H.R. 50, the National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration Act. This bill is identical to
the legislation that I introduced last year and that passed the
Subcommittee at the end of the Congressional session.
Unfortunately, time ran out before we could consider it at Full
Committee. H.R. 50 provides NOAA with an organic act. An
organic act defines the overall missions and functions of an
agency. As an example, H.R. 50 states that the mission of NOAA
is, first, to understand and predict changes in the Earth's
oceans and atmosphere; second, to conserve and manage coastal,
ocean, and great lakes ecosystems; and third, to educate the
public about these topics. The bill also describes the specific
functions NOAA should carry out to fulfill its mission, such as
issuing weather forecasts and warnings.
I should note that H.R. 50 contains very little language
about fisheries or research management at NOAA because those
topics are under the jurisdiction of the Resources Committee,
and particularly the Subcommittee chaired by my colleague from
Maryland, Mr. Gilchrest, who is also, now, a Member of this
committee. I look forward to working with Mr. Gilchrest, my
other colleagues, and the administration, as well as with the
full Resources Committee, to pass truly comprehensive
legislation for NOAA.
I am pleased to recognize Mr. Wu if he wishes to make any
comments about this bill.
Mr. Wu. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I fully support your
interest in moving forward to develop legislation that will
provide NOAA with a statutory foundation to guide its missions
and functions. I congratulate you for introducing H.R. 50.
NOAA is this nation's lead agency charged with conserving
and managing our coastal and oceanic resources. NOAA also plays
a vital role in public safety through the programs of the
National Weather Service to issue weather forecasts and
warnings. We must ensure that NOAA has the resources and
authorities it needs to meet its statutory responsibilities and
to accomplish its resource management and public safety
missions.
H.R. 50 makes a good start on this effort, and I look
forward to working with you further before this legislation is
considered by the full House. And I might add that I also look
forward to working with you and Mr. Gilchrest to have a more
robust component with respect to fisheries, which are of great
interest to us on either coast, and I assume, also, in the
Great Lakes.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my
time.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Wu follows:]
Prepared Statement of Representative David Wu
Good afternoon, everyone. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to be here
this afternoon to participate in our subcommittee's first markup of
legislation. I realize your interest in moving forward to develop
legislation that will provide NOAA with the statutory foundation to
guide its missions and functions. I congratulate you for introducing
H.R. 50.
NOAA is this nation's lead agency charged with conserving and
managing our coastal and oceanic resources. NOAA also plays a vital
role in public safety through the programs of the National Weather
Service to issue weather forecasts and warnings.
We must ensure that NOAA has the resources and authorities it needs
to meet its statutory responsibilities and to accomplish its resource
management and public safety missions.
H.R. 50 makes a good start on this effort, and I look forward to
working with you further before this legislation is considered by the
Full Science Committee.
Chairman Ehlers. I thank you for your comments, and let me
just note the presence of Mr. Udall. Mr. Udall, I paid you
several compliments in your absence. I won't repeat them, but I
expressed my appreciation for your good service as Ranking
Member of this subcommittee. We will miss you, and I am happy
that you are going to continue to be on the Subcommittee.
Mr. Udall. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. In the spirit of the
old adage, you never get in trouble for something you didn't
say. I would just say I think probably those compliments are
undeserved, and I do look forward to working with you as a
Member of the Committee, and with Ranking Member Wu. Thank you.
Chairman Ehlers. I thank the gentleman for his comments,
and I disagree with him; they are deserved.
I ask unanimous consent that the bill is considered as read
and open to amendment at any point and that the Members proceed
with the amendments in the order of the roster. Without
objection, so ordered.
The first amendment on the roster is an en bloc amendment
offered by Mr. Wu. Are you ready to proceed with your
amendment?
Mr. Wu. Yes, Mr. Chairman. I have amendment at the desk.
Chairman Ehlers. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk. Amendment to H.R. 50 offered by Mr. Wu of
Oregon.
Chairman Ehlers. I ask unanimous consent to dispense with
the reading. Without objection, so ordered.
Mr. Wu. My amendment, Mr. Chairman, does three things. The
first part of my amendment clarifies current policy of having
the National Weather Service serve as the Nation's source for
issuing forecasts and warnings. The public safety function
performed by the National Weather Service should not be
contracted to outside providers. There are numerous commercial
weather providers that also have an important role to play in
weather forecasting. They and the National Weather Service have
developed a productive partnership that serves our nation well.
This language ensures that it will continue to do so.
The second part of my amendment ensures the continuance of
the agreements between NOAA and its established employee
organization. The final part of my amendment requires NOAA to
engage the agency's client base, this Congress, and their own
employees in the development of any organizational changes.
NOAA partners include State and local governments,
commercial interests in recreation, fishing, navigation, and
weather forecasting, the research and education communities,
and conservation organizations. NOAA reorganizations should not
occur without the involvement of the many organizations that
work with NOAA.
Mr. Chairman, I understand that you will be supporting my
amendment. I yield back.
Chairman Ehlers. I thank Mr. Wu for working with us on his
amendment. It is a worthy amendment. I believe it strengthens
the bill, and the Chair is pleased to support this amendment.
Is there any further discussion on this amendment? None?
Mr. Udall. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
Chairman Ehlers. The gentleman may proceed for five
minutes.
Mr. Udall. Mr. Chairman, in the interest of moving the
legislation forward, I don't have an amendment, but I would
like clarification on an issue of concern to me, and I believe
to all of the Members of the Committee. The mission we are
defining for NOAA is a broad one, and I certainly agree that
NOAA's mission should be defined broadly to include the many
important operation and research functions it performs for our
nation. However, I am concerned about the potential for overlap
with NASA's mission. And as you know, reports have surfaced at
various times, indicating the possibility that NASA's Earth
science programs might be transferred to NOAA. And I was
curious if it was your intention to endorse or facilitate that
type of transfer through this legislation.
Chairman Ehlers.--with your comment.
Mr. Udall. I would be happy to yield to the----
Chairman Ehlers. I thank gentleman for yielding.
There is no intent in this bill to favor that one way or
the other and no plans to do any such thing. It is true there
is overlap between NOAA and NASA. There is also overlap between
NOAA and the armed services with the new satellite program. And
I think--my personal opinion is that there is going to have to
be much greater effort made in NOAA--and I hope it will occur
under this bill--to work more closely with other agencies with
which they have joint interests. And that, of course, includes
NASA as well as the armed forces and perhaps other government
agencies, perhaps the Department of Interior as an example. So
my hope is that operating under an organic act, it will be
easier for them to develop interagency agreements to deal with
these issues. At this point, it has been pretty much on an ad
hoc basis, as far as I can see, particularly with the satellite
program.
So there is no ulterior motive in the bill to deal with
this, and so far as I know, nothing in the bill would encourage
that sort of thing. But it would be something that we would be
involved in judging on a case-by-case basis, as they present.
Mr. Udall. I thank the Chairman. And reclaiming my time, if
I could ask just one follow-on question?
I understand we are planning a hearing on NASA's Earth
sciences program in the near future, and it would be my hope
that--and this is the thrust of my question--we would have that
hearing before we markup H.R. 50 in the Full Committee. And I
would be happy to yield to the gentleman again.
Chairman Ehlers. I assume that hearing would be on the
Space Subcommittee rather than this subcommittee, so I would
suggest that since you are on that committee that you make that
request known to the Chairman. I would not want to hold up H.R.
50 at any point, but if that Subcommittee wishes to conduct
such a hearing early on, that would be most helpful.
Mr. Udall. Reclaiming my time, I hear the gentleman
suggesting that he would be amenable to the Space Subcommittee
taking a look at that this, but you don't want to slow down the
process that H.R. 50----
Chairman Ehlers. The gentleman is correct, and that is
based on consideration of how rapidly or not rapidly bills tend
to move through Committee--through the House, through the
Senate, and I want to make certain that this gets passed during
this Congress and preferably this year if at all possible. But
I would be happy to work with the Chair of the Space
Subcommittee on a joint hearing if he would wish to do it.
Mr. Udall. That seems to be the general thrust here, and I
will talk to Chairman Calvert as well, and I look forward to
working with you, and we will prove, Mr. Chairman, Ross Perot
wrong where he said a committee is a cul-de-sac down which
great ideas go to die. So we have, I think a bigger load to
shoulder here when it comes to proving Mr. Perot wrong.
Chairman Ehlers. Well, you also have to remember that was a
goal of the founders of this nation, to make a structure so
complicated that very few things would pass, assuming that only
the best would survive. But since this bill is so superb, we
are not worried about what the process might do to it.
Any further comments on the amendment? Hearing none, the
vote occurs on the amendment. All in favor, say aye. Those
opposed say no. The yeas have it, and the amendment is agreed
to.
Are there any other amendments? Hearing none, the question
is on the bill. H.R. 50, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration Act, as amended--all those in favor will say
aye. All those opposed will say no. In the opinion of the
Chair, the ayes have it.
I will now recognize Mr. Wu for a motion.
Mr. Wu. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I move that
the Subcommittee favorably report the bill H.R. 50, as amended,
to the Full Committee. Further, I ask unanimous consent that
the staff be instructed to make all necessary technical and
conforming changes to the bill as amended, in accordance with
the recommendations of the Subcommittee.
Chairman Ehlers. The question is on the motion to report
the bill as amended favorably. Those in favor of the motion
will signify by saying aye. Opposed, no. The motion carries,
and the bill favorably reported. Without object, the motion to
reconsider is laid upon the table.
