[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 73 (Wednesday, May 19, 1999)]
[House]
[Pages H3352-H3360]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE AND RELATED AGENCIES AUTHORIZATION ACT OF 1999

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 175 and rule

[[Page H3353]]

XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House 
on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill, H.R. 1553.

                              {time}  1702


                     In the Committee of the Whole

  Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the 
Whole House on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill 
(H.R. 1553) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2000 and fiscal 
year 2001 for the National Weather Service, Atmospheric Research, and 
National Environmental Satellite, Data and Information Service 
activities of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and 
for other purposes, with Mr. Shimkus in the chair.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered as having 
been read the first time.
  Under the rule, the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner) and 
the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Costello) each will control 30 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. 
Sensenbrenner).
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, H.R. 1553, the National Weather Service and Related 
Agencies Authorization Act of 1999 authorizes a total of $1.391 billion 
for fiscal year 2000 and $1.468 billion for fiscal year 2001 for the 
National Weather Service, the NOAA office of Oceanic and Atmospheric 
Research Programs, the National Environmental Satellite Data and 
Information Service and related facilities. The NWS, supported by the 
Atmospheric Research and NESDIS programs, provides around-the-clock 
weather and flood warning and forecast services to the general public 
for the protection of life and property. The NWS data is used by 
private sector, commercial and weather service firms which provide 
specialized forecasts for a variety of business uses.
  The additional funds authorized by this bill will, first, provide an 
increase of nearly 10 percent in the lead time for tornado warnings, 
particularly to those areas of the Nation such as Texas, Oklahoma, 
Kansas, the Midwest and the Southeast that are subject to devastating 
tornadoes; second, also provide an increase of 10 percent in forecast 
accuracy of the onset of freezing temperatures, particularly important 
for agricultural regions; third, provide an increase of nearly 5 
percent in the forecast accuracy of heavy snowfall and severe storm 
warnings; and last, maintain current capabilities and hurricane 
forecasts and flood warnings. I commend the bill to the House for its 
adoption.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. COSTELLO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  (Mr. COSTELLO asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. COSTELLO. Mr. Chairman, I want to commend the full committee 
chairman, the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner), and the 
subcommittee chairman, the gentleman from California (Mr. Calvert) for 
bringing this bill to the floor today.
  The Committee on Science has worked quickly this year to bring to the 
floor several authorization bills to give guidance to the Committee on 
Appropriations. One of the most significant of these bills is H.R. 
1553, which will authorize the operations of the National Weather 
Service for the next 2 years. The National Weather Service provides 
critical information and early warning detection of disasters to 
communities throughout the United States. Timely, accurate weather 
forecasts save lives and provide us with time to prevent or at least 
minimize damage to property that results from tornadoes, hurricanes, 
blizzards and other severe weather.
  New technologies pioneered by NOAA research enabled the National 
Weather Service to issue tornado warnings 30 minutes before they struck 
communities in Oklahoma. Those tornadoes caused over $1 billion in 
damage to Oklahoma City and surrounding communities. The loss of life 
could have been much worse without early warning provided by the 
National Weather Service. The development and deployment of Doppler 
radar and the Advanced Weather Interactive Processing System, AWIPS, 
extended the lead time for storm warnings by 20 minutes or more. More 
time means more lives can be saved. Emergency services can be deployed 
and people can take action to protect themselves.
  The National Weather Service and its related research programs 
provide tangible benefits to our citizens every day at the cost of a 
few dollars per person annually. This bill replaces the Organic Act of 
1890, which currently provides the definition of the National Weather 
Service's mission, with new language defining the duties of the Weather 
Service. The language was improved through the adoption of an amendment 
that I offered in committee which clarified the role of the National 
Weather Service in providing marine and aviation forecasts, and it will 
be further improved by the manager's amendment that will be offered by 
the chairman of the committee, the full committee, the gentleman from 
Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner).
  I believe the changes we have made in this section have addressed 
many of the concerns raised by the administration and the aviation 
industry. I am confident that we have a sound basis for continued work 
on this issue as the bill moves through the legislative process.
  Although we would have preferred to see the authorization for the 
High Performance Computing and Communications Initiative, the HPCC, in 
this bill, we are satisfied that its exclusion is not done with 
prejudice on the part of the chairman of the committee, or the 
committee. Funding for the HPCC initiative supports advancements will 
enable NOAA to improve both short and long range forecasting.
  The gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner) indicated the 
committee will move separate legislation within the coming few weeks to 
authorize appropriations for the HPCC program in its entirety, 
including the authorization of NOAA's portion of the program. We 
understand that this bill will provide authorizations of appropriations 
for all departments and agencies which participate in the government-
wide HPCC program, as well as in the proposed information technology 
for the 21st century initiative. We look forward to working with our 
colleagues to advance the HPCC authorization bill, given its importance 
to the Nation and future technology.
  H.R. 1553 reflects the President's request for FY 2000 for both the 
program accounts and to the procurement and construction accounts of 
NOAA. I am pleased by the authorization levels for next year. However, 
I am concerned that the FY 2001 numbers, kept at the same level as FY 
2000 for all program accounts, would lead to a real decline in real 
support for the work of the National Weather Service and related 
research programs.
  Later, I will offer an amendment to increase the FY 2001 
authorization by a modest 3 percent. I hope my colleagues will support 
my amendment and ensure that NOAA has the stable funding required to 
continue to provide the vital weather forecasting services we rely on 
every day.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the 
distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Calvert), the subcommittee 
chairman.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank my colleague, the 
gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner) and the distinguished 
chairman of the Committee on Science, for yielding me this time.
  Mr. Chairman, as the subcommittee Chair and author of this 
legislation, I am proud to speak in support of H.R. 1553. H.R. 1553 
authorizes funding for the National Weather Service's atmospheric 
research, NOAA's environmental satellite data information service.
  I am pleased to say that the Committee on Science reported this bill 
by voice vote. It was a tremendous display of how much can be 
accomplished when we work together in a bipartisan fashion.
  Before I go on, I would like to thank the chairman, the gentleman 
from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner), for his hard work and leadership in 
bringing this bill to the floor. I would also like to thank the ranking 
minority member

