[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 123 (Tuesday, September 16, 1997)]
[House]
[Pages H7298-H7301]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




         EARTHQUAKE HAZARDS REDUCTION ACT OF 1977 AUTHORIZATION

  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass 
the Senate bill (S. 910) to authorize appropriations for carrying out 
the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 for fiscal years 1998 and 
1999, and for other purposes.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                                 S. 910

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       Section 12 of the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 
     (42 U.S.C. 7706) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)(7)--
       (A) by striking ``and'' after ``1995,''; and
       (B) by inserting before the period at the end the 
     following: ``, $20,900,000 for the fiscal year ending 
     September 30, 1998, and $21,500,000 for the fiscal year 
     ending September 30, 1999'';
       (2) in subsection (b)--
       (A) by striking ``and'' after ``September 30, 1995;'';
       (B) by inserting before the period at the end the 
     following: ``; $52,565,000 for the fiscal year ending 
     September 30, 1998, of which $3,800,000 shall be used for the 
     Global Seismic Network operated by the Agency; and 
     $54,052,000 for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1999, of 
     which $3,800,000 shall be used for the Global Seismic Network 
     operated by the Agency''; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following: ``Of the amounts 
     authorized to be appropriated under this subsection, at 
     least--
       ``(1) $8,000,000 of the amount authorized to be 
     appropriated for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1998; 
     and
       ``(2) $8,250,000 of the amount authorized for the fiscal 
     year ending September 30, 1999,
     shall be used for carrying out a competitive, peer-reviewed 
     program under which the Director, in close coordination with 
     and as a complement to related activities of the United 
     States Geological Survey, awards grants to, or enters into 
     cooperative agreements with, State and local governments and 
     persons or entities from the academic community and the 
     private sector.'';
       (3) in subsection (c)--
       (A) by striking ``and'' after ``September 30, 1995,''; and
       (B) by inserting before the period at the end the 
     following: ``, (3) $18,450,000 for engineering research and 
     $11,920,000 for geosciences research for the fiscal year 
     ending September 30, 1998, and (4) $19,000,000 for 
     engineering research and $12,280,000 for geosciences research 
     for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1999''; and
       (4) in the last sentence of subsection (d)--
       (A) by striking ``and'' after ``September 30, 1995,''; and
       (B) by inserting before the period at the end the 
     following: ``, $2,000,000 for the fiscal year ending 
     September 30, 1998, and $2,060,000 for the fiscal year ending 
     September 30, 1999''.

     SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION OF REAL-TIME SEISMIC HAZARD WARNING 
                   SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT, AND OTHER ACTIVITIES.

