[Congressional Record Volume 150, Number 103 (Thursday, July 22, 2004)]
[Senate]
[Pages S8624-S8627]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




 COAST GUARD AND MARITIME TRANSPORTATION ACT OF 2004--CONFERENCE REPORT

  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate 
proceed to the consideration of the conference report to accompany H.R. 
2443, the Coast Guard reauthorization bill.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Committee of Conference on the disagreeing votes of the 
     two Houses on the amendments of the Senate to the bill (H. R. 
     2443), to authorize appropriations for the Coast Guard for 
     fiscal year 2004, to amend various laws administered by the 
     Coast Guard, and for other purposes, having met, after full 
     and free conference, have agreed that the House recede from 
     its disagreement to the amendment of the Senate, and agree to 
     the same with an amendment, signed by all conferees on the 
     part of both Houses.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the Senate will proceed to 
the consideration of the conference report.
  (The conference report is printed in the House proceedings in the 
Congressional Record of Tuesday, July 20, 2004 (Volume 150, Number 
101).
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I rise today as the chairman of the Senate 
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, and I am pleased to 
announce today the successful completion of the conference report for 
H.R.

[[Page S8625]]

2443, The Coast Guard Maritime Transportation Act of 2004. The 
conference report will provide the Coast Guard with the authorization 
bill it desperately needs to carry out all its missions, protect the 
homeland, and ultimately prepare for the future.
  This legislation will provide the Coast Guard with an authorization 
for fiscal year 2004 and several critical programs. First and foremost, 
it authorizes the funding and personnel levels it needs to fulfill its 
obligation to the maritime communities of this Nation. It will provide 
the Coast Guard with $5.4 B in authorized operating expenses, and a 
$1.1 B authorization for the Integrated Deepwater Program designed to 
allow the Coast Guard to continue the prosecution of its traditional 
missions, while at the same time combating new and emerging threats.
  Additionally, the conference report authorizes an increase in the 
active duty personnel to 45,500 personnel, an increase of nearly 8,000, 
including an authorization for up to 6,700 officers that are 
desperately needed to fill critical homeland security positions.
  The Secretary of homeland security is now authorized to require vital 
electronic navigation systems onboard vessels the Secretary deems 
necessary in order to improve and facilitate safe navigation.
  A National Coast Guard Museum will be established in New London, CT 
that will exemplify the fine traditions and heritage that the United 
States Coast Guard possesses, yet until today, has been unable to 
properly display. This legislation will now allow the public to witness 
first hand, the legacy of what once was the Lifesaving Service, now 
evolved into the modern-day Coast Guard.
  This legislation also provides many provisions which improve the 
Coast Guard's ability to recruit, reward, and retain high-quality 
personnel. It addresses personnel management and quality of life issues 
by providing for a critical skills training bonus, retaining 
commissioned officers with essential skill sets and experiences, 
expanding property authorities to ease housing shortages, and includes 
several measures that grant parity with the other Armed Services. There 
are also many provisions regarding Law Enforcement, Marine Safety, and 
Environmental Protection which allow the Coast Guard to better 
accomplish its many missions.
  Further, the legislation requires increased reporting and targeting 
for inspection of cargo containers headed to the United States. It also 
provides for increased research and development to improve and deploy 
port security technology. There are also a number of provisions that 
clarify the role of the Coast Guard in leading the United States' 
efforts to improve port and maritime security.
  This legislation was crafted in a bi-partisan fashion and it provides 
the Coast Guard with a solid foundation to do its job both now, and in 
the future. I am proud to give the Coast Guard the resources it needs 
to carry out its many essential missions that will result in saved 
lives, seized contraband, a cleaner environment, and ultimately the 
protection of our homeland.
  Mr. HOLLINGS. I am pleased that the conference committee charged with 
resolving the differences between the House and Senate versions of H.R. 
2443 has reached final agreement on the Coast Guard and Maritime 
Transportation Act of 2004. Through this bill, Congress underscores our 
support for a strong and effective Coast Guard.
  The Coast Guard has always taken on an impressive array of tasks that 
are important for our national security, the protection of our 