[[Page H3354]]

of the Subcommittee on Energy and Environment and my good friend, the 
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Costello), for his leadership on his side 
of the aisle. While we do not always see eye to eye, I would think it 
is safe to say we do agree on the importance of passing H.R. 1553.
  The National Weather Service plays an important part in protecting 
the public. The recent violent tornadoes in Oklahoma and Texas 
demonstrated how important advanced warning can be. Lives were 
tragically lost. I am afraid that the toll would have been much, much 
higher if there had not been advance warning given by the National 
Weather Service. This is just one of many examples of the important, 
sometimes lifesaving, services provided in the funding of this bill.
  The bill funds NOAA's satellite programs at a level consistent with 
the administration's request. Satellites play a critical role in 
weather forecasting, as well as providing important environmental data. 
NOAA plans an ambitious launch schedule over the next decade or so 
which will not only improve coverage but will also improve satellite 
data acquisition capabilities.
  H.R. 1553 also authorizes funding for NOAA's Office of Atmospheric 
Research. It is important that we have a clear understanding of how the 
atmosphere works so that we can better understand the weather and 
determine if global climate change is in fact occurring. H.R. 1553 
continues the committee's tradition of strong support for atmospheric 
sciences.
  Just a quick aside: I woke up this past Saturday morning to read a 
front page story detailing a crucial court decision overturning EPA's 
thoughts on P/M and ozone standards. The Court's decision noted that 
the agency had far exceeded its legal authority and based the 
regulation on science that was proven to be potentially unsound.
  The reason I bring this matter up today in the context of H.R. 1553 
is that I have always been a strong proponent of moving the EPA science 
mission to a nonregulatory governmental body. In my mind, NOAA would be 
a natural choice. In the light of the court decision, I plan to hold a 
hearing on the subject of P/M and ozone regulations. This will build on 
the bipartisan series of three hearings held by the Subcommittee on 
Energy and Environment last year.
  I would like to conclude by saying H.R. 1553 will protect public 
safety, maintain state-of-the-art scientific research and facilities 
without busting the budget or raiding the Social Security Trust Fund. 
This is good legislation. I encourage all my colleagues on both sides 
of the aisle to support this important bill.
  Mr. COSTELLO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Guam (Mr. Underwood).
  Mr. UNDERWOOD. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me 
this time.
  Mr. Chairman, I do stand in support of the passage of H.R. 1553 to 
provide the National Weather Service with the resources to warn our 
citizens of impending natural disasters.
  My constituents, the people of Guam, are probably the most familiar 
with the destruction that accompanies storms, and though we are 
thousands of miles away from Washington, D.C., we nonetheless share our 
prayers and support for stricken communities around the country.
  The work of the National Weather Service, along with other Federal 
agencies like FEMA and the Small Business Administration, is important 
for communities to prepare for potential natural disasters. There is no 
question that with the technological advances and improved methods of 
research, the National Weather Service has been able to relay timely 
information via TV, radio, computers and other media to communities in 
the direct path of destruction.
  Guam is located in an area of the Pacific known as typhoon alley, 
which was once the home of a weather reconnaissance squadron employing 
WC-130 aircraft. Their mission consisted of gathering advanced storm 
information by flying directly into a typhoon. Today, Guam remains the 
only part of the United States that is not covered by some kind of 
hurricane or typhoon aircraft.

                              {time}  1715

  I know that this is not directly related to the National Weather 
Service, but I did want to thank the chairman for accepting in the 
manager's amendment to make sure that both States and territories are 
equitably treated in terms of protection of property and life.
  Guam is now no longer covered by the Joint Typhoon Warning Center, a 
casualty of the BRAC process. So it is vitally important that we 
continue to support the National Weather Service, particularly as they 
develop new ways of doing weather forecasting and providing information 
to communities such as Guam. It is important that as they perfect their 
satellite technology and as they experiment with the possibility of 
using fixed-wing aircraft, that they consider all parts of the United 
States in their service.
  We in Guam would like to see perhaps the introduction of typhoon 
chasers once again, but it is very important that the National Weather 
Service and any kind of typhoon warning for a place like Guam is 
vitally important. Some years we face as many as 70 storm warnings in 
one year, and almost every typhoon that one hears about that hits the 
Asian mainland passes by or near or through Guam; hopefully most by or 
near.
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman 
from Michigan (Mr. Ehlers).
  (Mr. EHLERS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Wisconsin for 
yielding me this time.
  I would like to discuss two aspects of the science that is covered 
under this bill. The first my colleagues have already heard discussed 
by other speakers and that involves the National Weather Service and 
its importance. I certainly share that view, particularly since I live 
in a part of the country that frequently has tornadoes and have 
personally been in the basement a few times as tornadoes have passed 
overhead.
  A little sideline on that, I depend heavily on the Weather Channel 
for my weather information, particularly when I travel, and I was 
struck recently by someone who commented that he did not really see the 
need for the National Weather Service because he got all of his weather 
from the TV. I enlightened him about the fact that although I love the 
Weather Channel and other TV that reports the weather, all that 
information comes from the National Weather Service, and the other 
services that are provided by the Weather Channel and so forth are 
simply massaging, computing and varying the data received from the 
National Weather Service. Indeed, the Weather Service performs a 
valuable service for our country in many, many ways.
  The main point I would like to make this afternoon is the National 
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration is doing a great deal of good 
science, often in somewhat obscure areas. All of us know how important 
it was 150 years ago to explore this Nation so that we could learn the 
details of its geography and, above all, the amount of its national 
resources. As we have explored our entire earth surface in terms of 
lands and found all the natural resources or nearly all the natural 
resources of the various landed areas of our planet, we realize that in 
another century we are going to have to get many of our natural 
resources from the oceans.
  I wanted to point out and bring to light an important service 
performed by NOAA last year, and this was published in Science Magazine 
on September 26 of last year by Dr. Smith of NOAA, Dr. Walter H.F. 
Smith, and Dr. David Sandwell of the Scripps Institute.
  Before their work was done, we only had rough ideas of the topography 
underneath the oceans, and that was obtained by echo sounding data from 
ships. But there are many areas that were unexplored, areas as large as 
the State of Oklahoma which had never been explored. The two scientists 
I mentioned developed a method by watching the motion of the satellites 
and measuring their positions very carefully and calculating the 
gravitational attraction of the various parts of the Earth upon the 
satellites and calculating backwards, finding the topographic structure 
underneath the oceans. It is not extremely accurate,

