[Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 125 (Wednesday, July 25, 2018)]
[House]
[Pages H7640-H7645]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
SAVE OUR SEAS ACT OF 2018
Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and
pass the bill (S. 756) to reauthorize and amend the Marine Debris Act
to promote international action to reduce marine debris, and for other
purposes, as amended.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
S. 756
=========================== NOTE ===========================
July 25, 2018, on page H7640, the following appeared: amended.
The text of the bill is as follows: S. 756
The online version has been corrected to read: amended. The
Clerk read the title of the bill. The text of the bill is as
follows: S. 756
========================= END NOTE =========================
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
TITLE I--MARINE DEBRIS
SEC. 101. SHORT TITLE.
This title may be cited as the ``Save Our Seas Act of
2018''.
SEC. 102. NOAA MARINE DEBRIS PROGRAM.
Section 3 of the Marine Debris Act (33 U.S.C. 1952) is
amended--
(1) in subsection (b)--
(A) in paragraph (4), by striking ``; and'' and inserting a
semicolon;
(B) in paragraph (5)(C), by striking the period at the end
and inserting a semicolon; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
``(6) work to develop outreach and education strategies
with other Federal agencies to address sources of marine
debris;
``(7) except for discharges of marine debris from vessels,
in consultation with the Department of State and other
Federal agencies, promote international action, as
appropriate, to reduce the incidence of marine debris,
including providing technical assistance to expand waste
management systems internationally; and
``(8) in the case of an event determined to be a severe
marine debris event under subsection (c)--
``(A) assist in the cleanup and response required by the
severe marine debris event; or
``(B) conduct such other activity as the Administrator
determines is appropriate in response to the severe marine
debris event.'';
(2) by redesignating subsection (c) as subsection (d);
(3) by inserting after subsection (b) the following:
``(c) Determination of Severe Marine Debris Events.--At the
discretion of the Administrator or at the request of the
Governor of an affected State, the Administrator shall
determine whether there is a severe marine debris event.'';
and
(4) in subsection (d), as so redesignated--
(A) in paragraph (2)(A), by striking ``subparagraph (B)''
and inserting ``subparagraphs (B) and (C)'';
(B) in paragraph (2)(B), by striking ``may waive all or
part of the matching requirement under subparagraph (A)'' and
inserting ``may reduce the non-Federal share of project costs
under subparagraph (A) by up to 50 percent''; and
(C) by adding at the end of paragraph (2) the following:
``(C) Severe marine debris events.--Notwithstanding
subparagraph (A), the Federal share of the cost of an
activity carried out under a determination made under
subsection (c) shall be--
``(i) 100 percent of the cost of the activity, for an
activity funded wholly by funds made available by a person,
including the government of a foreign country, to the Federal
Government for the purpose of responding to a severe marine
debris event; or
``(ii) 75 percent of the cost of the activity, for any
activity other than an activity funded as described in clause
(i).''.
SEC. 103. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON INTERNATIONAL ENGAGEMENT TO
RESPOND TO MARINE DEBRIS.
It is the sense of Congress that the President should--
(1) support research and development on systems and
materials that reduce--
(A) derelict fishing gear; and
(B) the amount of solid waste that is generated from land-
based sources and the amount of such waste that enters the
marine environment;
(2) work with representatives of foreign countries that
discharge the largest amounts of solid waste from land-based
sources into the marine environment, to develop mechanisms to
reduce such discharges;
(3) carry out studies to determine--
(A) the primary means of discharges referred to in
paragraph (2);
(B) the manner in which waste management infrastructure can
be most effective in preventing such discharges; and
(C) the long-term impacts of marine debris on the national
economies of the countries with which work is undertaken
under paragraph (2) and on the global economy, including the
impacts of reducing the discharge of such debris;
(4) work with representatives of the countries with which
work is undertaken in paragraph (2) to conclude one or more
new international agreements that include provisions--
(A) to mitigate the discharge of land-based solid waste
into the marine environment; and
(B) to provide technical assistance and investment in waste
management infrastructure to reduce such discharges, if the
President determines such assistance or investment is
appropriate; and
(5) encourage the United States Trade Representative to
consider the impact of discharges of land-based solid waste
from the countries with which work is conducted under
paragraph (2) in relevant future trade agreements.