       (a) Automatic Seismic Warning System Development.--
       (1) Definitions.--In this section:
       (A) Director.--The term ``Director'' means the Director of 
     the United States Geological Survey.
       (B) High-risk activity.--The term ``high-risk activity'' 
     means an activity that may be adversely affected by a 
     moderate to severe seismic event (as determined by the 
     Director). The term includes high-speed rail transportation.
       (C) Real-time seismic warning system.--The term ``real-time 
     seismic warning system'' means a system that issues warnings 
     in real-time from a network of seismic sensors to a set of 
     analysis processors, directly to receivers related to high-
     risk activities.
       (2) In general.--The Director shall conduct a program to 
     develop a prototype real-time seismic warning system. The 
     Director may enter into such agreements or contracts as may 
     be necessary to carry out the program.
       (3) Upgrade of seismic sensors.--In carrying out a program 
     under paragraph (2), in order to increase the accuracy and 
     speed of seismic event analysis to provide for timely warning 
     signals, the Director shall provide for the upgrading of the 
     network of seismic sensors participating in the prototype to 
     increase the capability of the sensors--
       (A) to measure accurately large magnitude seismic events 
     (as determined by the Director); and
       (B) to acquire additional parametric data.
       (4) Development of communications and computation 
     infrastructure.--In carrying out a program under paragraph 
     (2), the Director shall develop a communications and 
     computation infrastructure that is necessary--
       (A) to process the data obtained from the upgraded seismic 
     sensor network referred to in paragraph (3); and
       (B) to provide for, and carry out, such communications 
     engineering and development as is necessary to facilitate--
       (i) the timely flow of data within a real-time seismic 
     hazard warning system; and
       (ii) the issuance of warnings to receivers related to high-
     risk activities.
       (5) Procurement of computer hardware and computer 
     software.--In carrying out a program under paragraph (2), the 
     Director shall procure such computer hardware and computer 
     software as may be necessary to carry out the program.
       (6) Reports on progress.--
       (A) In general.--Not later than 120 days after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Director shall prepare and submit 
     to Congress a report that contains a plan for implementing a 
     real-time seismic hazard warning system.
       (B) Additional reports.--Not later than 1 year after the 
     date on which the Director submits the report under 
     subparagraph (A), and annually thereafter, the Director shall 
     prepare and submit to Congress a report that summarizes the 
     progress of the Director in implementing the plan referred to 
     in subparagraph (A).
       (7) Authorization of appropriations.--In addition to the 
     amounts made available to the Director under section 12(b) of 
     the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 (42 U.S.C. 
     7706(b)), there are authorized to be appropriated to the 
     Department of the Interior, to be used by the Director to 
     carry out paragraph (2), $3,000,000 for each of fiscal years 
     1998 and 1999.
       (b) Seismic Monitoring Networks Assessment.--
       (1) In general.--The Director shall provide for an 
     assessment of regional seismic monitoring networks in the 
     United States. The assessment shall address--
       (A) the need to update the infrastructure used for 
     collecting seismological data for research and monitoring of 
     seismic events in the United States;
       (B) the need for expanding the capability to record strong 
     ground motions, especially for urban area engineering 
     purposes;
       (C) the need to measure accurately large magnitude seismic 
     events (as determined by the Director);
       (D) the need to acquire additional parametric data; and
       (E) projected costs for meeting the needs described in 
     subparagraphs (A) through (D).
       (2) Results.--The Director shall transmit the results of 
     the assessment conducted under this subsection to Congress 
     not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this 
     Act.
       (c) Earth Science Teaching Materials.--
       (1) Definitions.--In this subsection:
       (A) Local educational agency.--The term ``local educational 
     agency'' has the meaning given that term in section 14101 of 
     the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 
     8801).
       (B) School.--The term ``school'' means a nonprofit 
     institutional day or residential school that provides 
     education for any of the grades kindergarten through grade 
     12.
       (2) Teaching materials.--In a manner consistent with the 
     requirement under section 5(b)(4) of the Earthquake Hazards 
     Reduction Act of 1977 (42 U.S.C. 7704(b)(4)) and subject to a 
     merit based competitive process, the Director of the National 
     Science Foundation may use funds made available to him or her 
     under section 12(c) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 7706(c)) to 
     develop, and make available to schools and local educational 
     agencies for use by schools, at a minimal cost, earth science 
     teaching materials that are designed to meet the needs of 
     elementary and secondary school teachers and students.
       (d) Improved Seismic Hazard Assessment.--
       (1) In general.--As soon as practicable after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the

[[Page H7299]]

     Director shall conduct a project to improve the seismic 
     hazard assessment of seismic zones.
       (2) Reports.--
       (A) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, and annually during the period of the 
     project, the Director shall prepare, and submit to Congress, 
     a report on the findings of the project.
       (B) Final report.--Not later than 60 days after the date of 
     termination of the project conducted under this subsection, 
     the Director shall prepare and submit to Congress a report 
     concerning the findings of the project.
       (e) Study of National Earthquake Emergency Training 
     Capabilities.--
       (1) In general.--The Director of the Federal Emergency 
     Management Agency shall conduct an assessment of the need for 
     additional Federal disaster-response training capabilities 
     that are applicable to earthquake response.
       (2) Contents of assessment.--The assessment conducted under 
     this subsection shall include--
       (A) a review of the disaster training programs offered by 
     the Federal Emergency Management Agency at the time of the 
     assessment;
       (B) an estimate of the number and types of emergency 
     response personnel that have, during the period beginning on 
     January 1, 1990 and ending on July 1, 1997, sought the 
     training referred to in subparagraph (A), but have been 
     unable to receive that training as a result of the 
     oversubscription of the training capabilities of the Federal 
     Emergency Management Agency; and
       (C) a recommendation on the need to provide additional 
     Federal disaster-response training centers.
       (3) Report.--Not later than 180 days after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Director shall prepare and submit 
     to Congress a report that addresses the results of the 
     assessment conducted under this subsection.

     SEC. 3. COMPREHENSIVE ENGINEERING RESEARCH PLAN.