[[Page H3355]]

but when we have areas the size of Oklahoma with no data, then any data 
is worthwhile, and they have done a remarkable job. They found an 
entire mountain range underneath the ocean which was not known about 
before.
  Now, why is this important? First of all, as my colleagues can see, 
there are many rifts in the ocean bed. Most of those areas provide a 
lot of warm water which, in turn, provides for a great deal of activity 
by various organisms which forms the bottom of the food chain for the 
fishing industry. By plotting this more carefully, we have been able to 
aid the fishing industry throughout the world. But even more 
importantly, those rifts produce tremendous amounts of natural 
resources of metals which we are running out of on our landed areas 
and, in the future, we are likely to be mining ocean module and picking 
up these nodules of material which are quite abundant on the ocean 
floor. It will be very difficult to operate in that situation, but 
certainly this is something that has been pursued to a certain extent 
already, and once the prices of minerals rise this will provide a major 
source of resources for the next century and beyond.
  I personally thank these scientists and others who have worked on 
this issue and the many other issues they deal with, and I think it is 
very important for the Congress and for the people of this Nation to 
realize that this important work is being done and is being done so 
well by the scientific community of our Nation.
  Mr. COSTELLO. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  I understand that the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Cramer) wants to 
engage in a colloquy, and this seems to be about the last chance to do 
that before general debate is over with.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Alabama.
  Mr. CRAMER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman, and he is correct, I 
do wish to engage in a colloquy. It happens to be about Weather Service 
modernization issues and the process that we have been going through 
for years, those of us from vulnerable communities and those of us who 
have expressed concerns. I know the chairman has been aware of that for 
some time.
  NOAA, through the Modernization Transition Committee, is engaged in 
this process of independently reviewing the necessity of maintaining 
those Weather Service offices throughout the country, and in fact they 
have already rubber-stamped the closure of maybe more than 100 of 
those. Some of those closings, in my opinion, could result in the 
degradation of service, and that is of particular concern to me and why 
regularly I have monitored this bill and wanted to make sure that some 
of our more vulnerable communities had that review process in place.
  I wanted to inquire if the chairman would care to comment about where 
we are currently with that and with regard to those circumstances, 
whether the Weather Services Modernization Committee is trying to close 
some of those offices.
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I would like to 
tell my friend, the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Cramer), as well as the 
gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Hutchinson), who has a similar concern, 
that the Committee on Science is aware of the NOAA Modernization 
Transition Committee process and commends NOAA for its efforts in this 
regard.
  The committee is also aware of the efforts of various communities 
that maintain local weather coverage and shares the gentlemen's view 
and their concern about the degradation of service that may result from 
closing Weather Service offices. Consequently, the Committee on Science 
strongly urges NOAA to continue to aggressively work with local 
communities in developing comprehensive strategies that will allow 
high-risk communities to effectively respond to occurrences of severe 
weather.
  I can add that the Committee on Science is known as doing tough-love 
oversight, and this is one of the areas where the committee will be 
doing some pretty tough oversight because we do not want NOAA 
modernization to result in a huge degradation of service, particularly 
in the high-risk areas. I know the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Cramer) 
represents one of those areas, as does the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. 
Hutchinson).
  Mr. CRAMER. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will continue to yield, I 
would like to add that I appreciate that attitude, and I am aware that 
the Modernization Transition Committee has its work cut out for it and 
that NOAA has had to look after closing a number of these offices. But 
I was also aware that a few of us were in perhaps an extraordinarily 
exceptional category. So I appreciate the committee's attitude in 
expressing this tough-love oversight, because I think NOAA needs that, 
and I think our citizens deserve that.
  So I thank the gentleman for that attitude.
  Mr. COSTELLO. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. All time for general debate has expired.
  Pursuant to the rule, the committee amendment in the nature of a 
substitute printed in the bill is considered as an original for the 
purpose of amendment and is considered read.
  The text of the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute is 
as follows:

                               H.R. 1553

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``National Weather Service and 
     Related Agencies Authorization Act of 1999''.

     SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.

       For purposes of this Act, the term--
       (1) ``Administrator'' means the Administrator of the 
     National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; and
       (2) ``Secretary'' means the Secretary of Commerce.

     SEC. 3. NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE.

       (a) Operations, Research, and Facilities.--There are 
     authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary to enable the 
     National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to carry out 
     the Operations, Research, and Facilities activities of the 
     National Weather Service $617,897,000 for fiscal year 2000 
     and $617,897,000 for fiscal year 2001, to remain available 
     until expended. Of such amounts--
       (1) $449,441,000 for fiscal year 2000 and $450,411,000 for 
     fiscal year 2001 shall be for Local Warnings and Forecasts;
       (2) $2,200,000 for fiscal year 2000 and $2,200,000 for 
     fiscal year 2001 shall be for Advanced Hydrological 
     Prediction System;
       (3) $619,000 for fiscal year 2000 and $619,000 for fiscal 
     year 2001 shall be for Susquehanna River Basin Flood Systems;
       (4) $35,596,000 for fiscal year 2000 and $35,596,000 for 
     fiscal year 2001 shall be for Aviation Forecasts;
       (5) $4,000,000 for fiscal year 2000 and $4,000,000 for 
     fiscal year 2001 shall be for Weather Forecast Offices (WFO) 
     Facilities Maintenance;
       (6) $37,081,000 for fiscal year 2000 and $37,081,000 for 
     fiscal year 2001 shall be for Central Forecast Guidance;
       (7) $3,090,000 for fiscal year 2000 and $3,090,000 for 
     fiscal year 2001 shall be for Atmospheric and Hydrological 
     Research;
       (8) $39,325,000 for fiscal year 2000 and $39,325,000 for 
     fiscal year 2001 shall be for Next Generation Weather Radar 
     (NEXRAD);
       (9) $7,573,000 for fiscal year 2000 and $7,573,000 for 
     fiscal year 2001 shall be for Automated Surface Observing 
     System (ASOS);
       (10) $38,002,000 for fiscal year 2000 and $38,002,000 for 
     fiscal year 2001 shall be for Advanced Weather Interactive 
     Processing System (AWIPS); and
       (11) $970,000 for fiscal year 2000 shall be for two 1,000-
     watt National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Weather 
     Radio transmitters, to be located in Jasper and Marion 
     Counties, Illinois, and nine 300-watt National Oceanic and 
     Atmospheric Administration Weather Radio transmitters, to be 
     installed in appropriate locations throughout the State of 
     Illinois, and for maintenance costs related thereto.
       (b) Procurement, Acquisition, and Construction.--There are 
     authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary to enable the 
     National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to carry out 
     the Procurement, Acquisition, and Construction activities of 
     the National Weather Service $69,632,000 for fiscal year 2000 
     and $70,120,000 for fiscal year 2001, to remain available 
     until expended. Of such amounts--
       (1) $9,560,000 for fiscal year 2000 and $9,060,000 for 
     fiscal year 2001 shall be for Next Generation Weather Radar 
     (NEXRAD);
       (2) $4,180,000 for fiscal year 2000 and $6,125,000 for 
     fiscal year 2001 shall be for Automated Surface Observing 
     System (ASOS);
       (3) $22,575,000 for fiscal year 2000 and $21,525,000 for 
     fiscal year 2001 shall be for Advanced Weather Interactive 
     Processing System (AWIPS);
       (4) $11,100,000 for fiscal year 2000 and $12,835,000 for 
     fiscal year 2001 shall be for Computer Facilities Upgrades;
       (5) $8,350,000 for fiscal year 2000 and $8,350,000 for 
     fiscal year 2001 shall be for Radiosonde Replacement;