I thank the Committee very much.
Without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid upon
the table. I wish to express my appreciation to all of the
Members of the Committee for the rapid action on this group of
bills and the good spirit in which we have all approached these
bills and trying to improve them. So I appreciate your
consideration. I thank the Committee Members for their
attendance. This concludes our subcommittee markup.
[Whereupon, at 1:46 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
Appendix:
----------
H.R. 50, Section-by-Section Analysis, Amendment Roster
Section-by-Section Analysis of H.R. 50,
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Act
Section 1. Short Title.
The short title of this Act is the ``National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration Act.''
Section 2. Definitions.
Defines terms used in the Act.
Section 3. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
Establishes the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA) within the Department of Commerce and describes the mission and
functions of NOAA.
Section 4. Administration Leadership.
Describes the leadership structure of NOAA, including a new
position of a Deputy Assistant Secretary for Science, Technology,
Education and Outreach, who shall be responsible for coordinating and
managing all research activities across the agency, and must be a
career position. Also, this section designates the Deputy Under
Secretary for Oceans and Atmosphere as the Chief Operating Officer of
the Administration, responsible for the day-to-day aspects of the
Administration's operations and management.
Section 5. National Weather Service.
Directs the Secretary of Commerce to maintain a National Weather
Service within NOAA.
Section 6. Operations and Services.
Directs the Secretary to maintain programs within NOAA to support
operational and service functions. These functions would include all
the activities of NOAA's National Environmental Satellite Data and
Information Service (NESDIS) and the mapping and charting activities of
the National Ocean Service.
Section 7. Research and Education.
Directs the Secretary to maintain programs within NOAA to conduct
and support research and education functions.
Section 8. Science Advisory Board.
Establishes a Science Advisory Board for NOAA, which would provide
scientific advice to the Administrator and to Congress on issues
affecting NOAA.
Section 9. Reports.
Requires two reports from the Secretary. Each report is to be
delivered to Congress within 18 months of the date of enactment of the
Act. One report should assess the adequacy of the environmental data
and information systems of NOAA and provide a strategic plan to address
any deficiencies in those systems. The other report must provide a
strategic plan for research at NOAA. The National Academy of Sciences
(NAS) shall review each report prior to delivery to Congress.
Section 10. Effect of Reorganization Plan.
Repeals the Executive Order that established NOAA in 1970.
Section 11. Savings Provision.
Provides that all rules and regulations, and other technical legal
topics that were previously assigned to the Administration, remain in
effect under this Act.
Section 12. Transition.
Makes the effective date of the Act two years after the date of
enactment and requires NOAA to reorganize around the themes outlined in
sections five through seven.
Section 13. Facility Evaluation Process.
Provides that NOAA cannot expend funds to close or transfer a
facility without a 60-day public comment period, 90 days notification
to Congress, review by the Science Advisory Board (if appropriate),
preparation of anticipated costs and savings, and preparation of a
statement of the impacts of the facility change on NOAA and its part
PROCEEDINGS OF THE FULL COMMITTEE MARKUP ON H.R. 50, NATIONAL OCEANIC
AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION ACT
----------
TUESDAY, MAY 17, 2005
House of Representatives,
Committee on Science,
Washington, DC.
The Committee met, pursuant to call, at 10:08 a.m., in Room
2318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Sherwood L.
Boehlert [Chairman of the Committee] presiding.
Chairman Boehlert. I want to welcome everyone here today
for this markup of bills concerning the heavens and the Earth
and to the agencies that explore them, NOAA and NASA.
Now let me just say this before I give you the rest of this
wonderful statement.
The Committee on Science will come to order. Pursuant to
notice, the Committee on Science meets to consider the
following measures: H.R. 50, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration Act; H.R. 2363, To establish a Science and
Technology Scholarship Program to award scholarships to recruit
and prepare students for careers in the National Weather
Service and in the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration marine research, atmospheric research, and
satellite programs; H.R. 426, Remote Sensing Applications Act
of 2005, and H.R. 1022, the George E. Brown, Jr. Near-Earth
Object Survey Act.
I ask unanimous consent for the authority to recess the
Committee at any point during consideration of these matters,
and without objection, it is so ordered.
We will now proceed with the markup beginning with the
opening statements, and I will continue mine.
The main bill before us today is the NOAA Organic Act
introduced by Dr. Ehlers, which we had initially planned to
markup last week. This bill will give NOAA a firm legislative
grounding, something that was called for by the Ocean
Commission, among others. The Administration has also called
for an Organic Act for NOAA.
But our bill will do more than merely found NOAA into law.
It will raise the profile of science at NOAA and improve its
management. The bill also will greatly improve oversight of the
agency by ensuring that Congress and the public get the
information needed to evaluate NOAA's organizational structure,
facilities plans, budgeting, and satellite programs. This is a
solid bill that will strengthen the agency.
And now we look forward to working with the Resources
Committee, which shares jurisdiction over portions of NOAA, to
get this bill to the Floor. Also related to NOAA, we will take
up Congressman Rohrabacher's bill to create a Scholarship for
Service Program at NOAA. And he is a real leader on that
effort, and we applaud that. We have done the same thing with
NASA and the Department of Energy. Service scholarships are a
great way to entice students into science, math, and
engineering while also helping the Federal Government develop
the workforce it will need. These scholarships have been
championed tirelessly by Congressman Rohrabacher, and I
congratulate him for that.
We are running the scholarship program through as a
separate bill, because specific program authorizations
generally are not part of agency Organic Acts. We will also
take up two bills related to space today. These were last-
minute additions to today's roster, which is something we have
generally avoided on this committee. But this seemed like an
opportune time to move these bills, and we continue to work on
them through manager's amendments on the Floor.
Mr. Udall's bill, which the Committee also passed last
Congress, concerns remote sensing. Mr. Udall will offer an
amendment that will take care of concerns raised by companies
in the remote sensing data business, concerns that have stymied
progress on this bill in the past. I know that Mr. Bonner and
I, perhaps some others, have some further ideas for perfecting
the bill, and we will work on those as the bill moves forward.
Mr. Rohrabacher's bill focuses on near-Earth objects, a
subject that has long concerned him and has gotten quite a bit
of publicity lately. Congressman Rohrabacher has helped us all
understand that asteroids may present a real threat to Earth
and that we need to pay greater attention to them. All of these
bills will improve our lives through increasing our
understanding of the Earth, how it works, and what may threaten
it.
As usual, these bills represent a bipartisan effort, and I
take pride in that. I look forward to their passage.
The Chair recognizes Mr. Gordon.
Mr. Gordon.
[The prepared statement of Chairman Boehlert follows:]
Prepared Statement of Chairman Sherwood L. Boehlert
I want to welcome everyone here today for this markup of bills
concerning the heavens and the Earth--and to the agencies that explore
them, NOAA and NASA.
The main bill before us today is the NOAA Organic Act, introduced
by Dr. Ehlers, which we had initially planned to mark up last week.
This bill will give NOAA a firm legislative grounding, something that
was called for by the Ocean Commission among others. The Administration
has also called for an Organic Act for NOAA.
But our bill will do more than merely found NOAA in law. It will
raise the profile of science at NOAA and improve its management. The
bill also will greatly improve oversight of the agency by ensuring that
Congress--and the public--get the information needed to evaluate NOAA's
organizational structure, facilities plans, budgeting and satellite
programs. This is a solid bill that will strengthen the agency.
And now we look forward to working with the Resources Committee,
which shares jurisdiction over portions of NOAA, to get this bill to
the Floor.
Also related to NOAA, we will take up Congressman Rohrabacher's
bill to create a scholarship for service program at NOAA, as we have at
NASA and the Department of Energy. Service scholarships are a great way
to entice students into science, math and engineering while also
helping the Federal Government develop the workforce it will need.
These scholarships have been championed tirelessly by Congressman
Rohrabacher, and I congratulate him for that.
We are running the scholarship program through as a separate bill
because specific program authorizations generally are not part of
agency organic acts.
We will also take up two bills related to space today. These were
last minute additions to today's roster, which is something we have
generally avoided on this committee. But this seemed like an opportune
time to move these bills, and we can continue to work on them through
manager's amendments on the Floor.
Mr. Udall's bill, which the Committee also passed last Congress,
concerns remote sensing. Mr. Udall will offer an amendment that will
take care of concerns raised by companies in the remote sensing data
business--concerns that have stymied progress on this bill in the past.
I know that Mr. Bonner and I and perhaps some others have some further
ideas for ``perfecting'' the bill, and we will work on those as the
bill moves forward.
Mr. Rohrabacher's bill focuses on Near-Earth Objects, a subject
that has long concerned him and that has gotten quite a bit of press
lately. Congressman Rohrabacher has helped us all understand that
asteroids may present a real threat to Earth and that we need to pay
greater attention to them.
All of these bills will improve our lives through increasing our
understanding of the Earth, how it works and what may threaten it. As
usual, these bills represent a bipartisan effort. I look forward to
their passage.
Mr. Gordon.
Mr. Gordon. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. You have summed up
what we are going to do this morning very well. I just want to
concur that it is a good idea, I think, to take up these
additional three bills today, and I want to give my thanks to
the staff on both sides for the good cooperative work that they
have done over the last week in trying to bring NOAA together
as well as these three bills, and I look forward to the markup.