SEC. 104. MEMBERSHIP OF THE INTERAGENCY MARINE DEBRIS
COORDINATING COMMITTEE.
Section 5(b) of the Marine Debris Act (33 U.S.C. 1954(b))
is amended--
(1) in paragraph (4), by striking ``; and'' and inserting a
semicolon;
(2) by redesignating paragraph (5) as paragraph (7); and
(3) by inserting after paragraph (4) the following:
``(5) the Department of State;
``(6) the Department of the Interior; and''.
SEC. 105. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
Section 9 of the Marine Debris Act (33 U.S.C. 1958) is
amended to read as follows:
``SEC. 9. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
``(a) In General.--There is authorized to be appropriated
to the Administrator $10,000,000 for each of fiscal years
2018 through 2022 for carrying out sections 3, 5, and 6, of
which not more than 5 percent is authorized for each fiscal
year for administrative costs.
``(b) Amounts Authorized for Coast Guard.--Of the amounts
authorized for each fiscal year under section 2702(1) of
title 14, United States Code, up to $2,000,000 is authorized
for the Secretary of the department in which the Coast Guard
is operating for use by the Commandant of the Coast Guard to
carry out section 4 of this Act, of which not more than 5
percent is authorized for each fiscal year for administrative
costs.''.
TITLE II--MARITIME SAFETY
SEC. 201. SHORT TITLE.
This title may be cited as the ``Maritime Safety Act of
2018''.
SEC. 202. DEFINITIONS.
In this title:
(1) Commandant.--The term ``Commandant'' means the
Commandant of the Coast Guard.
(2) Recognized organization.--The term ``recognized
organization'' has the meaning given that term in section
2.45-1 of title 46, Code of Federal Regulations, as in effect
on the date of the enactment of this Act.
(3) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of the department in which the Coast Guard is operating.
SEC. 203. DOMESTIC VESSEL COMPLIANCE.
(a) In General.--Not later than 60 days after the date on
which the President submits to the Congress a budget each
year pursuant to section 1105 of title 31, United States
Code, the Commandant shall publish on a publicly accessible
Website information documenting domestic vessel compliance
with the requirements of subtitle II of title 46, United
States Code.
(b) Content.--The information required under subsection (a)
shall--
(1) include flag-State detention rates for each type of
inspected vessel; and
(2) identify any recognized organization that inspected or
surveyed a vessel that was later subject to a Coast Guard-
issued control action attributable to a major nonconformity
that the recognized organization failed to identify in such
inspection or survey.
SEC. 204. SAFETY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM.
(a) In General.--The Comptroller General of the United
States shall conduct an audit regarding the implementation
and effectiveness of safety management plans required under
chapter 32 of title 46, United States Code.
(b) Scope.--The audit conducted under subsection (a) shall
include a representative sample of safety management plans,
including such plans for--
(1) a range of vessel types and sizes; and
(2) vessels that operate in a cross-section of regional
operating areas.
(c) Report.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General shall
submit to Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of
the House of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce,
Science, and
[[Page H7641]]
Transportation of the Senate a report detailing the results
of the audit and providing recommendations related to such
results, including ways to streamline and focus such plans on
ship safety.
(2) Marine safety alert.--Not later than 60 days after the
date the report is submitted under paragraph (1), the
Commandant shall publish a Marine Safety Alert providing
notification of the completion of the report and including a
link to the report on a publicly accessible website.
SEC. 205. EQUIPMENT REQUIREMENTS.
(a) Regulations.--
(1) In general.--Section 3306 of title 46, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(l)(1) The Secretary shall require that a freight vessel
inspected under this chapter be outfitted with distress
signaling and location technology for the higher of--
``(A) the minimum complement of officers and crew specified
on the certificate of inspection for such vessel; or
``(B) the number of persons onboard the vessel; and
``(2) the requirement described in paragraph (1) shall not
apply to vessels operating within the baseline from which the
territorial sea of the United States is measured.