[[Page H3356]]

       (6) $500,000 for fiscal year 2000 shall be for National 
     Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Operations Center 
     Rehabilitation; and
       (7) $13,367,000 for fiscal year 2000 and $12,225,000 for 
     fiscal year 2001 shall be for Weather Forecast Office (WFO) 
     Construction.
       (c) Duties of the National Weather Service.--
       (1) In general.--To protect life and property, the 
     Secretary, through the National Weather Service, except as 
     provided in paragraph (2), shall be responsible for--
       (A) forecasts and shall serve as the sole official source 
     of weather and flood warnings;
       (B) the issuance of storm warnings;
       (C) the collection, exchange, and distribution of 
     meteorological, hydrological, climatic, and oceanographic 
     data and information;
       (D) the preparation of hydrometeorological guidance and 
     core forecast information; and
       (E) the issuance of marine and aviation forecasts and 
     warnings.
       (2) Competition with private sector.--The National Weather 
     Service shall not provide, or assist other entities to 
     provide, a service (other than a service described in 
     paragraph (1)(A) or (B)) if that service is currently 
     provided or can be provided by commercial enterprise, 
     unless--
       (A) the Secretary finds that the private sector is 
     unwilling or unable to provide the service; or
       (B) the service provides vital weather warnings and 
     forecasts for the protection of lives and property of the 
     general public.
       (3) Amendments.--The Act of October 1, 1890 (26 Stat. 653) 
     is amended--
       (A) by striking section 3 (15 U.S.C. 313); and
       (B) in section 9 (15 U.S.C. 317), by striking ``, and it 
     shall be'' and all that follows, and inserting a period.
       (4) Report.--Not later than 60 days after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to the 
     Committee on Science of the House of Representatives and the 
     Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the 
     Senate a report detailing all National Weather Service 
     activities which do not conform to the requirements of this 
     subsection and outlining a timetable for their termination.

     SEC. 4. ATMOSPHERIC RESEARCH.

       (a) Operations, Research, and Facilities.--
       (1) In general.--There are authorized to be appropriated to 
     the Secretary to enable the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
     Administration to carry out the Atmospheric Research 
     Operations, Research, and Facilities environmental research 
     and development activities of the Office of Oceanic and 
     Atmospheric Research $173,250,000 for fiscal year 2000 and 
     $173,250,000 for fiscal year 2001, to remain available until 
     expended.
       (2) Climate and air quality research.--Of the amounts 
     authorized under paragraph (1), $126,200,000 for fiscal year 
     2000 and $126,200,000 for fiscal year 2001 shall be for 
     Climate and Air Quality Research, of which--
       (A) $16,900,000 for fiscal year 2000 and $16,900,000 for 
     fiscal year 2001 shall be for Interannual and Seasonal 
     Climate Research;
       (B) $34,600,000 for fiscal year 2000 and $34,600,000 for 
     fiscal year 2001 shall be for Long-Term Climate and Air 
     Quality Research;
       (C) $69,700,000 for fiscal year 2000 and $69,700,000 for 
     fiscal year 2001 shall be for Climate and Global Change; and
       (D) $5,000,000 for fiscal year 2000 and $5,000,000 for 
     fiscal year 2001 shall be for Global Learning and 
     Observations to Benefit the Environment (GLOBE).
       (3) Atmospheric programs.--Of the amounts authorized under 
     paragraph (1), $47,050,000 for fiscal year 2000 and 
     $47,050,000 for fiscal year 2001 shall be for Atmospheric 
     Programs, of which--
       (A) $36,600,000 for fiscal year 2000 and $36,600,000 for 
     fiscal year 2001 shall be for Weather Research;
       (B) $4,350,000 for fiscal year 2000 and $4,350,000 for 
     fiscal year 2001 shall be for Wind Profiler; and
       (C) $6,100,000 for fiscal year 2000 and $6,100,000 for 
     fiscal year 2001 shall be for Solar-Terrestrial Services and 
     Research.
       (b) Procurement, Acquisition, and Construction.--There are 
     authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary to enable the 
     National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to carry out 
     the Atmospheric Research Procurement, Acquisition, and 
     Construction environmental research and development 
     activities of the Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research 
     $10,040,000 for fiscal year 2000 and $14,160,000 for fiscal 
     year 2001, to remain available until expended. Of such 
     amounts--
       (1) $5,700,000 for fiscal year 2000 and $8,000,000 for 
     fiscal year 2001 shall be for the Geophysical Fluid Dynamics 
     Laboratory Supercomputer; and
       (2) $4,340,000 for fiscal year 2000 and $6,160,000 for 
     fiscal year 2001 shall be for the Advanced Composition 
     Explorer (ACE) Follow-On Satellite/GEOSTORM.

     SEC. 5. NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL SATELLITE, DATA AND 
                   INFORMATION SERVICE.