And I yield my time back.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Gordon follows:]
Prepared Statement of Representative Bart Gordon
I want to thank the Chairman for scheduling this markup.
Originally we were to just take up H.R. 50 today, but I think it is
to the advantage of our Members that we will expeditiously take up
three other bills, all of which can probably move on suspension on the
Floor.
In addition to the NOAA organic act, I am especially pleased to see
the Remote Sensing Act move through Committee. We have dealt with this
in past Congresses and I am happy the Chairman agrees that we can move
that bill forward today.
I don't want to delay the process here this morning with an
extensive preliminary statement, but let me take a moment to thank
staff on both sides of the aisle for their work to handle these bills.
I think the Members have been well served through their efforts.
With that, I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you very much.
Without objection, Members may place statements in the
record at this point.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Wu follows:]
Prepared Statement of Representative David Wu
Good morning, everyone. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to be here today
to participate in the Science Committee's markup of H.R. 50. I
appreciate your interest in moving forward to develop legislation that
will provide NOAA with the statutory foundation to guide its missions
and functions.
NOAA is this nation's lead agency charged with conserving and
managing our coastal and oceanic resources. NOAA also plays a vital
role in public safety through the programs of the National Weather
Service to issue weather forecasts and warnings. We must ensure that
NOAA has the resources and authorities it needs to meet its statutory
responsibilities and to accomplish its resource management and public
safety missions. H.R. 50 makes a good start on this effort, and we want
to continue to work with Chairman Boehlert and the majority on the
dollar figures for facility changes.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Jackson Lee follows:]
Prepared Statement of Representative Sheila Jackson Lee
Mr. Chairman,
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Act is an
important piece of legislation that deserves strong consideration along
with the appropriate Amendments. NOAA was created through the merger of
a number of organizations in the 1970s. However, it still has no
legislation that establishes it as an Agency or formally defines it
missions.
The legislation before this committee today will help to refine the
mission of NOAA and allow the agency to succeed in the future.
Specifically, the legislation authored by my colleague Mr. Ehlers will
define broad mission areas and general authorities and to codify the
existing primary administrative positions at NOAA. Based upon text from
the Ocean Commission report this bill defines the mission and function
of NOAA. The bill codifies the current senior positions of the agency:
Administrator/Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere and
the Assistant Secretary for Oceans and Atmosphere. The current
positions of Deputy Under Secretary and Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Oceans and Atmosphere are also specifically authorized and Deputy
Assistant Secretary for International Affairs.
Among the provisions I am most supportive of is Section 5 of the
bill which calls upon NOAA to maintain the National Weather Service as
a distinct entity. The National Weather Service Employees Organization
(NWSEO) is very supportive of this position. NWS forms a major part of
NOAA's operational mission and I have long advocated that accurate
weather forecasting is not only useful for planning purposes, but can
also be used in possible life saving capacity as the technology
continues to develop.
This legislation needs to be clearer on certain issues; I am
especially concerned about the issue of separation between the mission
of NOAA and the Earth science programs at NASA. As we heard last week
from testimony provided by Mr. Diaz of NASA at last week's Full
Committee hearing, he indicated NASA's plan for a number of their
missions (Landsat, Glory) will be to transfer these Earth science
programs to NOAA. In addition, the Ocean Commission Report suggests
that NOAA should take on NASA's Earth sciences programs. Firstly, I am
against the idea that Earth science programs should be diminished at
NASA. Secondly, NOAA's budget cannot absorb these programs in its
current budget. The current mission statement in the bill does create
overlap with the mission statement for NASA. Clarifying language should
be inserted to ensure that these necessary Earth science programs are
continued in one fashion or another.
Again, I believe this legislation is pertinent and should be
implemented with due consideration for all amendments. NOAA deserves to
have proper mission which is achievable under the right parameters.
Thank you.
Chairman Boehlert. We will now consider H.R. 50, National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Act. I recognize Dr.
Ehlers to present some introductory remarks.
Mr. Ehlers. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to
explain my bill.
This is certainly an important bill, and I say that not
because I have a large ego, but because it is very rare that we
have an opportunity to pass an organic act through this
committee. And this bill, H.R. 50, establishes an organic act
for NOAA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Act.
An organic act defines the overall mission and functions of
an agency. As an example, my bill states that the mission of
NOAA is to, first, understand and predict changes in the
Earth's oceans and atmosphere; second, conserve and manage
coastal, ocean, and Great Lakes ecosystems; and third, educate
the public about these topics.
NOAA was created in 1970 by an Executive Order that placed
the agency in the Department of Commerce and transferred
various oceanic and atmospheric functions from other agencies
into the new NOAA. Since that time, NOAA has operated under a
confusing collection of issue-specific laws that are not
coordinated by an overarching mission, therefore, the need for
an organic act.
In September 2004, the U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy
released its final report, which called for Congress to pass an
organic act for NOAA and clarify in one place the mission and
program goals of the agency. The Bush Administration supports
Congressional passage of a NOAA and organic act and made it a
priority in the Administration formal response to the Ocean
Commission report. In the 108th Congress, witnesses at Science
Committee hearings strongly endorsed this bill.
Today, I will offer a manager's amendment, which makes
technical corrections and reflects negotiations with the
minority. I will explain the amendment further when it is
offered.
I should note that H.R. 50 contains little language about
fisheries management at NOAA, because that topic is under the
jurisdiction of the Resources Committee, and in particular, the
jurisdiction of the Subcommittee chaired by my colleague from
Maryland, Mr. Gilchrest.
I look forward to working with the Members of that
committee to join us in passing truly comprehensive legislation
for NOAA. I urge my colleagues today to support H.R. 50, and I
yield back the balance of my time.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Ehlers follows:]
Prepared Statement of Representative Vernon J. Ehlers
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to explain my bill.
H.R. 50, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Act, is an
organic act for NOAA. An organic act defines the overall mission and
functions of an agency. As an example, my bill states that the mission
of NOAA is to:
(1) understand and predict changes in the Earth's oceans and
atmosphere;
(2) conserve and manage coastal, ocean, and Great Lakes
ecosystems; and
(3) educate the public about these topics.
NOAA was created in 1970 by an executive order that placed the
agency in the Department of Commerce and transferred various oceanic
and atmospheric functions from other agencies into the new NOAA. Since
that time, NOAA has operated under a confusing collection of issue-
specific laws that are not coordinated by an overarching mission.
In September 2004, the U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy released its
final report, which called for Congress to pass an organic act for NOAA
and clarify in one place the mission and program goals of the agency.
The Bush Administration supports Congressional passage of a NOAA
organic act, and made it a priority in the Administration formal
response to the Ocean Commission report. In the 108th Congress
witnesses at Science Committee hearings strongly endorsed my bill.
Today I will offer a manager's amendment which makes technical
corrections and reflects negotiations with the minority. I will explain
the amendment further when it is offered.
I should note that H.R. 50 contains little language about fisheries
management at NOAA because that topic is under the jurisdiction of the
Resources Committee, in particular the Subcommittee chaired by my
colleague from Maryland, Mr. Gilchrest. I look forward to working with
the Members of that committee to join us in passing truly comprehensive
legislation for NOAA. I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 50, and I
yield back the balance of my time.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you very much, Dr. Ehlers, and a
special thanks from all of us for your hard work to bring us to
the point where we find ourselves today.
Mr. Gordon.
Mr. Gordon. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Once again, let me say that I think Mr. Ehlers has done a
good job in evaluating this bill, and I want to thank him for
the work with his staff in putting it together.
A couple of concerns I do have, though, is that we are
still trying to determine what is an appropriate value to be
triggering the review process. The bill has a $5 million limit,
but I think the Committee needs to do some more work on this to
make sure that that really is a valid number, and I am sure we
will be doing that before it goes to the Floor. And I do
appreciate Mr. Ehlers' work in the past.
Finally, let me just say that the bill defines a broad
mission for NOAA to allow this agency to grow and change as
needed to serve our resource needs as our nation grows and
changes. However, I do not believe the broadly-defined mission
in this bill should serve as an invitation to this or future
Administrations to transfer programs from other agencies to
NOAA without sufficient planning and adequate funding. And I
think that is very important.
We look forward to working with you and our colleagues on
the Committee of Resources as this bill continues to move
forward, and I yield back my time.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Gordon follows:]
Prepared Statement of Representative Bart Gordon
Thank you, Mr. Chairman for bringing H.R. 50 before the Committee
this morning. I would also like to thank Rep. Ehlers for introducing
the NOAA Organic Act.
I recognize H.R. 50 is not yet a true organic act for NOAA. The
bill does not include important authorities and functions in fisheries,
coastal zone management, ocean mapping and charting, and a number of
other important operations that are in the jurisdiction of the
Committee on Resources.
This committee's programs, however, are well-treated in this
legislation. I am especially pleased that we are including explicit
language to ensure that the structure and function of the National
Weather Service remains unchanged.
The 3,700 employees of the National Weather Service fulfill a vital
public safety mission across this nation everyday in cooperation with
the network of professionals in the private sector.
We have worked well together on language to try to establish a
regular procedure for proposed changes in NOAA facilities. However, I
want to keep working to understand what an appropriate dollar value is
to trigger that review process. The bill has $5 million, but I think
the Committee needs to do more work before this bill gets to the floor
to understand all the implications of this language. We do have some
information from NOAA on this, but since they prefer the $5 million
number I think we need to double check some of that information.