       (a) National Science Foundation.--Section 5(b)(4) of the 
     Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 (42 U.S.C. 
     7704(b)(4)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (D);
       (2) by striking the period at the end of subparagraph (E) 
     and inserting ``; and''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(F) develop, in conjunction with the Federal Emergency 
     Management Agency, the National Institute of Standards and 
     Technology, and the United States Geological Survey, a 
     comprehensive plan for earthquake engineering research to 
     effectively use existing testing facilities and laboratories 
     (in existence at the time of the development of the plan), 
     upgrade facilities and equipment as needed, and integrate 
     new, innovative testing approaches to the research 
     infrastructure in a systematic manner.''.
       (b) Federal Emergency Management Agency.--Section 5(b)(1) 
     of the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 (42 U.S.C. 
     7704(b)(1)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (D);
       (2) by striking the period at the end of subparagraph (E) 
     and inserting ``; and''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(F) work with the National Science Foundation, the 
     National Institute of Standards and Technology, and the 
     United States Geological Survey, to develop a comprehensive 
     plan for earthquake engineering research to effectively use 
     existing testing facilities and laboratories (existing at the 
     time of the development of the plan), upgrade facilities and 
     equipment as needed, and integrate new, innovative testing 
     approaches to the research infrastructure in a systematic 
     manner.''.
       (c) United States Geological Survey.--Section 5(b)(3) of 
     the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 (42 U.S.C. 
     7704(b)(3)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (E);
       (2) by striking the period at the end of subparagraph (G) 
     and inserting ``; and''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(H) work with the National Science Foundation, the 
     Federal Emergency Management Agency, and the National 
     Institute of Standards and Technology to develop a 
     comprehensive plan for earthquake engineering research to 
     effectively use existing testing facilities and laboratories 
     (in existence at the time of the development of the plan), 
     upgrade facilities and equipment as needed, and integrate 
     new, innovative testing approaches to the research 
     infrastructure in a systematic manner.''.
       (d) National Institute of Standards and Technology.--
     Section 5(b)(5) of the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 
     1977 (42 U.S.C. 7704(b)(5)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (B);
       (2) by striking the period at the end of subparagraph (C) 
     and inserting ``; and''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(D) work with the National Science Foundation, the 
     Federal Emergency Management Agency, and the United States 
     Geological Survey to develop a comprehensive plan for 
     earthquake engineering research to effectively use existing 
     testing facilities and laboratories (in existence at the time 
     of the development of the plan), upgrade facilities and 
     equipment as needed, and integrate new, innovative testing 
     approaches to the research infrastructure in a systematic 
     manner.''.

     SEC. 4. REPEALS.

       Sections 6 and 7 of the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 
     1977 (42 U.S.C. 7705 and 7705a) are repealed.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Wisconsin [Mr. Sensenbrenner] and the gentleman from California [Mr. 
Brown] each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. 
Sensenbrenner].
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, Senate 910, an act to authorize appropriations for 
carrying out the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act for fiscal 
years 1998 and 1999 is nearly identical to H.R. 2249, a bill reported 
out of the Committee on Science by voice vote on July 29, 1997, and 
discharged from further consideration by the Committee on Resources on 
August 1, 1997.
  S. 910 is the result not only of a bipartisan effort but also a 
bicameral effort to craft legislation that is in the national interest. 
This legislation is strongly supported by both Democrats and 
Republicans on the Committee on Science and the Committee on Resources.
  The National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program has been successful 
in increasing our understanding of the science of earthquakes, where 
earthquakes are likely to occur and how the built environment is 
impacted by the ground shaking and other effects of this phenomenon. 
Because of what this program has taught us over the years, measures 
have been taken at the Federal, State and local levels to mitigate the 
effect of potential earthquakes, reducing our risk and vulnerability.
  Despite these advances, much more remains to be done. Many areas of 
this country face an earthquake threat that could result in the loss of 
thousands of lives and hundreds of billions of dollars of economic 
damage. Early in 1995, Kobe, Japan suffered just such a catastrophe. 
Over 6,000 people lost their lives in that earthquake, and the 
economists have estimated the economic losses at over $200 billion.
  The legislation we have before us today will do much to further our 
understanding of the effects of earthquakes and enable additional 
mitigation to occur. Specifically, S. 910 enables the program to 
continue its good work in earthquake research and hazards mitigation. 
This legislation authorizes approximately $105 million in fiscal year 
1998 and $108 million in fiscal year 1999 for the four NEHRP agencies, 
the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the U.S. Geological Survey, 
the National Science Foundation, and the National Institute of 
Standards and Technology.
  In addition, the bill provides $3.8 million in each of fiscal years 
1998 and 1999 for the U.S. Geological Survey for the operation of the 
global seismic network.
  There are several other provisions of this legislation I would like 
to highlight which I believe will strengthen NEHRP and provide for a 
more robust earthquake science and engineering research infrastructure 
into the next century.
  First, the legislation authorizes $8 million specifically for the 
U.S. Geological Survey's external grants program. This action is 
consistent with the Committee on Science's ongoing efforts to recognize 
and support external competitive peer review programs within the 
science agencies.
  Second, the bill requires the Director of the U.S. Geological Survey 
to develop a prototype, real-time seismic hazard warning system which 
will enable our Nation's vital lifelines, such as electric utilities, 
gas lines, and high speed railroads to receive warnings in advance of 
an earthquake. It is hoped that these warnings can be provided in time 
to shut down the lifelines, thereby guarding against the catastrophic 
effects that occur when such facilities are ruptured or damaged by 
earthquakes.
  Third, this reauthorization requires an assessment of regional 
seismic monitoring networks to determine the state of facilities and 
equipment.
  Fourth, the bill authorizes the Director of the National Science 
Foundation to use funds to develop Earth science teaching materials and 
to make them available to local elementary and secondary schools. This 
is consistent with