resources, and the safety of our mariners. After the tragic events of 
September 11, 2001, we have asked the Coast Guard to take on even more 
responsibility for our maritime security, all the while continuing to 
excel in their traditional missions.
  This legislation provides an authorization of $8,167,610,000 for the 
Coast Guard's fiscal year 2005 budget, an increase of 19 percent over 
fiscal year 2004, and important new authority for the Coast Guard to 
better execute its missions. Of this, $5,404,300,000 is authorized for 
the Coast Guard's operating expenses, an increase of 14 percent over 
fiscal year 2004, with $100 million allocated to cover the costs of the 
Coast Guard's new tempo demands. This will assure that the traditional 
core missions of the Coast Guard--such as search and rescue of mariners 
in distress and protection of our living marine resources--are not 
compromised. Most importantly, we authorized approximately $300 million 
for port security that was not requested by the President. I believe 
the provision of these funds are essential to the security of our 
ports, our waterways, and our maritime transportation industry. In 
particular, the funds will help implement the Coast Guard's Automatic 
Identification System, AIS, to track the movement of foreign vessels 
operating in U.S. waters.
  I have always been a firm supporter of providing the Coast Guard with 
the tools it needs to get the job done. The Coast Guard needs to 
upgrade its core assets, in particular, its aging fleet of cutters. The 
Integrated Deepwater Program is the Coast Guard's program for achieving 
these upgrades, and the administration has not requested sufficient 
funding in its budgets to even keep this program on track. The bill 
authorizes $1.1 billion in fiscal year 2005 for the Deepwater Program. 
This sends an important signal we support the Coast Guard's 
modernization effort. I do have some reservations as to whether the 
Coast Guard can in reality absorb such a large increase over last 
year's levels, an issue that GAO raised in testimony before the Senate 
Commerce Committee this year. However, we can consider this issue 
further when we take up the Department of Homeland Security, DHS, 
appropriations bill. I am pleased the conference agreed to procurement 
management improvements by requiring the Coast Guard to report on how 
it intends to implement recent GAO recommendations, including measures 
to increase competition of subcontracts, and how it intends to alter 
the mix of legacy and replacement assets in the future, as well as 
expected costs of any changes to its original plan. Unless there are 
significant changes to the way the Deepwater contracting business is 
conducted, there will be enormous problems in the future that may 
ultimately undermine this program.
  I would also like to thank the conferees for supporting the inclusion 
of various measures that were addressed in S. 2279, the Maritime 
Transportation Security Act of 2004, MTSA 2004, a bill that I 
introduced to enhance implementation of MTSA 2002. I remain very 
concerned about the current implementation of port security measures 
and will continue to demand review of implementation policies to ensure 
that we are aggressively implementing effective security measures. 
Specifically, the conference agreement includes important requirements 
to review and improve cargo security programs. We must have concrete 
cargo security programs in place to detect and prevent cargo containers 
from being used in a terrorist attack. In the event we are attacked 
through our ports, we then need to be able to reopen U.S. ports to the 
commerce that sustains so much of our Nation's economy, with some 
degree of confidence. We are far from where we should be. Cargo 
security programs must require that we can verify the contents do not 
include weapons of mass destruction. Similarly, cargo security programs 
must be continually inspected to ensure their compliance. Documentary 
evaluation of cargo information, while important, does not substitute 
for physical verification. Our motto should not continue to be: 
``trust, but don't verify''.
  I also am pleased that the Coast Guard will be reviewing and 
reporting on Joint Operations Centers such as Operation SeaHawk. 
Operation SeaHawk, established in Charleston, SC, is providing law 
enforcement an opportunity to coordinate their law enforcement and 
security missions, and is being utilized to help implement the security 
and contingency response plans for the whole area. I feel confident 
that this model will be found to provide the best structure to 
coordinate law enforcement activities of the various agencies that are 
involved in port security and provide a model for the Coast Guard to 
utilize Area Maritime Security plans.
  I am also pleased that the final bill includes a number of important 
provisions to address important natural resource issues. For example, 
the bill includes a number of provisions regarding the Oil Pollution 
Act, including a program to provide loans to fishermen