We have achieved steady improvements to our weather forecasting
through investments in research and technology and the expansion of our
system of weather observing satellites. We should ensure continued
progress in weather forecasting and understanding the Earth's
atmospheric and oceanic systems.
The bill defines a broad mission for NOAA to allow this agency to
grow and change as needed to serve our resource needs as our nation
grows and changes. However, I do not believe the broadly defined
mission in this bill should serve as an invitation to this or a future
Administration to transfer programs from other agencies to NOAA without
sufficient planning and adequate funding.
We look forward to working with you and our colleagues on the
Committee on Resources as this bill moves forward.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you very much.
I ask unanimous consent that the bill be considered as read
and open to amendment at any point and that Members proceed
with the amendments in the order of the roster. Without
objection, so ordered.
The first amendment on the roster is an amendment offered
in the nature of a substitute offered by Dr. Ehlers. I ask
unanimous consent that the amendment in the nature of a
substitute be treated as original text for purposes of
amendment under the five-minute rule. Without objection, so
ordered.
Dr. Ehlers, are you ready to proceed?
Mr. Ehlers. Yes, Mr. Chairman.
This substitute amendment strengthens and clarifies certain
sections of H.R. 50.
Chairman Boehlert. Excuse me, Dr. Ehlers.
The Clerk will report the amendment, and then we will hear
the eloquent words of Dr. Ehlers.
Mr. Ehlers. I have an amendment at the desk.
Ms. Tessieri. Amendment in the nature of a substitute to
H.R. 50 offered by Mr. Ehlers of Michigan.
Chairman Boehlert. I ask unanimous consent to dispense with
the reading. Without objection, so ordered.
The gentleman is recognized for five minutes.
Mr. Ehlers. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
This substitute amendment strengthens and clarifies certain
sections of H.R. 50, as it was reported by the Environment,
Technology, and Standards Committee. Specifically, as compared
to the bill as reported, my amendment first provides technical
clarification. It also provides additional authorities of the
Administrator of NOAA, such as conducting education and
outreach activities. It emphasizes NOAA's role in forecasting
of and warning for tsunamis. It also provides for input from
the National Academy of Sciences earlier in the process of NOAA
developing its strategic plan for management of its
environmental data and information systems. It requires NOAA to
notify Congress when NOAA starts new satellite programs,
encounters serious problems with, or makes major changes to
existing satellite programs, and finally clarifies that nothing
in the bill shall alter the responsibilities or authorities of
other federal agencies.
These changes were developed after careful consultation
with the Administration, outside experts, NOAA stakeholders,
and other Members of this committee.
I urge my colleagues to support this substitute amendment
for H.R. 50 and yield back the balance of my time.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Ehlers follows:]
Prepared Statement of Representative Vernon J. Ehlers
This substitute amendment strengthens and clarifies certain
sections of H.R. 50 as it was reported by the Environment, Technology
and Standards Committee.
Specifically, as compared to the bill as reported, my amendment:
Provides technical clarifications;
Provides additional authorities for the Administrator
of the NOAA, such as conducting education and outreach
activities;
Emphasizes NOAA's role in forecasting of and warning
for tsunamis;
Provides for input from the National Academy of
Sciences earlier in the process of NOAA developing its
strategic plan for management of its environmental data and
information systems;
Requires NOAA to notify Congress when NOAA starts new
satellite programs, encounters serious problems with or makes
major changes to existing satellite programs; and
Clarifies that nothing in the bill shall alter the
responsibilities or authorities of other federal agencies.
These changes were developed after careful consultation with the
Administration, outside experts, NOAA stakeholders, and other Members
of this committee. I urge my colleagues to support this substitute
amendment for H.R. 50 and yield back the balance of my time.
Chairman Boehlert. I want to thank Dr. Ehlers for his work
on the bill, and the Chair supports his amendment.
Is there further discussion on the amendment?
Mr. Udall. Mr. Chairman, I would move to strike the last
word.
Chairman Boehlert. Who seeks recognition?
Mr. Udall, my distinguished colleague and good friend from
Colorado.
Mr. Udall. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I will be brief, I hope.
I am pleased to see some of the changes included in my good
friend, Dr. Ehlers' amendment regarding the evaluation process
for the closures, relocation, or consolidation of NOAA
facilities. Particularly, I am pleased to see that the Congress
must be notified if any NOAA facility will be closed,
relocated, or consolidated. This covers 183 facilities that
could have been closed without Congressional notification under
the original definition of a facility as having a budget
greater than $1 million.
I am also pleased that the language has been included to
evaluate National Weather Service's field offices by involving
a similar evaluation process used in the National Weather
Modernization Act.
These are both good government provisions, and I am pleased
that they have been included in Dr. Ehlers' amendment.
However, I would like to express my concern that there are
at least 28 NOAA facilities with budgets between $1 million and
$5 million. NOAA will merely have to notify Congress of
closures, relocations, or consolidations of these facilities
without going through an evaluation process. I do not believe
that we know enough about how this will affect these 28
facilities at this time to set the number at $5 million.
While I do not want to try to amend this language in an
effort to move the bill through Committee, I plan to continue
to work on the issue in an effort to ensure that any changes to
the organization of NOAA facilities is thoroughly evaluated and
services are not degraded.
In conclusion, I would like to thank the Chairman and Dr.
Ehlers for working with me on this issue, and I look forward to
continuing this working relationship in the future as we move
this bill forward.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I would yield back any time I have
remaining. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Udall follows:]
Prepared Statement of Representative Mark Udall
Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
I am pleased to see some of the changes included in this amendment
regarding the evaluation process for the closures, relocation, or
consolidation of NOAA facilities.
Particularly, I am pleased to see that Congress must be notified if
any NOAA facility will be closed, relocated or consolidated. This
covers 183 facilities that could have been closed without Congressional
notification under the original definition of a facility as having a
budget greater than $1 million.
I am also pleased that language has been included to evaluate
National Weather Services field offices by involving a similar
evaluation process used in the National Weather Modernization Act.
These are both good government provisions and I am pleased they
have been included in Mr. Ehlers amendment.
However, I would like to express my concern that there are at least
28 NOAA facilities with budgets between $1 and $5 million. NOAA will
merely have to notify Congress of closures, relocations or
consolidations of these facilities without going through an evaluation
process.
I do not believe that we know enough about how this will affect
these 28 facilities at this time to set the number at $5 million.
While I do not want to try to amend this language in an effort to
move the bill through Committee, I plan to continue to work on issue in
an effort to ensure that any changes to the organization of NOAA
facilities is thoroughly evaluated and services are not degraded.
I would like to thank the Chairman and Mr. Ehlers for working with
me on this issue and hope to continue this working relationship in the
future.
With that Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you very much, Mr. Udall, and we
will be glad to continue our work with you, because you bring
up a very good point. It is one that should concern us all, and
we will work cooperatively to get the best possible result.
The vote, then, is on--all right.
The second amendment on the roster is offered by the
gentleman from Illinois, Mr. Costello. Are you ready to
proceed?
Mr. Costello. Mr. Chairman, I am. My amendment is at the
desk.
Chairman Boehlert. The Clerk will read the amendment.
Ms. Tessieri. Amendment offered by Mr. Costello of
Illinois.
Mr. Costello. Mr. Chairman, I ask that we dispense with the
reading of the amendment.
Chairman Boehlert. Without objection, so ordered.
The gentleman is recognized for five minutes to explain his
amendment.
Mr. Costello. Mr. Chairman, I thank you.
And Mr. Chairman, my amendment is a ``buy American and
protect American jobs'' amendment. The amendment is
straightforward, and it will protect American jobs.
Mr. Chairman, my amendment addresses two contracting issues
with NOAA. One, it prohibits federal jobs from being outsourced
to foreign nations, and two, it requires NOAA contracts for
goods and services to be performed in the United States.
In cases where NOAA issues a contract for goods or services
to a private-sector contractor, NOAA would have to ensure that
the contract work is being done in the United States. Foreign
labor may not be substituted for U.S. labor.
The amendment provides exceptions to this policy. One, the
new Administrator may waive the requirement if an essential
instrument or service is only produced outside the United
States or is only produced by non-U.S. manufacturers. Two, the
President may waive the requirement if, in his opinion, it is
in the interest of national security. Three, the restriction
does not apply to goods or services that are now obtained for
use outside of the United States or in case where the functions
are performed by U.S. federal workers outside the United
States.
Regardless of how Members of the Committee feel about the
A-76 process on either side of the aisle, we should have an
agreement that tax dollars should not be spent to create jobs
in other countries and put Americans out of work. We must look
for ways to protect our national economy. NOAA should be
getting its goods and services here in America, not abroad. We
may not be able to keep the big multi-national firms from
moving offshore or setting up supply chains that stretch from
China to our local retailers, but we ought to be able to block
NOAA from doing exactly that.
And Mr. Chairman, I ask for your support and ask for the
support of Members of the Committee, and I----
Mr. Gordon. Would the gentleman yield?
Mr. Costello. I would be happy to yield to the Ranking
Member.
Mr. Gordon. Let me just quickly say that, as you pointed
out, we are all aware that the Administration has launched an
aggressive effort to cut government jobs through the A-76
circular out of OMB. And we all want to see government work as
efficiently as possible, but I think the jury is still out on
this outsourcing, whether it really is effective. But clearly,
your niche in this of not sending jobs overseas is an important
one. I think that it is something that we can all agree upon,
and I commend you for this amendment.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you.