``(m)(1) The Secretary shall promulgate regulations
requiring companies to maintain records of all incremental
weight changes made to freight vessels inspected under this
chapter, and to track weight changes over time to facilitate
rapid determination of the aggregate total.
``(2) Records maintained under paragraph (1) shall be
stored, in paper or electronic form, onboard such vessels for
not less than 3 years and shoreside for the life of the
vessel.''.
(2) Deadlines.--The Secretary shall--
(A) begin implementing the requirement under section
3306(l) of title 46, United States Code, as amended by this
subsection, by not later than 1 year after the date of the
enactment of this Act; and
(B) promulgate the regulations required under section
3306(m) of title 46, United States Code, as amended by this
subsection, by not later than 1 year after the date of the
enactment of this Act.
(b) Engagement.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Commandant shall seek to enter
into negotiations through the International Maritime
Organization to amend regulation 25 of chapter II-1 of the
International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea to
require a high-water alarm sensor in each cargo hold of a
freight vessel (as that term is defined in section 2101(13)
of title 46, United States Code), that connects with audible
and visual alarms on the navigation bridge of the vessel.
SEC. 206. VOYAGE DATA RECORDER; ACCESS.
(a) In General.--Chapter 63 of title 46, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
``Sec. 6309. Voyage data recorder access
``Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Coast
Guard shall have full and timely access to and ability to use
voyage data recorder data and audio held by any Federal
agency in all marine casualty investigations, regardless of
which agency is the investigative lead.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The analysis for such chapter is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``6309. Voyage data recorder access.''.
SEC. 207. VOYAGE DATA RECORDER; REQUIREMENTS.
(a) Float-Free and Beacon Requirements.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Commandant shall seek to enter
into negotiations through the International Maritime
Organization to amend regulation 20 of chapter V of the
International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea to
require that all voyage data recorders are installed in a
float-free arrangement and contain an integrated emergency
position indicating radio beacon.
(2) Progress update.--Not later than 3 years after the date
of the enactment of this Act, the Commandant shall submit to
the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the
House of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce,
Science, and Transportation of the Senate an update on the
progress of the engagement required under paragraph (1).
(b) Cost-Benefit Analysis.--Not later than 2 years after
the date of the enactment of this Act, the Commandant shall
submit to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
of the House of Representatives and the Committee on
Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate a cost-
benefit analysis of requiring that voyage data recorders
installed on commercial vessels documented under chapter 121
of title 46, United States Code, capture communications on
the internal telephone systems of such vessels, including
requiring the capture of both sides of all communications
with the bridge onboard such vessels.
SEC. 208. SURVIVAL AND LOCATING EQUIPMENT.
Not later than 2 years after the date of the enactment of
this Act, the Commandant shall, subject to the availability
of appropriations, identify and procure equipment that will
provide search-and-rescue units the ability to attach a radio
or Automated Identification System strobe or beacon to an
object that is not immediately retrievable.
SEC. 209. TRAINING OF COAST GUARD PERSONNEL.
(a) Prospective Sector Commander Training.--Not later than
1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the
Commandant shall implement an Officer in Charge, Marine
Inspections segment to the sector commander indoctrination
course for prospective sector commanders without a Coast
Guard prevention ashore officer specialty code.
(b) Steamship Inspections.--Not later than 1 year after the
date of the enactment of this Act, the Commandant shall
implement steam plant inspection training for Coast Guard
marine inspectors and, subject to availability, recognized
organizations to which authority is delegated under section
3316 of title 46, United States Code.
(c) Advanced Journeyman Inspector Training.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 2 years after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Commandant shall establish
advanced training to provide instruction on the oversight of
recognized organizations to which authority is delegated
under section 3316 of title 46, United States Code, auditing
responsibilities, and the inspection of unique vessel types.
(2) Recipients.--The Commandant shall--
(A) require that such training be completed by senior Coast
Guard marine inspectors; and
(B) subject to availability of training capacity, make such
training available to recognized organization surveyors
authorized by the Coast Guard to conduct inspections.