[[Page S8626]]

and aquaculture producers who are damaged by oil spills, a requirement 
for using electronic charts which will reduce oil spill incidents, as 
well as a report on a number of important issues such as the 
feasibility of speeding up the requirement for double hulls, and the 
state of health of the oil pollution trust fund. The bill also requires 
the Coast Guard to improve its coordination on fisheries enforcement 
with NOAA and State and local authorities. Finally, it mandates that 
the Coast Guard must cooperate with NOAA in analyzing ship routing 
measures for certain ports that would reduce ship strikes of the North 
Atlantic right whale.
  Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I commend Senator McCain, Senator Hollings, 
and the rest of the conference committee for their hard work on this 
bipartisan authorization bill. This legislation provides an 
authorization of $8.168 billion for the Coast Guard's fiscal year 2005 
budget, an increase of 19 percent over fiscal year 2004. This 
conference agreement also includes important new authority for the 
Coast Guard to better carry out its missions and meet the growing 
responsibilities of a post-September 11 environment.
  Sadly, when it comes to funding homeland security needs, I believe 
the congressional intent expressed in this bill will, yet again, be 
ignored at the White House.
  This conference report authorizes $5.4 billion for the Coast Guard's 
operating expenses account--an increase of 14 percent over fiscal year 
2004 levels and over $231 million above the President's fiscal year 
2005 request for the Coast Guard.
  Over 20 months ago, the President signed the Homeland Security Act 
creating the Department of Homeland Security. With respect to the Coast 
Guard, that act required that, ``. . .the authorities, functions, and 
capabilities of the Coast Guard to perform its missions shall be 
maintained intact and without significant reduction. . . .''
  Unfortunately, the administration has not held up its end of the 
bargain. The administration has failed to provide the Coast Guard with 
sufficient budgets to maintain both traditional missions and new 
homeland security responsibilities. As a result, since September 11, 
2001, there has been severe degradation in the Coast Guard's 
traditional mission areas. Because of the administration's negligence, 
the number of hours the Coast Guard is spending on many of its mission 
areas has dropped dramatically as compared to pre-September 11, 2001. 
Drug enforcement is down 41 percent; fisheries enforcement is down 26 
percent; search and rescue is down 22 percent; and marine safety is 
down 41 percent. The administration's fiscal year 2005 request for the 
Coast Guard falls well short in addressing these serious deficiencies.
  This conference report also provides $1.1 billion for the Coast 
Guard's program to modernize and/or replace some 100 cutters and 200 
aircraft over a multi-year period, called Deepwater. This is $334 
million above the administration's request and puts the program on 
track to be completed in 15 years, compared to 22 years as proposed by 
the administration. Since the terrorist attacks on 9/11, the Coast 
Guard's ships and planes are being used more today than ever in the 
Coast Guard's history. The Coast Guard Commandant makes no bones about 
the fact that recapitalizing operational assets is his No. 1 priority. 
In testimony before the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland 
Security, the Commandant testified that the current condition of the 
aging, technologically obsolete fleet, threatens Coast Guard mission 
performance. He testified that Coast Guard assets are in a ``declining 
readiness spiral.''
  The question that must be asked is, if Coast Guard assets are in a 
``declining readiness spiral,'' why has the administration failed to 
address the situation. Despite the Commandant's plea for help, the 
President's budget for the Deepwater program will take 22 years to 
complete. Twenty-two years. This is 2 years slower than the capital 
improvement program envisioned when Deepwater was conceived prior to 
the tragic events of September 11th.
  The funding authorized in this bill addresses some of the operational 
and capital deficiencies that have been ignored by the administration. 
It is a good bill. However, as a result of the President setting 
arbitrary limits on discretionary spending, the Homeland Security 
Appropriations bill, at whatever point the Republican leadership 
decides to allow the Senate to debate the measure, will not come close 
to funding the Coast Guard at the levels set in this bill.
  By all indications, the President will sign this bill into law. 
Unfortunately, it will likely be thrown into the pile of other homeland 
security promises that have gone unfulfilled.
  Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, I rise today in support of the Coast Guard 
and Maritime Transportation Act of 2004. Since the Coast Guard was last 
authorized in 2002 as part of the Maritime Transportation Security Act 
of 2002, its responsibilities and needs have continued to evolve. Last 
year I introduced the Senate Coast Guard Authorization bill (S. 733), 
the underlying bill of this conference report, to address many of these 
concerns. We have successfully finished this critical conference and I 
strongly believe we need to move forward expeditiously and pass this 
conference report as soon as possible so that we can provide the Coast 
Guard with the authorization bill it desperately needs.
  In April, as Chair of the Oceans, Fisheries, and Coast Guard 
subcommittee, I held a hearing to examine the Coast Guard's readiness 
concerns; review the challenges it faces in balancing its homeland 
security and traditional missions; and ensure that we provide this 
service with the fiscal year 2005 budget it needs to carry out all of 
its many responsibilities.
  During this hearing the Coast Guard Commandant, Admiral Collins, 
presented a stark picture of his service's increasing maintenance 
costs. I was struck by Admiral Collins' testimony as he laid out the 
depths of the legacy asset sustainment problems faced by the Coast 
Guard. I am greatly concerned about the toll such a high operational 
tempo is taking on his antiquated ships and aircraft and ultimately on 
his personnel.
  The conference report we are considering will provide many important 
authorizations for the Coast Guard. First and foremost, it would 
authorize the funding and personnel levels it needs. In recent years we 
have seen an unprecedented growth in the Coast Guard's budget--more 
than 30 percent over the past 2 years alone--but this has not been 
enough. We must provide the Coast Guard with the funding it needs to 
restore its non-homeland security missions--such as search and rescue, 
fisheries enforcement, and marine environmental protection--to near 
their pre-September 11th levels.
  Additionally, while we have increased the number of Coast Guard 
personnel by more than 4,000, we have not raised the statutory cap on 
its authorized number of officers. We are rectifying this before the 
Coast Guard reaches its cap and is forced to terminate reserve officer 
contracts or delay some officer's deserved commissions and promotions. 
The Conference report raises this cap to 6,700 and prevents the Coast 
Guard from being forced to implement these drastic measures which would 
unfairly impact individual officers.
  Secondly, we all know that the Coast Guard currently operates the 
third oldest of the world's 39 similar naval fleets with several 
cutters dating back to World War II. The administration's fiscal year 
2005 request would put this program on a 22-year time line, which is 2 
years behind the original 20-year plans. This is simply not acceptable. 
I strongly believe that we must authorize the acceleration of this 
critical program because it is the best and most cost effective way to 
remedy the Coast Guard's readiness problems and provide it with the 
tools it needs to carry out all of its missions. That is why, I am 
extremely pleased with the $1.1 billion authorization for the Deepwater 
program in this Conference report, which if fully funded, will 
accelerate the program to a 15-year time line.
  This conference report also provides many non-controversial 
provisions which improve the Coast Guard's ability to recruit, reward, 
and retain high-quality personnel. It addresses personnel management 
and quality of life issues by providing for a critical skills training 
bonus, retaining commissioned officers with essential skill sets and 
experiences, expanding property authorities to ease housing shortages,

[[Page S8627]]

and includes several measures that grant parity with the other Armed 
Services. There are also many provisions requested by the 
administration regarding Law Enforcement, Marine Safety, and 
Environmental Protection which allow the Coast Guard to better 
accomplish its many missions.
  This conference report was crafted in a bi-partisan fashion and it 
provides the Coast Guard with a solid foundation to do its job. I thank 
all of the Members who have actively participated in its development. I 
am proud to give the Coast Guard my full support, and the resources it 
needs to carry out its many essential missions.
  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the 
conference report be agreed to, the motion to reconsider be laid upon 
the table, and any statements relating to the conference report be 
printed in the Record.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The conference report was agreed to.

                          ____________________