The gentleman's time has expired.
I know the gentleman's amendment is well-intended, and none
of us would argue with its thrust to keep and create jobs in
the United States. I always say that ``jobs'' is my favorite
four-letter word.
But here is the problem with the amendment.
In many ways, it runs afoul of our international trade
obligations. We all know the world is flat. We are constantly
reminded of that every single day. Specifically, we have signed
treaties in which we and the other signatories agree not to
limit most government procurements. And guess why we do that.
We do it because we think it will help keep and create jobs in
the United States by enabling U.S. companies to compete for
government contracts abroad. There is no way to know for sure,
but it is perfectly likely that this amendment would actually
cost jobs in the United States by preventing U.S. companies
from winning procurement contracts overseas.
Moreover, the amendment is at odds with our international
obligations and possibly endangers American jobs, even though
no one can point to a particular problem that this amendment is
designed to resolve.
Is there any indication that NOAA has been loose with the
taxpayers' money by needlessly sending money overseas? The
answer is no. This amendment is a well-meaning, symbolic
expression of the concern we all have with outsourcing, but it
is not designed to combat a specific known problem.
But it would create specific known problems by conflicting
with trade agreements. And I would add that the Administration
strenuously objects for that same reason.
So I will offer a second-degree amendment that says that
the Costello language can not override an international
obligation of the United States. I imagine Mr. Costello will
claim, and I know him from long experience working closely with
him, and we are very good friends, but he will claim, probably,
that this amendment, my second-degree amendment, would gut his
amendment. If that is so, then it just confirms that Mr.
Costello's language would create an international trade
incident, which may hurt the United States. If my language will
not gut Mr. Costello's effort, then there is no reason not to
pass it.
So I urge passage of my amendment, which will balance Mr.
Costello's good intentions. Let me emphasize that. Good
intentions. But we also have to match that with our obligation
to ensure that the United States abides by its international
commitments.
[The prepared statement of Chairman Boehlert follows:]
Prepared Statement of Chairman Sherwood L. Boehlert
I know the gentleman's amendment is well intentioned. And none of
us would argue with its ostensible purpose--to keep and create jobs in
the U.S. I always say that ``jobs'' is my favorite four-letter word.
But here's the problem with the amendment. In many ways, it runs
afoul of our international trade obligations. Specifically, we have
signed treaties in which we and the other signatories agree not to
limit most government procurements. And guess why we do that? We do it
because we think it will help keep and create jobs in the U.S. by
enabling U.S. companies to compete for government contracts abroad.
There's no way to know for sure, but it's perfectly likely that this
amendment would actually cost jobs in the U.S. by preventing U.S.
companies from winning procurement contracts overseas.
Moreover, this amendment is at odds with our international
obligations and possibly endangers American jobs even though no one can
point to a particular problem that this amendment is designed to
resolve. Is there any indication that NOAA has been loose with the
taxpayers money by heedlessly sending money overseas? No.
This amendment is a well meaning, symbolic expression of the
concern we all have with outsourcing, but it's not designed to combat a
specific, known problem. But it would create specific, known problems
by conflicting with trade agreements. And I would add that the
Administration strenuously objects for that same reason.
So, I will offer a second-degree amendment that says that the
Costello language cannot override an international obligation of the
United States.
I imagine Mr. Costello will claim that this would ``gut'' the
amendment. If that is so, then it just confirms that Mr. Costello's
language will create an international trade incident, which may hurt
the U.S. If my language will not ``gut'' Mr. Costello's effort, then
there's no reason not to pass it.
So I urge passage of my amendment, which will balance Mr.
Costello's good intentions with our obligation to ensure that the U.S.
abides by its international commitments.
Mr. Costello. I would ask the Chair to yield.
Chairman Boehlert. The Chair is pleased to yield to his
good friend and colleague.
Mr. Costello. Mr. Chairman, let me respond, if I may. I was
not going to suggest that it guts my amendment, but apparently
it does.
Let me make a couple of points.
One, you make the point of a foreign country or someone
objecting and challenging this provision because of the
international trade agreements that we have through the WTO.
And I would just suggest that this committee should not be in
the business of attempting to protect trade agreements, and in
fact, a provision such as this that we are offering as this
amendment has never been challenged at all by the International
Trade Commission. There has not been a foreign country ever
challenge an issue with the U.S. Government to go to court over
this issue before.
Number two is let me suggest that we have offered and
debated several amendments to other bills in the past, and the
Chair has been very protective in the past of having amendments
adopted that would result in referring a bill from this
committee to another committee. And it--I would suggest that--I
am told at least that your amendment to my amendment would, in
fact, result in this bill being referred to the Ways and Means
Committee.
So I would just raise that issue and last say that, you
know, Members of the Committee have a choice today regarding
NOAA. And the choice is, with exceptions, with--giving the
President the exception that if it is in the interest of
national security, NOAA would not have to abide by this. If
they are buying products now that are only made outside of the
United States, there would be an exception. So I am--it is
pretty clear to me that, you know, instead of this committee
protecting or trying to protect international trade agreements
that have never been challenged in the past on this issue, I
would just suggest that we have a choice to make today and that
is we can either protect American jobs from going overseas
through contracts and services or we can sit here and try and
protect trade agreements that I think many of us do not support
to begin with.
But I would ask again for Members--for their support of my
amendment and to respectfully reject the Chairman's amendment.
And I thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your time.
Chairman Boehlert. I am glad you noted respectfully.
Let me--first of all, let me just say before we proceed,
and the way I would like to proceed, I will just respond
initially briefly to you, and then I will have my amendment
reported, and then we can continue the debate. Okay.
Our advice from counsel is this will not result in a
referral to Ways and Means or any other committee, so we are
getting conflicting advice on both sides. But be that as it
may----
Mr. Costello. Mr. Chairman, we would like to take our
counsel's advice.
Chairman Boehlert. I don't blame you, but guess what, I
have got the advantage of sitting in the Chair. And my counsel
is pretty darn good. But we will get some clarification on
that, too.
The Clerk will report----
Ms. Biggert. Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Boehlert.--the amendment to the amendment.
Ms. Biggert. Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Boehlert. We are going to--here is what we are
going to do. She is going to report, and then we will have
further discussion.
Ms. Tessieri. Amendment offered by Mr. Boehlert of New York
to the amendment offered by Mr. Costello of Illinois.
Chairman Boehlert. I ask unanimous consent that the
amendment be considered as read, and so the Chair is recognized
for five minutes. We will continue this.
Ms. Biggert, you are next.
Ms. Biggert. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I move to strike the last word.
I have just a couple of points.
First of all, to the--to Mr. Costello's amendment, I have
concerns when he talks about we will let the courts decide and
it can always--or that we are protecting international trade
agreements. We are not protecting international trade
agreements. Trade agreements are a legal, binding contract on
the United States and all of the other countries involved, and
we can't protect them, but we really have to make sure that our
actions do not violate the law.
Second of all, the grandfathering in those contracts with
others right now, I think that locks us into an old technology
that if we can not make new agreements with other countries who
might have the quality of goods that we need that the United
States doesn't need and we have grandfathered them in, then
they are not going to be able to proceed with--we can't go to
another country with--that has better technology and that we
don't have. So I have concerns just with the way that that is
written.
Second of all, with the proposed secondary amendment, I
think that that helps to overcome the legality of trade
agreements. My only concern with the secondary amendment is
that it doesn't say who is going to decide. And in most cases
like this, there usually is a provision as--that USTR will be
the deciding body whether--you know, whether that would violate
the trade agreement whether to be able to go ahead or not.
So with that, I think there is a little bit of the language
that would need to be looked at if we decide to go with the
secondary amendment.
And with that, I yield back.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you.
Is there anyone--Ms. Jackson Lee has departed.
Mr. Gutknecht.
Mr. Gutknecht. Mr. Chairman, I am going to vote for your
perfecting amendment here, but I do want to congratulate Mr.
Costello for bringing this issue forward. And for those of you
who have never been out to NOAA's headquarters out in Colorado,
I would encourage you to make a trip out there. And after I was
out there, I came back believing that this was an agency that
not only had a point of view, but was willing to do whatever it
took to prove that particular point of view. And that was
discouraging for me.
But I also want to say this. It is also discouraging to me
that a lot of our partners around the world are more than eager
to allow the United States to shoulder 90 percent of the cost
of doing research of this type and then have little to offer
except criticism of the United States. And so this may be a
ham-fisted way to make a point, but I think it is an important
point that Congress needs to make.
And I guess if you boiled it all down, it comes to this: he
who pays, plays. And a lot of our trading partners in Europe
and in other parts of the world, who are supposedly our allies,
will--are not willing to put up much money in terms of doing
this kind of research but they are constantly critical of the
United States for not doing enough. And so this may not be the
perfect way to make a statement to some of our friends around
the world, but at least it is an attempt.
I will vote for the Chairman's perfecting amendment, but I
would encourage all Members to pay very close attention not
only to what NOAA is up to but sometimes to what our friends
are up to as well.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Boehlert. Ms. Jackson Lee.
Ms. Jackson Lee. I thank the Chairman very much.
I wish my colleagues would look specifically at Mr.
