[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 147 (Thursday, October 15, 1998)]
[House]
[Pages H10925-H10927]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




GRANTING CONSENT OF CONGRESS TO PACIFIC NORTHWEST EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT 
                              ARRANGEMENT

  Mr. GEKAS. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the 
Senate joint resolution (S.J. Res. 35) granting the consent of Congress 
to the Pacific Northwest Emergency Management Arrangement.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                              S.J. Res. 35

       Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
     United States of America in Congress assembled, 

     SECTION 1. CONGRESSIONAL CONSENT.

       Congress consents to the Pacific Northwest Emergency 
     Management Arrangement entered into between the States of 
     Alaska,

[[Page H10926]]

     Idaho, Oregon, and Washington, and the Province of British 
     Columbia and the Yukon Territory. The arrangement is 
     substantially as follows:

          ``PACIFIC NORTHWEST EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT ARRANGEMENT

       ``Whereas, Pacific Northwest emergency management 
     arrangement between the government of the States of Alaska, 
     the government of the State of Idaho, the government of the 
     State of Oregon, the government of the State of Washington, 
     the government of the State of the Providence of British 
     Columbia, and the government of Yukon Territory hereinafter 
     referred to collectively as the `Signatories' and separately 
     as a `Signatory';
       ``Whereas, the Signatories recognize the importance of 
     comprehensive and coordinated civil emergency preparedness, 
     response and recovery measures for natural and technological 
     emergencies or disasters, and for declared or undeclared 
     hostilities including enemy attack;
       ``Whereas, the Signatories further recognize the benefits 
     of coordinating their separate emergency preparedness, 
     response and recovery measures with that of contiguous 
     jurisdictions for those emergencies, disasters, or 
     hostilities affecting or potentially affecting any one or 
     more of the Signatories in the Pacific Northwest; and
       ``Whereas, the Signatories further recognize that 
     regionally based emergency preparedness, response and 
     recovery measures will benefit all jurisdictions within the 
     Pacific Northwest, and best serve their respective national 
     interests in cooperative and coordinated emergency 
     preparedness as facilitated by the Consultative Group on 
     Comprehensive Civil Emergency and Management established in 
     the Agreement Between the government of the United States of 
     America and the government of Canada on Cooperation and 
     Comprehensive Civil Emergency Planning and Management signed 
     at Ottawa, Ontario, Canada on April 28, 1986: Now, therefore, 
     be it is hereby agreed by and between each and all of the 
     Signatories hereto as follows:


                          ``Advisory Committee

       ``(1) An advisory committee named the Western Regional 
     Emergency Management Advisory Committee (W-REMAC) shall be 
     established which will include one member appointed by each 
     Signatory.
       ``(2) The W-REMAC will be guided by the agreed-upon Terms 
     of Reference-Annex A.


                      ``Principles of Cooperation

       ``(3) Subject to the laws of each Signatory, the following 
     cooperative principles are to be used as a guide by the 
     Signatories in civil emergency matters which may affect more 
     than one Signatory:
       ``(A) The authorities of each Signatory may seek the 
     advice, cooperation, or assistance of any other Signatory in 
     any civil emergency matter.
       ``(B) Nothing in the arrangement shall derogate from the 
     applicable laws within the jurisdiction of any Signatory. 
     However, the authorities of any Signatory may request from 
     the authorities of any other signatory appropriate 
     alleviation of such laws if their normal application might 
     lead to delay or difficulty in the rapid execution of 
     necessary civil emergency measures.
       ``(C) Each Signatory will use its best efforts to 
     facilitate the movement of evacuees, refugees, civil 
     emergency personnel, equipment or other resources into or 
     across its territory, or to a designated staging area when it 
     is agreed that such movement or staging will facilitate civil 
     emergency operations by the affected or participating 
     Signatories.
       ``(D) In times of emergency, each Signatory will use its 
     best efforts to ensure that the citizens or residents of any 
     other Signatory present in its territory are provided 
     emergency health services and emergency social services in a 
     manner no less favorable than that provided to its own 
     citizens.
       ``(E) Each Signatory will use discretionary power as far as 
     possible to avoid levy of any tax, tariff, business license, 
     or user fees on the services, equipment, and supplies of any 
     other Signatory which is engaged in civil emergency 
     activities in the territory of another Signatory, and will 
     use its best efforts to encourage local governments or other 
     jurisdictions within its territory to do likewise.
       ``(F) When civil emergency personnel, contracted firms or 
     personnel, vehicles, equipment, or other services from any 
     Signatory are made available to or are employed to assist any 
     other Signatory, all providing Signatories will use best 
     efforts to ensure that charges, levies, or costs for such use 
     or assistance will not exceed those paid for similar use of 
     such resources within their own territory.
       ``(G) Each Signatory will exchange contact lists, warning 
     and notification plans, and selected emergency plans and will 
     call to the attention of their respective local governments 
     and other jurisdictional authorities in areas adjacent to 
     intersignatory boundaries, the desirability of compatibility 
     of civil emergency plans and the exchange of contact lists, 
     warning and notification plans, and selected emergency plans.
       ``(H) The authority of any Signatory conducting an exercise 
     will ensure that all other signatories are provided an 
     opportunity to observe, and/or participate in such exercises.