       (a) Operations, Research, and Facilities.--
       (1) In general.--There are authorized to be appropriated to 
     the Secretary to enable the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
     Administration to carry out the Operations, Research, and 
     Facilities environmental research and development and related 
     activities of the National Environmental Satellite, Data and 
     Information Service $103,092,000 for fiscal year 2000 and 
     $103,092,000 for fiscal year 2001, to remain available until 
     expended.
       (2) Satellite observing systems.--Of the amounts authorized 
     under paragraph (1), $59,236,000 for fiscal year 2000 and 
     $59,236,000 for fiscal year 2001 shall be for Satellite 
     Observing Systems, of which--
       (A) $2,000,000 for fiscal year 2000 and $2,000,000 for 
     fiscal year 2001 shall be for Global Disaster Information 
     Network (GDIN);
       (B) $4,000,000 for fiscal year 2000 and $4,000,000 for 
     fiscal year 2001 shall be for Ocean Remote Sensing; and
       (C) $53,236,000 for fiscal year 2000 and $53,236,000 for 
     fiscal year 2001 shall be for Environmental Observing 
     Services.
       (3) Environmental data management systems.--Of the amounts 
     authorized under paragraph (1), $43,856,000 for fiscal year 
     2000 and $43,856,000 for fiscal year 2001 shall be for 
     Environmental Data Management Systems, of which--
       (A) $31,521,000 for fiscal year 2000 and $31,521,000 for 
     fiscal year 2001 shall be for Data and Information Services; 
     and
       (B) $12,335,000 for fiscal year 2000 and $12,335,000 for 
     fiscal year 2001 shall be for Environmental Data Systems 
     Modernization.
       (b) Procurement, Acquisition, and Construction.--
       (1) In general.--There are authorized to be appropriated to 
     the Secretary to enable the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
     Administration to carry out the Procurement, Acquisition, and 
     Construction environmental research and development and 
     related activities of the National Environmental Satellite, 
     Data and Information Service $413,657,000 for fiscal year 
     2000 and $476,183,000 for fiscal year 2001, to remain 
     available until expended.
       (2) Systems acquisition.--Of the amounts authorized under 
     paragraph (1), $410,612,000 for fiscal year 2000 and 
     $473,803,000 for fiscal year 2001 shall be for Systems 
     Acquisition, of which--
       (A) $140,979,000 for fiscal year 2000 and $114,594,000 for 
     fiscal year 2001 shall be for the procurement and launch of, 
     and supporting ground systems for, Polar Orbiting 
     Environmental Satellites (POES), K, L, M, N, and N';
       (B) $80,100,000 for fiscal year 2000 and $113,600,000 for 
     fiscal year 2001 shall be for the procurement and launch of, 
     and supporting ground systems for, the National Polar-
     Orbiting Operational Environmental Satellite System (NPOESS); 
     and
       (C) $189,533,000 for fiscal year 2000 and $245,609,000 for 
     fiscal year 2001 shall be for the procurement and launch of, 
     and supporting ground systems for, Geostationary Operational 
     Environmental NEXT follow-on Satellites (GOES N-Q).
       (3) Construction.--Of the amounts authorized under 
     paragraph (1), $3,045,000 for fiscal year 2000 and $2,380,000 
     for fiscal year 2001 shall be for National Oceanic and 
     Atmospheric Administration Operations Center Rehabilitation 
     Construction.

     SEC. 6. FACILITIES.

       There are authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary to 
     enable the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to 
     carry out the Operations, Research, and Facilities 
     environmental research and development and related activities 
     required to meet recurring facilities operations costs 
     associated with the David Skaggs Research Center in Boulder, 
     Colorado, $3,850,000 for fiscal year 2000 and $3,850,000 for 
     fiscal year 2001.

     SEC. 7. ELIGIBILITY FOR AWARDS.

       (a) In General.--The Administrator shall exclude from 
     consideration for grant agreements made after fiscal year 
     1999 by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 
     under the activities for which funds are authorized under 
     this Act, any person who received funds, other than those 
     described in subsection (b), appropriated for a fiscal year 
     after fiscal year 1999, under a grant agreement from any 
     Federal funding source for a project that was not subjected 
     to a competitive, merit-based award process, except as 
     specifically authorized by this Act. Any exclusion from 
     consideration pursuant to this section shall be effective for 
     a period of 5 years after the person receives such Federal 
     funds.
       (b) Exception.--Subsection (a) shall not apply to the 
     receipt of Federal funds by a person due to the membership of 
     that person in a class specified by law for which assistance 
     is awarded to members of the class according to a formula 
     provided by law.
       (c) Definition.--For purposes of this section, the term 
     ``grant agreement'' means a legal instrument whose principal 
     purpose is to transfer a thing of value to the recipient to 
     carry out a public purpose of support or stimulation 
     authorized by a law of the United States, and does not 
     include the acquisition (by purchase, lease, or barter) of 
     property or services for the direct benefit or use of the 
     United States Government. Such term does not include a 
     cooperative agreement (as such term is used in section 6305 
     of title 31, United States Code) or a cooperative research 
     and development agreement (as such term is defined in section 
     12(d)(1) of the Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation Act of 
     1980 (15 U.S.C. 3710a(d)(1))).

     SEC. 8. INTERNET AVAILABILITY OF INFORMATION.

       The Administrator shall make available through the Internet 
     home page of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
     Administration the abstracts relating to all research grants 
     and awards made with funds authorized by this Act. Nothing in 
     this section shall be construed to require or permit the 
     release of any information prohibited by law or regulation 
     from being released to the public.

  The CHAIRMAN. During consideration of the bill for amendment, the 
Chair may accord priority in recognition to a Member offering an 
amendment that he has printed in the designated place in the 
Congressional Record. Those amendments will be considered read.
  The Chairman of the Committee of the Whole may postpone a request for 
a recorded vote on any amendment and may reduce to a minimum of 5 
minutes

[[Page H3357]]

the time for voting on any postponed question that immediately follows 
another vote, provided that the time for voting on the first question 
shall be a minimum of 15 minutes.
  Are there any amendments to the bill?


                    Amendment Offered by Mr. Calvert

  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Amendment offered by Mr. Calvert:
       In section 3(c)(1), insert ``(in all 50 States, the 
     District of Columbia, and the Territories)'' after ``life and 
     property''.
       In section 3(c)(2)--
       (1) strike ``(other than a service described in paragraph 
     (1)(A) or (B))'';
       (2) strike subparagraph (A);
       (3) redesignate subparagraph (B) as subparagraph (A);
       (4) in subparagraph (A), as so redesignated by paragraph 
     (3) of this amendment, strike ``lives'' and insert ``life'';
       (5) at the end of subparagraph (A), as so redesignated by 
     paragraph (3) of this amendment, strike the period and insert 
     ``; or''; and
       (6) add at the end the following new subparagraph:
       (B) the United States Government is obligated to provide 
     such service under international aviation agreements to 
     provide meteorological services and exchange meteorological 
     information.