[[Page H7300]]

the increased emphasis which the Committee on Science is placing on all 
science education for grades K through 12.
  Fifth, the legislation directs the Director of the U.S. Geological 
Survey to approve hazard assessment of seismic zones throughout the 
United States and report to the Congress.
  Sixth, the bill requires the Director of FEMA to assess and report on 
disaster training capabilities and programs offered by the agency.
  And finally, the bill requires the Director of the National Science 
Foundation to work with the other NEHRP agencies to develop a plan to 
effectively use earthquake engineering research facilities, which 
includes upgrading facilities and equipment and integrating innovative 
testing approaches.
  Mr. Speaker, S. 910 is a well thought out bill which has broad 
bipartisan support as well as the support of the earthquake science and 
engineering communities.
  Before closing, I would like to thank and commend the gentleman from 
California [Mr. Brown], my committee's ranking member, for his work on 
this legislation and his abiding interest throughout his congressional 
career in earthquake-related research and mitigation.
  I would also like to thank the gentleman from Alaska [Mr. Young], the 
chairman, and the gentleman from California [Mr. Miller], the ranking 
member of the Committee on Resources, who share jurisdictions on 
portions of this legislation, for their timely efforts in bringing this 
reauthorization to the House floor.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge support of my colleagues for the passage of 
Senate 910, and I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BROWN of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  (Mr. BROWN of California asked and was given permission to revise and 
extend his remarks.)
  Mr. BROWN of California. Mr. Speaker, the distinguished chairman of 
the full Committee on Science has, I think, given an excellent 
statement explaining the nature of the bill. I, of course, strongly 
support the reauthorization of the act. I was involved in 1977 in the 
passage of the original program and I have watched it flourish from its 
original passage up to the present time.
  I should comment here that developing a program which involves close 
cooperation of four separate agencies is not easy to do in the 
bureaucratic world of Washington, and it does challenge the oversight 
role of the appropriate committees. I think that on the Committee on 
Science, and particularly under the chairmanship of the gentleman from 
Wisconsin [Mr. Sensenbrenner], that we have tried to measure up to the 
requirements of this challenge.
  The program, over the last two decades, has accomplished many things. 
It has produced geological maps and model building codes, for example, 
that have helped many communities not only understand their 
seismological risk but to know what to do about it.
  In the Nation's public schools the program has introduced 
schoolchildren to the science of earthquakes, and with our universities 
it has trained many of the Nation's leading seismologists and 
earthquake engineers but, most importantly, for 20 years, NEHRP has 
provided an authoritative voice informing the public about what are 
real and what are imagined threats from earthquakes, and this is a job 
that we must not trivialize, especially since Hollywood still produces 
films like ``Volcano,'' a film that I enjoyed by the way, no matter how 
factually incorrect it was.
  Despite this long list of accomplishments, NEHRP has also failed to 
meet many of the expectations of its original sponsors, and I think I 
can say that objectively, as one of those sponsors. For example, it has 
been unable to convince every earthquake prone community to adopt 
stronger building codes or to enforce testing protocols for new 
construction methods or to completely monitor earthquake prone areas 
with state-of-the-art equipment.

