[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 160 (Thursday, November 13, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Pages S12515-S12516]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                FEDERAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE ACT AMENDMENT

  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate 
proceed to the immediate consideration of H.R. 2977, which was received 
from the House.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       A bill (H.R. 2977) to amend the Federal Advisory Committee 
     Act to clarify public disclosure requirements that are 
     applicable to the National Academy of Sciences and the 
     National Academy of Public Administration.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection to the immediate 
consideration of the bill?
  There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill.
  Mr. GLENN. Mr. President, I rise in strong support of H.R. 2977, the 
Federal Advisory Committee Act Amendments of 1997.
  H.R. 2977 properly excludes the National Academy of Science [NAS] and 
the National Academy of Public Administration [NAPA] from the Federal 
Advisory Committee Act [FACA], while at the same time ensuring that 
certain public sunshine and accountability measures apply to NAS and 
NAPA committees. Since the legislation did not have the benefit of a 
committee report in either the House of Senate, as ranking member of 
the Committee on Governmental Affairs, the committee of jurisdiction 
over FACA, I would like to make the following clarifications regarding 
the bill's provisions.
  Section 15 of the bill establishes procedures with which NAS and NAPA 
must comply as part of agreements with Federal agencies on work to be 
performed. I want to be clear that both NAS and NAPA should apply these 
procedures to standing committees in their future work for Federal 
agencies in addition to future committees that may be created, either 
temporarily or on a standing basis, to complete a specific project or 
projects under an agreement with an agency. In particular, it

[[Page S12516]]

should be noted that any replacement or new member added to a standing 
committee should be done so in accordance with the provisions of 
section 15(b)(1).
  Even though the requirements of section 15(b) of the bill are 
effective on the date of enactment, NAS has indicated in a letter that 
they would make reasonable and practicable efforts, to the fullest 
extent, to apply those requirements to committees that began work as 
part of an agency agreement prior to the date of enactment. I ask 
unanimous consent that the NAS letter be made part of the Record at the 
conclusion of my remarks.
  Section 15(b) provides that public notice be given for a number of 
committee activities. Traditionally, under FACA, public notice 
constitutes notice in the Federal Register. However, FACA was written 
over 20 years ago prior to advent of the information technology 
revolution. Therefore, I believe that public notice under this bill 
could include the use of the Internet, including notice and information 
timely posted on their home pages, by the NAS and NAPA as a means to 
satisfy the bill's public notice procedures.
  Regarding the NAS, I understand that they will establish a reading 
room, free and open to the general public, to make available 
information required to be made public under section 15(b). I concur 
with this approach. Furthermore, the legislation provides that a 
reasonable charge may be imposed by the NAS for distribution of written 
materials. I believe that this charge should be as minimal as possible 
and should not exceed the costs of copying, paper, printing, and 
mailing--if needed. My preference would be that future agreements 
between the Federal agencies and NAS include sufficient funds for 
copying and distribution of relevant materials so that there would be 
no charge to the public, particularly if the request for written 
materials is a narrow or limited one. I would also encourage both 
academies to use the Internet here as well.
  I also want to clarify that the provisions of this bill do not apply 
to NAS or NAPA committees that are self-funded or funded through a non-
Federal source. However, if Federal funds are added to such a committee 
pursuant to an agreement with an agency and the respective academy, 
then the committee must comply with the provisions of this bill.
  Finally, Federal agencies should take note that we have vested 
discretion to the NAS and NAPA regarding implementation of the 
requirements of section 15(b). Agencies should not seek to manage or 
control the specific procedures each academy will adopt in order to 
comply with the requirements of the bill. A certification from the 
academies at the time the final report is to be submitted shall 
suffice. Agencies should not interpret section 15(b)(1) as implying 
that the conflict of interest provisions under the Ethics in Government 
Act are the de facto standard to be employed. That act requires 
extensive financial disclosure and other requirements that are not 
appropriate in this instance.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of a letter from the National 
Academy of Sciences be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                     National Academy of Sciences,


                                      Office of the President,

                                 Washington, DC, November 9, 1997.
     Hon. John Glenn,
     Ranking Minority Member, Committee on Governmental Affairs, 
         U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Glenn: I am writing on behalf of the National 
     Academy of Sciences to explain how the Academy intends to 
     apply the requirements of the Federal Advisory Committee Act 
     of 1997 to Academy committees that are currently working on 
     contracts or agreements with federal agencies.
       Under the Act, the Academy is not required to apply the 
     procedures of section 15 to committees that are currently 
     underway. This makes sense, because the appointment 
     provisions of section 15 could not be applied retroactively 
     to committees whose members have already been appointed. 
     There are, however, some provisions of section 15 that 
     depending upon the stage of a committee's work could be 
     reasonably applied to ongoing committees. For example, if a 
     committee has not yet concluded its data gathering process, 
     the requirement that data gathering meetings be open to the 
     public could be followed by the committee.
       On behalf of the Academy, you have my assurance that the 
     Academy will apply the procedures set forth in section 15 to 
     committees that are currently underway to the fullest extent 
     that is reasonable and practicable.
           Sincerely,
                                                    Bruce Alberts,
                          President, National Academy of Sciences.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be 
considered read a third time and passed, the motion to reconsider be 
laid upon the table and any statements related to the bill be printed 
in the Record.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The bill (H.R. 2977) was passed.

                          ____________________