  Mr. CALVERT (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous 
consent that the amendment be considered as read and printed in the 
Record.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
California?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank the gentleman from 
Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner), the distinguished chairman of the 
Committee on Science.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise to offer an amendment to H.R. 1553. This 
amendment was crafted in a bipartisan manner with my colleagues, the 
gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Tiahrt), the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. 
Costello), the ranking minority member of the Subcommittee on Energy 
and Environment; the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Peterson), and 
the gentleman from Guam (Mr. Underwood). It contains carefully thought 
out language which will ensure that we maintain a proper balance 
between the protection of life and property while promoting a private 
sector weather forecasting industry.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge adoption of the amendment.
  Mr. COSTELLO. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  As the subcommittee chairman indicated, the gentleman from California 
(Mr. Calvert), we did discuss this amendment. I am in total support of 
the manager's amendment.
  The amendment addresses the major concerns our constituents in the 
aviation industry had on the section of the bill dealing with the 
duties of the Weather Service by making clear that the National Weather 
Service will continue to be responsible for providing weather 
information that is vital to protect life and property. Access to 
reliable high-quality weather information is essential to maintain the 
excellent safety record that our aviation industry has achieved and 
that the public expects. The National Weather Service's role in 
providing this information in support of our aviation industry will 
continue.
  The amendment also clarifies that the U.S. Government, through the 
National Weather Service, will continue to provide the weather services 
under our international aviation agreements. I know the administration 
also had concerns about the language included in the bill as reported 
to the House by the full committee. I believe this amendment will 
address those concerns on the part of the administration and the 
aviation industry.
  Again, I thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Calvert), the 
chairman of the subcommittee, for offering this manager's amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Calvert).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                Amendment No. 2 Offered by Mr. Traficant

  Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 2 offered by Mr. Traficant:
       At the end of the bill, add the following new sections:

     SEC. 9. COMPLIANCE WITH BUY AMERICAN ACT.

       No funds authorized pursuant to this Act may be expended by 
     an entity unless the entity agrees that in expending the 
     assistance the entity will comply with sections 2 through 4 
     of the Act of March 3, 1933 (41 U.S.C. 10a-10c, popularly 
     known as the ``Buy American Act'').

     SEC. 10. SENSE OF CONGRESS: REQUIREMENT REGARDING NOTICE.

       (a) Purchase of American-Made Equipment and Products.--In 
     the case of any equipment or products that may be authorized 
     to be purchased with financial assistance provided under this 
     Act, it is the sense of the Congress that entities receiving 
     such assistance should, in expending the assistance, purchase 
     only American-made equipment and products.
       (b) Notice to Recipients of Assistance.--In providing 
     financial assistance under this Act, the Secretary of 
     Commerce shall provide to each recipient of the assistance a 
     notice describing the statement made in subsection (a) by the 
     Congress.

     SEC. 11. PROHIBITION OF CONTRACTS.

       If it has been finally determined by a court or Federal 
     agency that any person intentionally affixed a label bearing 
     a ``Made in America'' inscription, or any inscription with 
     the same meaning, to any product sold in or shipped to the 
     United States that is not made in the United States, such 
     person shall be ineligible to receive any contract or 
     subcontract made with funds provided pursuant to this Act, 
     pursuant to the debarment, suspension, and ineligibility 
     procedures described in section 9.400 through 9.409 of title 
     48, Code of Federal Regulations.

  Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Chairman, this is a buy-American amendment that 
has been added to these bills.
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. TRAFICANT. I yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin.
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, this is a very good buy-American 
amendment, and we accept it.
  Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to vote for this 
amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Traficant).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                  Amendment Offered by Mr. Hutchinson

  Mr. HUTCHINSON. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Amendment offered by Mr. Hutchinson:
       In section 3, insert at the end the following new 
     subsection:
       (d) Closing of Local Weather Service Offices.--It is the 
     sense of the Congress that the National Weather Service must 
     fully take into account the dangerous and life threatening 
     nature of weather patterns in Wind Zone IV, otherwise known 
     as tornado alley, before making any determination on the 
     closure of any of its local weather service offices.

  Mr. HUTCHINSON (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous 
consent that the amendment be considered as read and printed in the 
Record.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
Arkansas?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. HUTCHINSON. Mr. Chairman, first of all, this amendment is 
something that I have worked with the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. 
Sensenbrenner) and the gentleman from California (Mr. Calvert) in 
regard to, and I want to thank them for their understanding of this 
important issue.
  The amendment is very simple. It expresses the sense of Congress that 
the National Weather Service must fully take into account the dangerous 
and life-threatening nature of weather patterns in wind zone number 
four, otherwise known as Tornado Alley, before making any determination 
on its closure of any of its local Weather Service offices.

                              {time}  1730

  This sense of the Congress resolution is very important because, as 
we know, in Oklahoma they have had severe impact, loss of life, because 
of tornadoes of devastating impact.
  In my State of Arkansas we have had similar circumstances, and they 
are considering and debating whether to close the local Weather Service 
office in Fort Smith. Only a few years ago, in 1996, there was a 
devastating tornado that came into Fort Smith and the Van Buren area 
which caused a loss of life. There was inadequate warning that still 
embarrasses the Weather Service because of that.
  In fact, on that occasion there was a local spotter that called the 
Tulsa office, which is what we would be under if we totally closed the 
Fort Smith office, and they were told that there was

[[Page H3358]]

