[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.
____________________