                         ``Comprehensive Nature

       ``(4) This document is a comprehensive arrangement on civil 
     emergency planning and management. To this end and from time 
     to time as necessary, all Signatories shall--
       ``(A) review and exchange their respective contact lists, 
     warning and notification plans, and selected emergency plans; 
     and
       ``(B) as appropriate, provide such plans and procedures to 
     local governments, and other emergency agencies within their 
     respective territories.


                      ``Arrangement Not Exclusive

       ``(5) This is not an exclusive arrangement and shall not 
     prevent or limit other civil emergency arrangements of any 
     nature between Signatories to this arrangement. In the event 
     of any conflicts between the provisions of this arrangement 
     and any other arrangement regarding emergency service entered 
     into by two or more States of the United States who are 
     Signatories to this arrangement, the provisions of that other 
     arrangement shall apply, with respect to the obligations of 
     those States to each other, and not the conflicting 
     provisions of this arrangement.


                              ``Amendments

       ``(6) This Arrangement and the Annex may be amended (and 
     additional Annexes may be added) by arrangement of the 
     Signatories.


                     ``Cancellation or Substitution

       ``(7) Any Signatory to this Arrangement may withdraw from 
     or cancel their participation in this Arrangement by giving 
     sixty days, written notice in advance of this effective date 
     to all other Signatories.


                              ``Authority

       ``(8) All Signatories to this Arrangement warrant they have 
     the power and capacity to accept, execute, and deliver this 
     Arrangement.


                            ``Effective Date

       ``(9) Notwithstanding any dates noted elsewhere, this 
     Arrangement shall commence April 1, 1996.''.

     SEC. 2. INCONSISTENCY OF LANGUAGE.

       The validity of the arrangements consented to by this Act 
     shall not be affected by any insubstantial difference in 
     their form or language as adopted by the States and 
     provinces.

     SEC. 3. RIGHT TO ALTER, AMEND, OR REPEAL.

       The right to alter, amend, or repeal this Act is hereby 
     expressly reserved.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania (Mr. Gekas) and the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Payne) 
each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Gekas).


                             General Leave

  Mr. GEKAS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may 
have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks 
on the resolution under consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. GEKAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, this particular piece of legislation is mandated, 
actually, by the Constitution. The Constitution says that when two 
States arrive at some kind of arrangement between the two that arises 
to the level of a compact, a binding agreement, that then the Congress 
of the United States must approve such a compact, else the Framers of 
the Constitution felt that would lead to conflict that might turn even 
violent if it were not guaranteed by the Federal Government, as one of 
the oversee functions it would have, should such an agreement be 
reached. So the Congress of the United States has, from time to time, 
approved these compacts.
  Such a compact was proposed a long time ago now, it seems, with 
respect to the Pacific Northwest Emergency Management Arrangement 
between the States of Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, Washington, and the 
provinces of British Columbia and the Yukon Territory.
  In this bill, this compact has to do with the coordination of 
emergency services in disaster relief and all the hundreds of scenarios 
that many of us, through our years of service, have seen examples of 
time and time again on the floor of this Chamber.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  (Mr. PAYNE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of Senate Joint Resolution 
35. Mr. Speaker, this bill would grant the consent of Congress to two 
compacts among Northwestern States and Canadian provinces to 
coordinated responses to forest fires and other emergencies.

[[Page H10927]]

  These compacts, which have already been ratified by the affected 
States and provinces, require the consent of Congress to take effect 
under the Compacts clause of the Constitution.
  This particular bill has bipartisan support of members of the other 
body and from States participating in these compacts. They were passed 
by unanimous consent in the Senate. I am not aware of any opposition to 
this bill.
  The need for a coordinated response to fires and other emergencies is 
clear. I want to commend the participating States and provinces for 
their effort to protect human lives and property, and to safeguard the 
environment in this region. We need to have continued cooperation 
between bordering areas. I commend those who are involved in this, and 
I urge adoption of this measure.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. GEKAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to take some time to pay tribute here to another 
colleague, the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Doc Hastings), who, in 
his endeavors over the course of time in the last session and before, 
has come to us time and time again to press for not just this compact, 
but another one that we will be taking up as the next order of 
business.
  He has worked tirelessly in this regard, and because of his 
perseverance, has helped to solve some serious problems in his region 
of the world.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of Senate 
Joint Resolution 35, a joint resolution granting the consent of 
Congress to the Pacific Northwest Emergency Management Arrangement. A 
compact entered into by the states of Alaska, Idaho, Oregon and 
Washington, as well as the Province of British Columbia and the Yukon 
Territory.
  Mr. Speaker, these state and provincial governments have negotiated 
this compact to coordinate regional responses to natural disasters. As 
we all know, disasters do not respect state or national boundaries. To 
plan for and respond to these events, these northwest states and 
provinces have chosen to adopt a cooperative regional approach. This 
will improve the allocation of material, personnel, and services to 
mobilize as many resources as possible in the event of a natural 
disaster. Furthermore, the compact allows for cooperation across state 
and national borders without sacrificing the state or national 
sovereignty.
  Mr. Speaker, this regional effort is non-controversial and was passed 
unanimously by the other body on July 31 of this year. The compact is a 
local and regional effort that requires the consent of Congress to take 
effect.
  I urge my colleagues to support the efforts of these northwest states 
and provinces to improve emergency preparedness and pass this 
bipartisan legislation.
  Mr. GEKAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Gekas) that the House suspend the 
rules and pass the Senate joint resolution, S.J. Res. 35.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor 
thereof), the rules were suspended and the Senate joint resolution was 
passed.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________