a tornado that was spotted in Pocola, only a few miles from Fort Smith, 
and the response from Tulsa was, where is Pocola? Pocola, of course, is 
again within the Fort Smith area. It is difficult to give an adequate 
warning when there is not a grasp of what is happening on the ground.
  So this is a great concern, and this I believe expresses the sense of 
Congress that they have to take into consideration the extraordinarily 
dangerous weather patterns in tornado alley, and the many States that 
are affected by the weather patterns in wind zone number 4.
  Mr. HOSTETTLER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. HUTCHINSON. I yield to the gentleman from Indiana.
  (Mr. HOSTETTLER asked and was given permission to revise and extend 
his remarks.)
  Mr. HOSTETTLER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Arkansas for 
yielding to me.
  While I commend the modernization transition committee for their 
work, and especially their work regarding the closure of the 
Evansville, Indiana office, I think it is necessary to chronicle the 
actual life lost and the loss of property as a result of the inadequate 
service provided there.
  On April 14 of 1996 an F-2 tornado struck Warrick County, Indiana, 
without warning, toppling two rail cars and tossing a trash dumpster 
into an electrical transformer at Alcoa's Warrick operations.
  Subsequently, a Reed, Kentucky woman was killed by a tornado of which 
she had no warning to the locale. Neither did the tornado in Warrick 
County. Likewise, no warning was given prior to a tornado hitting the 
north side of Evansville, Indiana, the third largest city in the State 
of Indiana, and damaged two places of business.
  Then, most recently, an F-2 tornado touched down in Pike County, 
Indiana, with no warning, destroying three homes.
  So I commend the gentleman from Arkansas for his bringing up this 
very important issue, and I ask for his sense of Congress amendment to 
be adopted by the committee and the House.
  Mr. HUTCHINSON. I thank the gentleman from Indiana.
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the 
amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, with regret, I must oppose the amendment of the 
gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Hutchinson). While not binding, the 
gentleman's sense of Congress amendment telling the National Weather 
Service that it should not close any local Weather Service office for 
any reason whatsoever is in direct contradiction to the provisions of 
existing law. It will have a chilling effect that could well bring the 
service's modernization efforts to a halt, with potentially disastrous 
consequences for public health and safety.
  I would remind the gentleman from Arkansas and the gentleman from 
Indiana that this bill improves forecast accuracy for tornadoes by 10 
percent. The reason we are able to do that without busting the budget 
is by making the Weather Service more efficient.
  The Weather Service plan for its modernization and associated 
restructuring was approved overwhelmingly by Congress and signed into 
law by President Bush in 1992. Already this multibillion dollar effort 
has resulted in dramatic gains in the service's capability to predict 
severe weather events such as tornadoes, hurricanes, floods, severe 
thunderstorms, damaging hail, and high winds, and in dramatic gains in 
its ability to further ensure the public health and safety.
  The only way this multibillion dollar modernization effort was and is 
affordable is because Congress also directed the Weather Service to 
consolidate its sprawling network of local Weather Service offices. The 
savings from this consolidation effort allows the modernization effort 
to proceed.
  Congress also established an elaborate procedure to ensure that local 
Weather Service offices were not closed in a willy-nilly fashion and 
were not subject to partisan politics.
  For example, the Secretary of Commerce may not close, consolidate, 
automate, or relocate any field office ``* * * unless the Secretary has 
certified'', ``certified that such action will not result in any 
degradation of service.''
  In addition, a public review process was also established, and, as an 
additional protection, Congress created a 12-member modernization 
transition committee comprised of five members representing the 
National Weather Service, the Department of Defense, the Federal 
Aviation Administration, and the Federal Emergency Management Agency 
and several members from civil defense, public safety and labor 
organizations, news media, pilots, and farmers. This committee may 
review any certification proposed by the Secretary of Commerce to 
determine if a degradation of service might result.
  Unfortunately, Mr. Chairman, the gentleman's amendment would have the 
implied effect of overriding this elaborate and fair public process. In 
addition, as I said earlier, it would have a chilling effect that could 
well bring the service's modernization efforts to a halt with 
potentially disastrous consequences to public health and safety.
  We simply cannot afford to complete the National Weather Service's 
modernization effort and to operate the new system without the parallel 
restructuring of Weather Service field offices.
  I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment and to support the 
committee's effort to complete the modernization.
  Mr. HUTCHINSON. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. I yield to the gentleman from Arkansas.
  Mr. HUTCHINSON. Mr. Chairman, I just wanted to thank the gentleman 
for his comments, and I wanted to remind the gentleman that a 
substitute amendment has been offered, and that I think it clarifies 
the objections that have been expressed by the gentleman from Wisconsin 
(Mr. Sensenbrenner).
  So I hope that with the amended amendment, the substitute amendment 
that has been offered, that the gentleman will be able to support it, 
because I believe it is consistent with the goals of the National 
Weather Service, but also expresses a sense of Congress that they have 
to take into account the dangerous and life-threatening nature of the 
weather patterns in wind zone number 4, and these States that are 
impacted by this are Louisiana, Texas, Alabama, Mississippi, Oklahoma, 
Missouri, Indiana, Ohio, Illinois, Nebraska, Kansas, Iowa, Kansas, 
Kentucky, Arkansas, Michigan, Tennessee, and Georgia.
  So Members can see the States impacted by wind zone number 4 are 
significant, and we ask the House or would ask the chairman hopefully 
to be able to support this amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Hutchinson).
  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. HUTCHINSON. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 175, further proceedings 
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. 
Hutchinson) will be postponed.
  Are there further amendments?


                   Amendment Offered by Mr. Costello

  Mr. COSTELLO. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Amendment offered by Mr. Costello:
       At the end of the bill, insert the following new section:

     SEC. 9. AUTHORIZATION INCREASE.

       Each of the amounts authorized for fiscal year 2001 by this 
     Act, except for the amounts authorized by sections 3(b), 
     4(b), and 5(b), shall be increased by 3 percent.

  Mr. COSTELLO (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous 
consent that the amendment be considered as read and printed in the 
Record.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
Illinois?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. COSTELLO. Mr. Chairman, my amendment prevents a cut in services 
performed by the National Weather Service in FY 2001. The bill before 
us today leaves funding for NOAA programs flat from FY 2000 to FY 2001. 
My amendment would increase the authorized levels for FY 2001 by a 
modest 3 percent.
  Construction and procurement accounts are excluded from this increase

[[Page H3359]]