Costello's language, and I think it is, if anything, leans
toward absolute fairness. It particularly talks about
procurement. It talks about contractors and subcontractors
located outside of the United States. Time after time, Members
have voted for this very same language on the Floor of the
House. I hate to use the term ``buy American'' to defend
someone, but I think part of the connection of Mr. Costello's
language and intent, and I don't want to read my analysis into
his language, but over and over again, we talk about building
the science capacity, technology capacity here in the United
States, the number of scholars that we can generate to begin to
foster a greater involvement in this work. NOAA is a scientific
entity. Albeit, it deals with our weather predictions and other
scientific efforts. What Mr. Costello is doing is even more
far-reaching than the concept of ``buy American.'' It is
investing in America. I think he makes provisions if it is to
the necessity of national security that he provides an
exemption.
And I am concerned, though I appreciate the intent of the
Chairman's amendment, I am concerned that this throws this
particular legislation into Ways and Means, which has
jurisdiction over treaties. And this doesn't speak--he does not
speak specifically to treaties, and by its silence, I think
that this legislation can track and parallel the obligations of
a treaty. What it says, where NOAA can, abiding by law, use the
services and goods from within the United States, goods and
services from the United States, they should do it. Why should
we be against that? All of the protections are in the
amendment.
And I would hope that we would see this two-fold: one,
investing in America, and three, investing in America's human
resources, investing in America's small businesses, investing
in America's technology, investing in America's science.
I hope my colleagues will support the amendment, and I
yield back.
Thank you.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you very much.
Before going to Mr. Hall, I just want it known that the
Parliamentarian's office has confirmed that this will--my
substitute amendment, second-degree amendment, will not trigger
a referral to Ways and Means, so let us strike that from your
thinking.
Mr. Hall.
Mr. Hall. Mr. Chairman, thank you.
You know, the lady from Texas was absolutely correct in
saying it is not an unfair thrust, but I was a judge for 12
years, and most of them I ran into wanted a favorable treatment
more than they wanted fair treatment. And I think from the
manner that you had with Mr. Costello evidences the respect
that you have for one another.
But actually, ``buy American'' is a wonderful thrust and
one that we have all supported and voted--all of us have voted
for it many times in many shapes and in many forms. And I read
this amendment over and looked at it with my advisor in my
office. And my thought was if there is some way that the U.S.
could get last chance at any underseller or underbuyer, and I
don't know what your amendment does, but I would like something
like that.
Mr. Chairman, you put it to him pretty hard. If it harms,
it should harm, and if it doesn't harm, there is no damage
done. I will--you are going to explain your amendment, aren't
you, a little more fully, your amendment to his amendment?
Chairman Boehlert. I already did.
Mr. Hall. And--well----
Chairman Boehlert. Do you want me to repeat?
No, I mean, as the fact--look, we are not----
Mr. Hall. Well, maybe you could just talk louder for some
of us older people. You know, your statement to the gentleman
who has the amendment, Mr. Costello, is a lot like a guy
standing in front of a judge in Texas that is about to condemn
him to death and explained his actions, how horrible they were
and how many children that the deceased left and what painful
death it was for him, and he says, ``Now do you have anything
to say before I sentence you to death?'' And he says, ``No,
sir. Under the circumstances, I feel like I am getting off
pretty light.''
So I don't know if Mr. Costello feels that way or not, but
I want to vote for his amendment, but I am going to support
your correcting amendment, if it corrects the amendment. If it
doesn't correct the amendment, it shouldn't correct the
amendment. That is taking a page out of your book.
I yield back.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you very much.
And you just, once again, gave us testimony to why it is
such a delight to have you serving on this committee.
This--let me just say that this is unlike past ``buy
American'' amendments, which did not supersede trade
agreements. What we are saying with my language is that the
Costello language can not override an international obligation
of the United States. You know, I have been in the ranks with
all of us here. We all have the same general intent. We want
everybody to buy American. But we have some international
agreements that have been entered into, and you know, we want
to--we don't want to override those international agreements
based on this amendment.
So with that, let us see, who is next up? Mr. Miller.
Mr. Miller. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Will the Chairman, as the author of the second-degree
amendment, yield to a question or two?
Chairman Boehlert. Will I yield or will----
Mr. Miller. Yes.
Mr. Chairman, do you agree with Mr. Costello that there is
not now any clear provision of treaty or any clear ruling of
law that would apply to this amendment to make it either
permissible or not permissible under the WTO or any other trade
agreement?
Chairman Boehlert. Yeah.
Mr. Miller. You do agree with that?
Chairman Boehlert. The answer is essentially yes.
Mr. Miller. But it is--okay. So then who would decide
whether this was consistent or not? Would it simply be the
Administration that would decide, and if so, what would be--on
what basis would they decide?
Mr. Costello. If the gentleman would yield while the
Chairman is conferring, would you yield?
Mr. Miller. I do yield.
Mr. Costello. That is my whole point.
Mr. Miller. Right.
Mr. Costello. My whole point in the issue with the--when we
are talking about international trade agreements, and my friend
from Illinois made the point, I would tell you that, in my
judgment, it is not clear what our international trade
obligations are under the WTO treaties. And number two, you
know, are we going to interpret treaties here, in this
committee, or are we going to leave it up to the courts or the
International Trade Association to determine what treaties are
violated and what treaties are not violated?
And I would just leave you with this thought. Are we going
to be cautious about trying to protect trade agreements where
we do not even know, as we sit here today, if this violates a
trade agreement? I would just say, as opposed to being cautious
about trade agreements, we ought to be aggressive about
protecting American jobs.
Mr. Miller. Mr. Costello, it did occur to me that my line
of questioning might actually help the point you were making.
Mr. Costello. And I thank the gentleman for that.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you very much, but let me just say
we do know that this would violate existing trade agreement,
and what would happen under the WTO? And it would be NOAA, in
consultation with the U.S. Trade Representative, that would
give us guidance and make the initial interpretation.
We are not going to get into the treaty business here in
the House. I agree with you on that. But we are involved in a
number of treaties, and it seems that we are obligated, under
the provisions of those treaties, to honor them, and we don't
want to do anything that would be in violation that would
trigger an action by WTO.
Mr. Miller. I am sorry. Was that in answer to the question
of who decides and on what basis?
Chairman Boehlert. Yeah. Yeah. The--NOAA, in consultation
with USTR, and incidentally, WTO procurement agreement would be
violated. The CRS review determined that.
Mr. Miller. Okay. My third--actually, I have just a couple
more questions, if I am not----
Chairman Boehlert. Have at it.
Mr. Miller. All right. Thank you, sir.
Mr. Chairman, do you agree with Ms. Biggert's point that
Congress can not exempt this from WTO, or any other trade
agreement, anyway?
Chairman Boehlert. Restate your question, please.
Mr. Miller. I believe Ms. Biggert made the point that we
cannot--Mr. Costello's amendment could not exempt NOAA's
procurement from WTO requirements anyway. Is that--do you agree
with that? Do you agree with Ms. Biggert?
Chairman Boehlert. Yeah, but then there is no reason to
oppose my amendment.
Mr. Miller. But then that also raises the question of
whether it is necessary or whether it is redundant, not that
redundancy has ever been particularly a political sin. We would
all be in deep trouble were it.
Mr. Gordon. Would my friend from North Carolina yield? I
think I can maybe sum this up.
Mr. Miller. All right.
Mr. Gordon. The--in my opinion, in my legal opinion, the
fact of the matter is, we can not, through this committee, pass
some type of law that would make us be in non-compliance with
an international treaty. So, I mean, you know, we can't do
that.
And so here is the practical part of this. There is a lot
of gray area in this law, and what--and this amendment, or
this--by putting this secondary amendment, it really puts us
into a burden of proof situation. In other words, we can't pass
a law that says that we are going to be in violation of an
international treaty. But--that is very vague. And so what this
amendment would do, secondary amendment would do, it would put
the--really the burden of proof on leaning more toward the
international treaties than it would on leaning toward trying
to be aggressive and protecting American jobs.
So it is really dealing in that gray area, and the kind of
message you are going to send out, it is--under no
circumstances are we in this Science Committee going to pass a
law that would allow us to violate an international treaty.
Chairman Boehlert. Yeah, and it----
Mr. Gordon. And I yield back.
Chairman Boehlert. And we are not the people who are going
to sit in judgment. It is going to be the Administrator of NOAA
in consultation with U.S. Trade Representative. We are not
getting into that business.
Mr. Miller. Mr. Chairman, I did have one more question.
Chairman Boehlert. Who else seeks recognition?
Mr. Miller. Actually, could I just ask----
Chairman Boehlert. Ms. Johnson.
Mr. Miller. I guess I can't ask one more?
Chairman Boehlert. Your time is expired now.
Ms. Johnson.
Ms. Johnson of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I would like to yield
to Mr. Costello before me.
Chairman Boehlert. The gentleman is recognized.
Mr. Costello. I thank the gentlelady for yielding. And I
would--you know, we could sit here for the next half-hour and
go back and forth on this issue, but I think it is pretty
clear. The Chairman stated it just a second ago. We are not
going to get into the business of determining international
treaties in this committee. But any time that we can try and
protect American jobs, we should. And if, in fact, this, at
some point in time, that it is determined that it is a
violation of an international trade agreement, which I doubt
very seriously that it is, then we can come back and address
that. But today, we ought to be protecting American jobs.
And I yield to the gentleman from North Carolina.
Mr. Miller. Thank you.