(d) Coast Guard Inspections Staff; Briefing.--Not later
than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the
Commandant shall provide to the Committee on Transportation
and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives and the
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the
Senate a briefing detailing--
(1) the estimated time and funding necessary to triple the
current size of the Coast Guard's traveling inspector staff;
and
(2) other options available to the Coast Guard to enhance
and maintain marine safety knowledge, including discussion of
increased reliance on--
(A) civilian marine inspectors;
(B) experienced licensed mariners;
(C) retired members of the Coast Guard;
(D) arranging for Coast Guard inspectors to ride onboard
commercial oceangoing vessels documented under chapter 121 of
title 46, United States Code, to gain experience and insight;
and
(E) extending tour-lengths for Coast Guard marine safety
officers assigned to inspection billets.
(e) Audits; Coast Guard Attendance and Performance.--Not
later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this
Act, the Commandant shall--
(1) update Coast Guard policy to utilize risk analysis to
target the attendance of Coast Guard personnel during
external safety management certificate and document of
compliance audits; and
(2) perform a quality assurance audit of recognized
organization representation and performance regarding United
States-flagged vessels.
SEC. 210. MAJOR MARINE CASUALTY PROPERTY DAMAGE THRESHOLD.
Section 6101(i)(3) of title 46, United States Code, is
amended by striking ``$500,000'' and inserting
``$2,000,000''.
SEC. 211. REVIEWS, BRIEFINGS, AND REPORTS.
(a) Major Conversion Determinations.--
(1) Review of policies and procedures.--The Commandant
shall conduct a review of policies and procedures for making
and documenting major conversion determinations, including an
examination of the deference given to precedent.
(2) Briefing.--Not later than 1 year after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Commandant shall provide to the
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House
of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science,
and Transportation of the Senate a briefing on the findings
of the review required by paragraph (1).
(b) Ventilators, Openings and Stability Standards.--
(1) Review.--Note later than 1 year after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Commandant shall complete a review
of the effectiveness of United States regulations,
international conventions, recognized organizations' class
rules, and Coast Guard technical policy regarding--
(A) ventilators and other hull openings;
(B) fire dampers and other closures protecting openings
normally open during operations; and
(C) intact and damage stability standards under subchapter
S of chapter I of title 46, Code of Federal Regulations.
(2) Briefing.--Not later than 18 months after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Commandant shall provide to
the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the
House of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce,
Science, and Transportation of the Senate a briefing on the
effectiveness of the regulations, international conventions,
recognized organizations' class rules, and Coast Guard
technical policy reviewed under paragraph (1).
(c) Self-Locating Datum Marker Buoys.--Not later than 6
months after the date of the enactment of this Act, the
Commandant shall provide to the Committee on Transportation
and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives and the
Committee
[[Page H7642]]
on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate a
briefing on the reliability of self-locating datum marker
buoys and other similar technology used during Coast Guard
search-and-rescue operations. The briefing shall include a
description of reasonable steps the Commandant could take to
increase the reliability of such buoys, including the
potential to leverage technology used by the Navy, and how
protocols could be developed to conduct testing of such buoys
before using them for operations.
(d) Oversight Program; Effectiveness.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 2 years after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Commandant shall commission an
assessment of the effectiveness of the Coast Guard's
oversight of recognized organizations and its impact on
compliance by and safety of vessels inspected by such
organizations.
(2) Experience.--The assessment commissioned under
paragraph (1) shall be conducted by a research organization
with significant experience in maritime operations and marine
safety.
(3) Submission to congress.--Not later than 180 days after
the date that the assessment required under paragraph (1) is
completed, the Commandant shall submit to the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation of the Senate the results of such assessment.
SEC. 212. FLAG-STATE GUIDANCE AND SUPPLEMENTS.
(a) Freight Vessels; Damage Control Information.--Within 1
year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the
Secretary shall issue flag-State guidance for all freight
vessels documented under chapter 121 of title 46, United
States Code, built before January 1, 1992, regarding the
inclusion of comprehensive damage control information in
safety management plans required under chapter 32 of title
46, United States Code.