because in those areas authorization levels are consistent with real 
projected outyear numbers. My amendment would increase the bill's total 
authorization level by just under $27 million. If we are able to avoid 
major damage from just one major weather event in fiscal year 2001, 
this investment will have paid off many times over.
  There are few programs that match the success of the National Weather 
Service. The recent tragedy in Oklahoma, where deadly tornadoes leveled 
residential communities, is our most recent example of the importance 
that timely and accurate weather forecasting plays in our lives. The 
extra 15 to 20 minutes of warning that our investments in forecasting 
and prediction research and in technology improvements at NOAA saved 
lives.
  The May 6 issue of USA Today contained an editorial which provided 
the statistics on storm-related deaths from the 1950s until today. The 
number of storm-related deaths has decreased by two-thirds over the 
past 40 years. Weather Service programs cost each taxpayer a few 
dollars per year. This is a modest price to pay for the protection of 
life and property.
  The level of increased funding provided in my amendment is consistent 
with the committee's past views and estimates, which called for a 3 
percent increase for FY 1998, a 4 percent increase in FY 1999, and a 3 
percent increase for FY 2000. Almost all of the members of the 
Committee on Science supported these increases. I have purposely stayed 
within the Chairman's preferred range of increases.
  The increased funding is also consistent with the increases the 
committee is providing in the authorization bills for other agencies 
and departments under our jurisdiction.
  The committee has made a commitment, through the Science Policy 
Report conducted by the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Ehlers), to 
``stable and sustainable Federal R&D funding'' over the next 5 years. 
Sustainability is not achieved if we let inflation erode the funding 
levels.
  This amendment meets the stability and sustainability tests set out 
by my colleagues on the other side of the aisle. In fact, Mr. Chairman, 
the gentleman from Wisconsin (Chairman Sensenbrenner) has rightfully, 
in my opinion, criticized the administration on several occasions for 
failing to provide adequate outyear funding in its budget request 
leading to net declines in inflation-adjusted funding. Flat funding 
means that all the increased inflationary costs for doing work will be 
absorbed by Weather Service programs leading to an effective cut in 
funding.
  Finally, by providing a modest increase of 3 percent, consistent with 
the policy of the committee, in FY 2001 authorized levels for Weather 
Service programs, we send a strong signal to the administration and the 
Committee on Appropriations that we value NOAA's Weather Service 
programs, and that we want to continue to provide stable funding to 
support these programs.
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the 
amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in reluctant opposition to the amendment offered 
by the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Costello), which would add nearly 
$27 million to the bill's already generous fiscal year 2001 
authorization level.
  This bill recommends an increase of $61.1 million, or 4.6 percent, 
above the fiscal 1999 appropriated level for fiscal year 2000, then an 
additional increase of $67.1 million, or 4.8 percent, above the fiscal 
2000 recommended level for fiscal year 2001.
  It is consistent with the administration's request, and also 
consistent with my pledge to provide stable and sustainable R&D funding 
over the next 5 years for programs under the Committee on Science's 
jurisdiction.
  I would just point out that I have been talking about 3 percent 
increases overall for science. This bill has 4.6 percent in the first 
year and 4.8 percent in the second year, which is over that recommended 
amount.
  While I understand the gentleman's amendment is well-intentioned, I 
also believe it is unwise, while we are trying to sustain the balanced 
budget caps in order to preserve and protect social security. I simply 
cannot be a party to an amendment that threatens the well-being of our 
senior citizens, and consequently, I urge rejection of the Costello 
amendment.
  Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge adoption of this amendment offered by my 
colleague, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Costello). It would 
increase authorization levels for the National Weather Service and the 
atmospheric research functions of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
Administration by 3 percent in fiscal year 2001.
  As it stands, this bill includes no increases in program accounts 
from fiscal year 2000 to 2001. I believe that will be insufficient to 
provide for the real needs of our Nation.
  With no allowance for inflation, this flat funding authorization will 
produce a decline in the real work being done by NOAA. The nominal 
dollars from fiscal year 2000 to 2001 appear to be the same, but the 
level of service it supported will decline, in real terms.
  With a major NOAA facility in my district in Boulder, Colorado, I 
want to avoid this real decline in the level of funding and services.
  The Space Environment Center that detects solar storms which can 
interfere with the operations of our utility companies and cell phones 
is based also in Boulder. The Forecast Systems Lab, which worked with 
the Weather Service to develop the advanced weather interactive 
processing system, or the radar system that is now used across our 
country, is also based in Boulder.

                              {time}  1745

  But this decline in funding and services will affect other Members' 
districts as well, and the impact of reduced funds on NOAA's Weather 
Service and its studies on atmospheric and environmental change will be 
felt nationwide.
  The Costello amendment will result in an increase in program 
authorizations of less than $27 million. The level of increase is 
consistent with the committee's past reviews and estimates, and those 
are produced by the majority. The majority endorsed a 3 percent 
increase in fiscal 1998 and fiscal 2000 and a 4 percent increase in 
fiscal year 1999. Furthermore, in a February report the majority 
criticized as too low the out-year numbers and the President's request 
for programs under the Committee on Science's jurisdiction.
  I would add that the Costello amendment is consistent with the 
findings in the report on Federal Science policy of the gentleman from 
Michigan (Mr. Ehlers). That report called for stable and substantial 
funding for science programs. But it is hard to see how funding can be 
stable and substantial if we routinely let inflation eat away at our 
programs.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge support of this amendment. As it stands, the 
bill does not enable NOAA and the National Weather Service to do their 
jobs. We must not marginalize these important programs.
  Mr. COSTELLO. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield to me?
  Mr. UDALL of Colorado. I am happy to yield to the gentleman from 
Illinois.
  Mr. COSTELLO. Mr. Chairman, let me respond to the increase in FY 2000 
and FY 2001 of the gentleman from Wisconsin (Chairman Sensenbrenner). 
The increases, in fact the percentages that the gentleman from 
Wisconsin (Chairman Sensenbrenner) gave are in fact accurate.
  But the point that needs to be made here is that the increases are 
for construction and procurement. There are no increases for programs. 
So the point is that the increases are going to construction and 
procurement. There are no increases in FY 2001 for programs. In effect, 
the inflation factor will require a cut in program funding for that 
fiscal year.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Pease). The question is on the 
amendment offered by the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Costello).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                  Amendment Offered By Mr. Hutchinson

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The pending business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arkansas 
(Mr. Hutchinson) on which further proceedings were postponed and on 
which the noes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The Clerk designated the amendment.

[[Page H3360]]

  Mr. HUTCHINSON. Mr. Chairman, I withdraw my demand for a recorded 
vote, and I ask for a division.
  The question was taken; and on a division (demanded by Mr. 
Hutchinson) there were--ayes 5, noes 0.
  So the amendment was agreed to.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Are there further amendments?
  If not, the question is on the committee amendment in the nature of 
the substitute, as amended.
  The committee amendment in the nature of a substitute was agreed to.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Under the rule, the Committee rises.
  Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. 
Cox) having assumed the chair, Mr. Pease, Chairman pro tempore of the 
Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, reported that 
that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 1553) to 
authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2000 and fiscal year 2001 for 
the National Weather Service, Atmospheric Research, and National 
Environmental Satellite, Data and Information Service activities of the 
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and for other 
purposes, pursuant to House Resolution 175, he reported the bill back 
to the House with an amendment adopted by the Committee of the Whole.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the rule, the previous question is 
ordered.
  Is a separate vote demanded on any amendment to the amendment in the 
nature of a substitute adopted by the Committee of the Whole?
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Speaker, I demand a separate vote on the so-called 
Costello amendment.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is a separate vote demanded on any other 
amendment?
  If not, the Clerk will report the amendment on which a separate vote 
has been demanded.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Amendment:
       At the end of the bill, insert the following new section:

     SEC. 9. AUTHORIZATION INCREASE.

       Each of the amounts authorized for fiscal year 2001 by this 
     Act, except for the amounts authorized by sections 3(b), 
     4(b), and 5(b), shall be increased by 3 percent.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the amendment.
  The question was taken; and on a division (demanded by Mr. Calvert) 
there were--ayes 3, noes 5.
  So the amendment was rejected.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the amendment in the 
nature of a substitute, as amended.
  The amendment in the nature of a substitute as amended, was agreed 
to.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the engrossment and third 
reading of the bill.
  The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was 
read the third time, and passed, and a motion to reconsider was laid on 
the table.

                          ____________________