I am sorry, Mr. Chairman. I have one more question for you.
Chairman Boehlert. Why am I not surprised?
The gentleman will ask the question.
Mr. Miller. All of the discussion so far, Mr. Chairman, has
been about jobs and about buying American. But does this not
also allow the contracting outside the United States of
services? Are we going to be building scientific expertise
somewhere other than here? Of course, I prefer to buy American
goods, but I am particularly concerned about building
scientific expertise in the United States, not somewhere else.
Chairman Boehlert. We don't have any problem with
Subsection A of the amendment. Get the amendment. Read it. What
my second-degree amendment simply says, and I will repeat,
``can not override an international obligation of the United
States.''
Mr. Miller. Right.
Chairman Boehlert. That is not the responsibility of the
Science Committee to determine. That is the responsibility of
the Administrator of NOAA in consultation with the World--with
the U.S. Trade Representative of any Administration.
Who else seeks recognition?
Ms. Biggert.
Ms. Biggert. Let me just take that one step further.
The reason that it is so important that we have this
secondary amendment is because if we don't, and there is a--we
are cited by the--and it goes to court to decide, then what
happens is that the World Trade Organization will, if they say
yes we are in violation of a trade agreement, then they can
sanction us. And it doesn't mean that they are going to
sanction NOAA or anything. They can sanction any product in
our--in this country, like, say, agriculture or financial
services, anything. And so it is so important that we make this
decision prior to going to court. And that is why it is so
important that it is with NOAA and with the USTR to give us an
opinion before this is done whether it would be a violation or
not.
Mr. Costello. And I wonder if my friend from Illinois would
yield?
The point that I have made, as I am trying to make, is
that, to my knowledge, and staff has informed me, that there
has never been a challenge to a ``buy American'' agreement
through the World Trade Organization. So there is not a ruling
by a court, there is not a ruling by anyone on any of these
issues. And what I am saying is, at some point in time, we have
to stand up and say enough is enough. And we have to begin to
protect American jobs.
Now this is not an amendment that says that NOAA can not
contract out for services, can not contract out for other goods
to foreign countries or to foreign labor. There are exceptions.
If the President determines that it is in the interest of
national security or if there are products that are only made
outside of the United States that can not be obtained here in
the country, or if, in fact, the goods are being made by U.S.
workers in other countries, those exceptions are clear in the
amendment. And I would say, you know, at some point in time, we
need to not be so concerned about protecting a gray area in an
international trade agreement and start protecting jobs here at
home.
Ms. Biggert. If I might reclaim my time.
We also have to be protective of our legal obligations and
to make sure that those are not violated. I just think it is
one more--all of your exceptions are very good. Your premise is
very good of buying American, but this one makes it even
better.
Mr. Costello. And I would say that the courts are there for
a reason, that we shouldn't be--we are the Judicial Branch.
They are the Judicial Branch, we are the Legislative Branch,
but the branch that will determine this will be the Judicial
Branch, not the Legislative Branch, and if we are going--every
action that we take, if we are going to be concerned that it is
going to be overruled by a court, you know, I don't think we
would ever get anything done around here.
Ms. Biggert. I don't think that we are worried about
whether what we are doing is legal under the WTO. And this is a
global economy, and we are participating.
I yield back.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you very much.
And thank you.
Ms. Johnson of Texas. Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Boehlert. Ms. Johnson.
Ms. Johnson of Texas. Just one more, I guess, comment.
If we get too over concerned about the language of the
treaties and not allow the appropriate ones to get concern,
it--then I would like to explore what our treaty says with
China, because apparently they have an open-ended agreement, if
we are going to get into treaty agreements, because they
certainly don't respect any of our guidelines.
Chairman Boehlert. I was just advised by the distinguished
Chief of Staff of the Science Committee that China is not part
of WTO and therefore--the procurement agreement, and therefore
it wouldn't apply.
But just let me say this in summing up everything. I must
admire the skill of the gentleman from Illinois' presentation.
I agree with the rhetoric, but not the reasoning. The rhetoric
is something we can all identify with. We are all anxious to do
as much as we can to protect American jobs. That is the desire
of every single Member of this panel, no matter where he or she
may sit.
But it is also the intent of this committee not to go
forward with anything that would be in violation of existing
commitments of the United States of America. And the Costello
Amendment violates the WTO procurement agreement on its face,
according to the Congressional Research Service, a highly-
regarded operation, CRS, non-partisan. We need my language,
because the Costello language goes further in contradicting
trade agreements than past ``buy American'' language does.
[The information follows:]
Chairman Boehlert. So with that, the vote will be on----
Mr. Gordon. Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Boehlert. Yes.
Mr. Gordon. I know we have got to finish this thing up, and
I will try to be quick.
Once again, we can't pass legislation here that is going to
be in violation of an international treaty, so we can all, you
know, go home comfortable about that tonight.
Let me tell you how it really can make a difference. I
had--I have got--the school in my hometown is called Middle
Tennessee State University, and they have got a very good
dyslexia center there. And they have done some work on treating
dyslexia and treating--and also with distant learning in trying
to help teachers around the state learn how to treat people
with dyslexia. So I was persuasive and had $1 million put in
the Defense budget for--so we could do the same sort of thing
with our military schools around the Nation--around the world
to try to help--you know, teach those teachers how to deal with
dyslexic students. And what wound up happening--and
parochially, I will admit, my university was a good one, and so
I was thinking they were going to get this bid. But instead,
what happened, it--there was a little company in New Jersey
that had a front there who got the bid and then shipped
everything to India to be done.
And I think this amendment would have given the Defense
Department or NOAA or someone else the ability, you know, to
take that back. And so I mean, I think this is the kind of--the
real war, it is really where are you going to put the burden of
proof. And I think that is what Mr. Costello does is puts the
burden of proof on keeping the jobs here.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you very much for reminding me of
the outstanding work being done at Middle Tennessee State
University.
And let me, on behalf of all of us, congratulate you on
your ability to get $1 million earmark in the DOD bill. We are
all wondering how you achieved that.
But I would point out that the procurement agreement allows
for exceptions for Defense.
And so with that, I think we have pretty much exhausted it.
The vote is on the amendment to the amendment. If--all in
favor, say aye. Opposed, no. The ayes appear to have it.
Mr. Costello. Mr. Chairman, I would ask for a recorded
vote.
Chairman Boehlert. Mr. Costello asks for a recorded vote.
The Clerk will call the roll.
Ms. Tessieri. Mr. Boehlert.
Chairman Boehlert. Aye.
Ms. Tessieri. Mr. Boehlert votes yes.
Mr. Hall.
Mr. Hall. Aye.
Ms. Tessieri. Mr. Hall votes yes.
Mr. Smith.
[No response.]
Ms. Tessieri. Mr. Weldon.
[No response.]
Ms. Tessieri. Mr. Rohrabacher.
Mr. Rohrabacher. No.
Ms. Tessieri. Mr. Rohrabacher votes no.
Mr. Calvert.
Mr. Calvert. Aye.
Ms. Tessieri. Mr. Calvert votes yes.
Mr. Bartlett.
Mr. Bartlett. Aye.
Ms. Tessieri. Mr. Bartlett votes yes.
Mr. Ehlers.
Mr. Ehlers. Yes.
Ms. Tessieri. Mr. Ehlers votes yes.
Mr. Gutknecht.
Mr. Gutknecht. Yes.
Ms. Tessieri. Mr. Gutknecht votes yes.
Mr. Lucas.
Mr. Lucas. Yes.
Ms. Tessieri. Mr. Lucas votes yes.
Mrs. Biggert.
Ms. Biggert. Yes.
Ms. Tessieri. Mrs. Biggert votes yes.
Mr. Gilchrest.
Mr. Gilchrest. Aye.
Ms. Tessieri. Mr. Gilchrest votes yes.
Mr. Akin.
Mr. Akin. Aye.
Ms. Tessieri. Mr. Akin votes yes.
Mr. Johnson.
[No response.]
Ms. Tessieri. Mr. Forbes.
[No response.]
Ms. Tessieri. Mr. Bonner.
Mr. Bonner. Aye.
Ms. Tessieri. Mr. Bonner votes yes.
Mr. Feeney.
Mr. Feeney. Aye.
Ms. Tessieri. Mr. Feeney votes yes.
Mr. Inglis.
Mr. Inglis. Aye.
Ms. Tessieri. Mr. Inglis votes yes.
Mr. Reichert.
Mr. Reichert. Yes.
Ms. Tessieri. Mr. Reichert votes yes.
Mr. Sodrel.
Mr. Sodrel. Aye.
Ms. Tessieri. Mr. Sodrel votes yes.
Mr. Schwarz.
Mr. Schwarz. Aye.
Ms. Tessieri. Mr. Schwarz votes yes.
Mr. McCaul.
Mr. McCaul. Aye.
Ms. Tessieri. Mr. McCaul votes yes.
Mr. Gordon.
Mr. Gordon. No.
Ms. Tessieri. Mr. Gordon votes no.
Mr. Costello.
Mr. Costello. No.
Ms. Tessieri. Mr. Costello votes no.
Ms. Johnson.
Ms. Johnson of Texas. No.
Ms. Tessieri. Ms. Johnson votes no.
Ms. Woolsey.
Ms. Woolsey. No.
Ms. Tessieri. Ms. Woolsey votes no.
Ms. Hooley.
Ms. Hooley. No.