(b) Recognized Organizations; United States Supplement.--
The Commandant shall--
(1) work with recognized organizations to create a single
United States Supplement to rules of such organizations for
classification of vessels; and
(2) by not later than 1 year after the date of the
enactment of this Act, provide to the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation of the Senate a briefing on whether it is
necessary to revise part 8 of title 46, Code of Federal
Regulations, to authorize only one United States Supplement
to such rules.
SEC. 213. MARINE SAFETY STRATEGY.
Section 2116 of title 46, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in subsection (a), by striking ``each year of an
annual'' and inserting ``of a triennial'';
(2) in subsection (b)--
(A) in the subsection heading, by striking ``Annual'' and
inserting ``Triennial''; and
(B) by striking ``annual'' each place it appears and
inserting ``triennial'';
(3) in subsection (c)--
(A) by striking ``fiscal year 2011 and each fiscal year''
and inserting ``fiscal year 2020 and triennially''; and
(B) by striking ``annual plan'' and inserting ``triennial
plan''; and
(4) in subsection (d)(2), by striking ``annually'' and
inserting ``triennially''.
SEC. 214. RECOGNIZED ORGANIZATIONS; OVERSIGHT.
(a) In General.--Section 3316 of title 46, United States
Code, is amended by redesignating subsection (g) as
subsection (h), and by inserting after subsection (f) the
following:
``(g)(1) There shall be within the Coast Guard an office
that conducts comprehensive and targeted oversight of all
recognized organizations that act on behalf of the Coast
Guard.
``(2) The staff of the office shall include subject matter
experts, including inspectors, investigators, and auditors,
who possess the capability and authority to audit all aspects
of such recognized organizations.
``(3) In this subsection the term `recognized organization'
has the meaning given that term in section 2.45-1 of title
46, Code of Federal Regulations, as in effect on the date of
the enactment of the Maritime Safety Act of 2018.''.
(b) Deadline for Establishment.--The Commandant of the
Coast Guard shall establish the office required by the
amendment made by subsection (a) by not later than 2 years
after the date of the enactment of this Act.
SEC. 215. TIMELY WEATHER FORECASTS.
Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of
this Act, the Commandant shall seek to enter into
negotiations through the International Maritime Organization
to amend the International Convention for the Safety of Life
at Sea to require that vessels subject to the requirements of
such Convention receive timely synoptic and graphical chart
weather forecasts.
SEC. 216. MARINE SAFETY IMPLEMENTATION STATUS.
Not later than December 19 of 2018, and of each of the 2
subsequent years thereafter, the Commandant shall provide to
the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the
House of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce,
Science, and Transportation of the Senate a briefing on the
status of implementation of each action outlined in the
Commandant's final action memo dated December 19, 2017,
regarding the sinking and loss of the vessel El Faro.
SEC. 217. DELEGATED AUTHORITIES.
(a) In General.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Commandant shall review the
authorities that have been delegated to recognized
organizations for the alternative compliance program as
described in subpart D of part 8 of title 46, Code of Federal
Regulations, and, if necessary, revise or establish policies
and procedures to ensure those delegated authorities are
being conducted in a manner to ensure safe maritime
transportation.
(b) Briefing.--Not later than 1 year after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Commandant shall provide to the
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the
Senate and the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
of the House of Representatives a briefing on the
implementation of subsection (a).
TITLE III--CENTER OF EXPERTISE
SEC. 301. SHORT TITLE.
This title may be cited as the ``Coast Guard Blue
Technology Center of Expertise Act''.
SEC. 302. COAST GUARD BLUE TECHNOLOGY CENTER OF EXPERTISE.
(a) Establishment.--Not later than one year after the date
of the enactment of this Act and subject to the availability
of appropriations, the Commandant shall establish under
section 58 of title 14, United States Code, a Blue Technology
center of expertise.
