[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 58 (Wednesday, May 2, 2001)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4180-S4181]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. MURKOWSKI:
  S. 815. A bill to make improvements to the Arctic Research and Policy 
Act of 1984; to the Committee on Governmental Affairs.
  Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, today I rise to introduce legislation 
to improve the operation of the Arctic Research and Policy Act. We have 
about 17 years of experience with this act, and the time has come to 
make some modifications to reflect the experience we have gained over 
that time.
  The most important feature of this bill is contained in section 4. 
This section authorizes the Arctic Research Committee, a Presidential 
Commission, to make grants for scientific research. Currently, the 
Commission can make recommendations and set priorities, but it cannot 
make grants. Our experience with the act and the Commission has shown 
us that research needs that do not fit neatly in a single agency do not 
get funded, even if they are compelling priorities.
  One example is a proposed Arctic contamination initiative that was 
developed a few years ago after we discovered that pollutants from the 
Former Soviet Union, including radionuclides, heavy metals and 
persistent organic pollutants, were working their way into the Arctic 
environment. It became clear that the job of monitoring and evaluating 
the threat was too big for any single agency. The Interior Department, 
given its vast land management responsibilities in Alaska, was 
interested. The Commerce Department, given its jurisdiction over 
fisheries issues, was interested. The Department of Health and Human 
Services, given its concern about the health of Alaska's indigenous 
peoples, was interested. The only agency that didn't seem interested in 
the problem, strangely enough, was the EPA, which at the time was in 
the process of dismantling its Arctic Contaminants program.
  Unfortunately, because the job was too big for any single agency, it 
was difficult to get the level of interagency cooperation necessary for 
a coordinated program. Moreover, agencies were unwilling to make a 
significant budgetary commitment to a program that wasn't under their 
exclusive control. If the Arctic Research Commission, which recognized 
the need, had some funding of its own to leverage agency participation 
and help to coordinate the effort, we would know far more about the 
Arctic contaminants problem than we do today.
  Another example is the compelling need to understand the Bering Sea 
ecosystem. Over the past 20 years we have

[[Page S4181]]

seen significant shifts in some of the populations comprising this 
ecosystem. King crab populations have declined sharply. Pollock 
populations have increased sharply. Steller sea lion populations have 
declined as have many types of sea birds. Scientists cannot tell us 
whether these population shifts are due to abiotic factors such as 
climate change, biotic factors such as predator-prey relationships, or 
some combination of both. Because the nation depends on this area for a 
significant portion of all its seafood, this is not an issue without 
stakeholders. Despite the chorus of interests and federal agencies that 
have said research is needed, a coordinated effort has not yet 
occurred. If the Arctic Research Commission, which recognized this need 
early on, had some funding of its own to leverage agency participation 
and help to coordinate the effort, we would know far more about the 
Bering Sea ecosystem than we do today.
  This bill also makes a number of other minor changes in the act:
  Section 2 allows the chairperson of the Commission to receive 
compensation for up to 120 days per year rather than the 90 days per 
year currently allowed by the Act. The chairperson has a major role to 
play in interacting with the legislative and executive branches of the 
government, representing the Commission to non-governmental 
organizations, in interacting with the State of Alaska, and serving in 
international fora. In the past, chairpersons have been unable to fully 
discharge their responsibilities in the 90 day limit specified in the 
act.
  Section 3 authorizes the Commission to award an annual award not to 
exceed $1,000 to recognize either outstanding research or outstanding 
efforts in support of research in the Arctic. The ability to give 
modest awards will bring recognition to outstanding efforts in Arctic 
Research which, in turn, will help to stimulate research in the Arctic 
region. This section also specifies that a current or former Commission 
member is not eligible to receive the award.
  Section 5 authorizes official representation and reception 
activities. Because the Commission is not authorized to use funds for 
these kinds of activities, the Commission has experienced embarrassment 
when they were unable to reciprocate after their foreign counterparts 
hosted a reception or lunch on their behalf. Under this provision, the 
Commission may spend not more than two tenths of one percent of its 
budget for representation and reception activities in each fiscal year.
  The Arctic Research and Policy Act and the Arctic Research Commission 
has worked well over the past 17 years. It can work even better with 
these modest changes. I look forward to working with my colleagues to 
enact this bill as soon as possible.
                                 ______