Ms. Tessieri. Ms. Hooley votes no.
Mr. Udall.
Mr. Udall. No.
Ms. Tessieri. Mr. Udall votes no.
Mr. Wu.
Mr. Wu. No.
Ms. Tessieri. Mr. Wu votes no.
Mr. Honda.
[No response.]
Ms. Tessieri. Mr. Miller.
Mr. Miller. No.
Ms. Tessieri. Mr. Miller votes no.
Mr. Davis.
[No response.]
Ms. Tessieri. Mr. Carnahan.
Mr. Carnahan. No.
Ms. Tessieri. Mr. Carnahan votes no.
Mr. Lipinski.
Mr. Lipinski. No.
Ms. Tessieri. Mr. Lipinski votes no.
Ms. Jackson Lee.
Ms. Jackson Lee. No.
Ms. Tessieri. Ms. Jackson Lee votes no.
Mr. Sherman.
Mr. Sherman. No.
Ms. Tessieri. Mr. Sherman votes no.
Mr. Baird.
[No response.]
Ms. Tessieri. Mr. Matheson.
Mr. Matheson. No.
Ms. Tessieri. Mr. Matheson votes no.
Mr. Costa.
Mr. Costa. No.
Ms. Tessieri. Mr. Costa votes no.
Mr. Green.
Mr. Green. No.
Ms. Tessieri. Mr. Green votes no.
Mr. Melancon.
Mr. Melancon. No.
Ms. Tessieri. Mr. Melancon votes no.
Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Boehlert. Is there any other Member who seeks
recognition?
Mr. Hall. Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Boehlert. Mr. Hall.
Mr. Hall. I didn't really understand fully what Mr. Wu
said. Like when you were speaking earlier, I couldn't hear you.
You weren't talking loud enough for some of us older people,
and I didn't understand Mr. Wu, and I would like to know what
Mr. Wu said, and then I would also like to really know what he
meant. And I would like to see it in writing. I would like to
have time to have him----
Chairman Boehlert. This is called a filibuster.
Mr. Hall. That is what I was waiting to hear, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Boehlert. The Clerk will record.
Ms. Tessieri. Mr. Chairman, yes, 18; no, 17.
Chairman Boehlert. The amendment is passed, and the vote is
on the amendment, as amended. All in favor, say aye. Opposed,
no. The ayes have it. The amendment, as amended, is passed.
Are there any other amendments to the amendment in the
nature of a substitute? If not, the vote occurs on the
amendment in the nature of a substitute, as amended. All in
favor, say aye. Those opposed, say no. The ayes have it, and
the amendment is agreed to.
Are there any other amendments? Hearing none, the vote is
on the bill H.R. 50, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration Act, as amended. All of those in favor will say
aye. Opposed, no. In the opinion of the Chair, the ayes have
it.
I recognize Dr. Ehlers to offer a motion.
Mr. Ehlers. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee
favorably report H.R. 50, as amended, to the House with the
recommendation that the bill, as amended, do pass. Furthermore,
I move that staff be instructed to prepare the legislative
report and make necessary technical and conforming changes and
that the Chairman take all necessary steps to bring the bill
before the House for consideration.
Chairman Boehlert. The question is on the motion to report
the bill, as amended, favorably. Those in favor of the motion
will signify by saying aye. Opposed, no. The ayes have it, and
the bill is favorably reported.
Without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid upon
the table.
I move that Members have two subsequent calendar days in
which to submit supplemental, minority, or additional views on
the measure. I would move pursuant to Clause 1 of Rule 22 of
the Rules of the House of Representatives that the Committee
authorizes the Chairman to offer such motions as may be
necessary in the House to adopt and pass H.R. 50, National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Act, as amended. Without
objection, so ordered.
I want to thank everybody for participating and for your
attendance and indulgence.
This concludes our Committee markup.
[Whereupon, at 11:15 a.m., the Committee was adjourned.]
Appendix:
----------
Subcommittee on Environment, Technology, and Standards Markup of H.R.
50 Memorandum; H.R. 50, as amended; Section-by-Section Analysis of H.R.
50, as amended; Amendment Roster; Section-by-Section Analysis of
Manager's Amendment
Section-by-Section Analysis of H.R. 50,
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Act, as amended
Section 1. Short Title.
``National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Act.''
Section 2. Definitions.
Defines terms used in the Act.
Section 3. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
Establishes the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA) within the Department of Commerce and describes the mission and
functions of NOAA.
Section 4. Administration Leadership.
Describes the leadership structure of NOAA, including a new
position of a Deputy Assistant Secretary for Science, Technology,
Education and Outreach, who shall be responsible for coordinating and
managing all research activities across the agency, and must be a
career position. Also, this section designates the Deputy Under
Secretary for Oceans and Atmosphere as the Chief Operating Officer of
the Administration, responsible for the day-to-day aspects of the
Administration's operations and management.
Section 5. National Weather Service.
Directs the Secretary of Commerce to maintain a National Weather
Service within NOAA.
Section 6. Operations and Services.
Directs the Secretary to maintain programs within NOAA to support
operational and service functions. These functions would include all
the activities of NOAA's National Environmental Satellite Data and
Information Service (NESDIS) and the mapping and charting activities of
the National Ocean Service.
Section 7. Research and Education.
Directs the Secretary to maintain programs within NOAA to conduct
and support research and education functions.
Section 8. Science Advisory Board.
Establishes a Science Advisory Board for NOAA, which would provide
scientific advice to the Administrator and to Congress on issues
affecting NOAA.
Section 9. Reports.
Requires two reports from the Secretary. Each report is to be
delivered to Congress within 18 months of the date of enactment of the
Act. One report should assess the adequacy of the environmental data
and information systems of NOAA and provide a strategic plan to address
any deficiencies in those systems. The other report must provide a
strategic plan for research at NOAA. The National Academy of Sciences
(NAS) shall review each report prior to delivery to Congress.
Section 10. Effect of Reorganization Plan.
Repeals the Executive Order that established NOAA in 1970.
Section 11. Savings Provision.
Provides that all rules and regulations, and other technical legal
topics that were previously assigned to the Administration, remain in
effect under this Act.
Section 12. Transition.
Makes the effective date of the Act two years after the date of
enactment and requires NOAA to reorganize around the themes outlined in
sections five through seven.
Section 13. Facility Evaluation Process.
Provides that NOAA cannot expend funds to close or transfer a
facility without a 60-day public comment period, 90 days notification
to Congress, review by the Science Advisory Board (if appropriate),
preparation of anticipated costs and savings, and preparation of a
statement of the impacts of the facility change on NOAA and its part.
Section-by-Section Analysis of Manager's Amendment to
H.R. 50, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Act
Section 1. Short Title.
``National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Act"
Section 2. Definitions.
Defines terms used in the Act.
Section 3. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
Establishes the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA) within the Department of Commerce and describes the mission and
functions of NOAA.
Section 4. Administration Leadership.
Describes the leadership structure of NOAA, including a new
position of a Deputy Assistant Secretary for Science, Technology,
Education and Outreach, who shall be responsible for coordinating and
managing all research activities across the agency, and which must be a
career position. Also, this section designates the Deputy Under
Secretary for Oceans and Atmosphere as the Chief Operating Officer of
the Administration, responsible for the day-to-day aspects of the
Administration's operations and management.
Section 5. National Weather Service.
Directs the Secretary of Commerce to maintain the National Weather
Service within NOAA.
Section 6. Operations and Services.
Directs the Secretary to maintain programs within NOAA to support
operational and service functions. This section does not name any
organizational units of NOAA, but the functions listed include all the
activities of NOAA's National Environmental Satellite Data and
Information Service (NESDIS) and the mapping and charting activities of
the National Ocean Service.
Section 7. Research and Education.
Directs the Secretary to maintain programs within NOAA to conduct
and support research and education functions.
Section 8. Science Advisory Board.
Establishes a Science Advisory Board for NOAA, which would provide
scientific advice to the Administrator and to Congress on issues
affecting NOAA.
Section 9. Reports.
Requires two reports from the Secretary. Each report is to be
delivered to Congress within 18 months of the date of enactment of the
Act. One report, by the National Academy of Sciences should assess the
adequacy of the environmental data and information systems of NOAA and
provide a strategic plan to address any deficiencies in those systems.
The other report is strategic plan for research at NOAA.
Section 10. Public-Private Partnerships.
Requires NOAA to review its policy on public-private partnerships
once every five years. Clarifies the no changes in NOAA's current
policy are required.
Section 11. Effect of Reorganization Plan.
Repeals the Executive Order that established NOAA in 1970.
Section 12. Savings Provision.
Provides that the Act does not change the legal status of any NOAA
rule, regulation or other legal matter.
Section 13. Reorganization Plan.
Requires NOAA to submit a reorganization plan to Congress not less
than 18 months after enactment of this Act.
Section 14. Facility Evaluation Process.
Provides that NOAA cannot expend funds to close or transfer certain
facilities without a public comment period, review by the Science
Advisory Board (if appropriate), analysis of anticipated costs and
savings and impact on NOAA services, and notification to Congress.
Section 15. Budget Reprogramming.
Requires NOAA to submit to the Science Committee a copy of any
reprogramming requests submitted to Appropriations Committees.
Section 16. Satellite Notification.
Requires NOAA to notify Congress when NOAA starts new satellite
programs, encounters serious problems with, or makes major changes to
existing satellite programs.