(b) Missions.--In addition to the missions listed in
section 58(b) of title 14, United States Code, the Center--
(1) shall--
(A) promote awareness within the Coast Guard of the range
and diversity of Blue Technologies and their potential to
enhance Coast Guard mission readiness, operational
performance, and regulation of such technologies;
(B) function as an interactive conduit to enable the
sharing and dissemination of Blue Technology information
between the Coast Guard and representatives from the private
sector, academia, nonprofit organizations, and other Federal
agencies;
(C) increase awareness among Blue Technology manufacturers,
entrepreneurs, and vendors of Coast Guard acquisition
policies, procedures, and business practices; and
(D) provide technical support, coordination, and assistance
to Coast Guard districts and the Coast Guard Research and
Development Center, as appropriate; and
(2) subject to the requirements of the Coast Guard Academy,
may coordinate with the Academy to develop appropriate
curricula regarding Blue Technology to be offered in
professional courses of study to give Coast Guard cadets and
officer candidates a greater background and understanding of
Blue Technologies.
(c) Blue Technology Exposition; Briefing.--Not later than 6
months after the date of the enactment of this Act, the
Commandant shall provide to the Committee on Transportation
and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives and the
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the
Senate a briefing on the costs and benefits of hosting a
biennial Coast Guard Blue Technology exposition to further
interactions between representatives from the private sector,
academia, and nonprofit organizations, and the Coast Guard
and examine emerging technologies and Coast Guard mission
demands.
(d) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Center.--The term ``Center'' means the Blue Technology
center of expertise established under this section.
(2) Commandant.--The term ``Commandant'' means the
Commandant of the Coast Guard.
(3) Blue technology.--The term ``Blue Technology'' means
any technology, system, or platform that--
(A) is designed for use or application above, on, or below
the sea surface or that is otherwise applicable to Coast
Guard operational needs, including such a technology, system,
or platform that provides continuous or persistent coverage;
and
(B) supports or facilitates--
(i) maritime domain awareness, including--
(I) surveillance and monitoring;
(II) observation, measurement, and modeling: or
(III) information technology and communications;
(ii) search and rescue;
(iii) emergency response;
(iv) maritime law enforcement;
(v) marine inspections and investigations; or
(vi) protection and conservation of the marine environment.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Alaska (Mr. Young) and the gentleman from California (Mr. Garamendi)
each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Alaska.
General Leave
=========================== NOTE ===========================
July 25, 2018, on page H7642, the following appeared: The
recognizes the gentleman from Alaska. GENERAL LEAVE
The online version has been corrected to read: The Chair
recognizes the gentleman from Alaska. GENERAL LEAVE
========================= END NOTE =========================
Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all
Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their
remarks and include extraneous material on S. 756.
[[Page H7643]]
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Alaska?
There was no objection.
Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of my time to
the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter), and I ask unanimous consent
that he may control that time to manage the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Alaska?
There was no objection.
Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, S. 756, the Save Our Seas Act, promotes continued
national and international efforts to address the growing amount of
marine debris entering the ocean environment.
The dean of the House, the gentleman who yielded to me, Mr. Don
Young, our esteemed colleague from Alaska, sponsored the House
companion bill. I thank our longstanding colleague for all of his
efforts to move this legislation through committee and to the House
floor.
Marine debris is pervasive and persistent, remaining in the ocean for
years and negatively impacting the ocean environment.
S. 756 urges the administration to support research and development
on systems and materials that would reduce the amount of waste that
enters the ocean and work with nations that discharge large amounts of
solid waste into the ocean by sharing technologies and infrastructure
to prevent, reduce, or mitigate those land-based sources from entering
the marine environment.
The bill also allows the Administrator of NOAA to designate, respond
to, and assist in the cleanup of severe marine debris events.
Title II of the bill is the Maritime Safety Act. The text came from
H.R. 6175, a bill ordered reported from the Transportation and
Infrastructure Committee. I sponsored this bill with the ranking member
of the Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Committee, Mr.
Garamendi, my esteemed colleague from California, as a cosponsor.
The bill addresses maritime safety issues that were raised in the
Commandant of the Coast Guard's final action memo in response to the
tragic sinking of the El Faro. A few of the required actions include:
timely weather forecasts, not too complicated; emergency safety gear
with locator beacons, so we can find the crew after the vessel has
sunk; and float-free voyage data recorders with integrated emergency
position indicating beacons.