                              {time}  1330

  While these shortcomings can be blamed on such things as a lack of 
funding, they are also a result of priority-setting efforts within the 
four different NEHRP agencies that are focused primary on each agency's 
individual initiatives and not on the needs of the multiagency NEHRP 
program.
  I have already commented on how difficult that is to do in large 
scale organizations, and this program gives us an opportunity to 
experiment with ways of handling these kinds of complex interagency 
programs.
  I am excited that the bill before us today addresses some of these 
concerns. In addition to authorizing increased funding for the base 
program, the bill begins an ongoing effort to modernize earthquake 
engineering research facilities, to assess seismic monitoring needs 
across the Nation, and to explore rapid-response technologies to alert 
communities to the advent of an earthquake, as the chairman has already 
described. I look forward to the initiation of these new efforts, and I 
hope that this committee vigorously oversees the progress.
  Before I finish, I would like to commend the chairman of the 
Committee on Science by noting that this bill is the product of 
outstanding bipartisan cooperation on the committee and bicameral 
cooperation between our committee and the Committee on Commerce in the 
Senate. In a sense we have short-circuited some of the normal processes 
by meeting informally with the Members on the Senate side to make sure 
that the bill which finally emerged from that body was compatible with 
our interests. That has been successfully achieved. And I particularly 
want to commend the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Sensenbrenner] for 
his commitment to utilizing this informal cooperation to expedite the 
progress of legislation.
  I want to also applaud the work of the other Committee members and 
their staff, especially Kristine Dietz and Tom Weimer of the majority 
committee staff. I rarely have the opportunity to praise staff members 
on the majority side, and I delight in doing so when I can.
  During the remainder of the Congress I hope we can continue to work 
in a bipartisan manner and with our Senate counterparts as we have.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge the passage of this bill and yield back the 
balance of my time.
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman 
from New York [Mr. Boehlert] for purpose of a colloquy.
  Mr. BOEHLERT. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. 
Sensenbrenner] for yielding me the time.
  Mr. Speaker, first I would like to point out that the passage of this 
legislation shows what can happen when we all work together. Since its 
inception in 1977, the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program 
has contributed greatly to what we now know about the science of 
earthquakes as well as how to reduce the damage that they can cause. 
This bill enables the program to continue its good work through 
continued research, hazard assessment, and public education.
  As my colleagues know, Mr. Speaker, the Robert T. Stafford Disaster 
Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, or Stafford Act, as it is commonly 
referred to, is the primary authority under which FEMA operates many of 
its preparedness and response programs. The Stafford Act and, in 
general, Federal management of emergencies and natural disasters falls 
under the jurisdiction of the Committee on Transportation and 
Infrastructure and, more specifically, under the Subcommittee on Water 
Resources and the Environment which I chair. The relationship between 
the Stafford Act and NEHRP has always been complementary, and I just 
want to clarify how this bill fits in with the Stafford Act.
  Mr. Chairman, section 2(a) authorizes the development of a prototype 
seismic hazard warning system. It is my understanding that this system 
will not dictate how disaster warnings are relayed, who is to receive 
such warnings, or any other aspects of disaster warning or 
communication systems which are addressed by section 202 of the 
Stafford Act. Is that correct?
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. BOEHLERT. I yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin.
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. The gentleman from New York [Mr. Boehlert] is 
correct.

[[Page H7301]]

  Mr. BOEHLERT. I thank the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. 
Sensenbrenner], the chairman, for that response.
  Further, section 2(c) provides for the study of disaster-response 
training by FEMA. The purpose of this study is to inform the Congress 
on the adequacy of training for earthquake response. However, it is my 
understanding this section is not intended to change or otherwise 
affect the authority for, or implementation of, disaster preparedness 
training programs. NEHRP does not currently provide authority for such 
training, and there is no intention that this section is meant to 
provide such authority. Is that correct?
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will continue to 
yield, the gentleman is correct again.
  Mr. BOEHLERT. I thank the chairman, and I urge my colleagues to 
support this well-crafted bipartisan bill.
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaHood). The question is on the motion 
offered by the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Sensenbrenner] that the 
House suspend the rules and pass the Senate bill, S. 910.
  The question was taken.
  Mr. CONDIT. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a 
quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not 
present.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 5, rule I, and the 
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be 
postponed.
  The point of no quorum is considered withdrawn.

                          ____________________