The measures included in this title should promote safer vessel
transit and, if needed, would assist the Coast Guard in its rescue
operations.
Sadly, we were reminded again last week, by the events in Missouri,
the dangers of going out in the open water, even in a relatively
protected environment. Our thoughts and prayers go out to the families
of the loved ones who lost their lives in the tragic incident.
Tragedies like this and, sadly, others in recent history remind us
that we must remain vigilant and committed to improving maritime safety
to protect those who go out on the water for their livelihood or for
recreation.
Title III of the bill allows the Coast Guard to establish a Blue
Technology center of expertise. This title is the text of H.R. 6206, as
reported by the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. Mr.
Garamendi sponsored the legislation, and I am an original cosponsor of
the bill.
The ranking member and I have a strong interest in Blue Technology
and how it can assist the Coast Guard in performing its multitude of
missions better and more cost effectively. The center created by this
legislation will provide a venue for the Coast Guard to interface with
industry on existing and up-and-coming technologies that could be used
by the service in conducting its missions. It is an important component
in bringing the Coast Guard into the modern technological world.
I thank the chairman of the committee, Mr. Shuster, for this
leadership, and Mr. DeFazio and, especially, Mr. Garamendi for their
leadership and cooperation in getting these bills out of committee and
to the floor today.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, first, let me thank Chairman Hunter for his work on this
bill and on the other work we have been able to do with the Coast Guard
and the legislation. It has been a great pleasure to work with him.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of S. 756, the Save Our Seas Act of
2018, as amended, to include other important bills addressing maritime
safety and ocean technologies.
As explained by the majority's manager of the bill, marine debris,
especially plastics, is a persistent and growing threat to the global
marine environment. Many countries, including the United States,
contribute to the plastic pollution, and it does add up.
For example, in 2010 alone, according to a University of Georgia
study, a total of 8 million metric tons of plastic entered the world's
oceans. Worse yet, the study predicts that number will grow 10 times--
tenfold--as large by 2025.
Not only are floating plastic bags, straws, Styrofoam cups, and
plastic bottles harmful to the health and welfare of marine life, but
marine debris also threatens the food supply of millions of people
around the world who rely on seafood as their primary source of
protein.
The impacts affect people everywhere, and the problem is not going to
go away and won't be solved by itself. The legislation we put forth
today is an important step in the right direction.
Title I would authorize existing funding levels in the Marine Debris
Act to enable the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and
the United States Coast Guard to identify and remove sources of marine
debris and to coordinate response activities on the national and
regional levels to assess and reduce the volume of the debris entering
our oceans.
The title also contains important amendments, including new authority
to allow the Federal Government to provide assistance to mitigate
severe marine debris events, such as the recurrence of the flood of
debris that drifted from Japan across the Pacific Ocean in the
aftermath of the 2011 Fukushima earthquake and tsunami.
I also want to express my strong support for two other bills recently
passed and reported by the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee
that were added as separate titles to S. 756: First, H.R. 6175, the
Maritime Safety Act of 2018, as title II; and my legislation, H.R.
6206, the Coast Guard Blue Technology Center of Expertise Act, as title
III.
The 2015 sinking of the U.S.-flagged commercial vessel, El Faro, and
the tragic loss of all 33 crew members was the worst U.S. maritime
disaster in 35 years. The subsequent Marine Board of Investigation,
convened by the Coast Guard and joined by the National Transportation
Safety Board, found numerous faults in the ship's safety management
system, bridge management, and safety apparatus, as well as other
critical oversights or failures.
Title II enacts several important recommendations contained in the
action memo released by then-Commandant of the Coast Guard, Admiral
Paul Zukunft.
I want to particularly note the chairman's work in bringing together
a couple of hearings on this, both formal and informal, that led to
these investigations and recommendations.
Together, these provisions that are in this bill will improve ship
communication and safety management. They will also improve our ability
to identify and recover voyage data recorders and locate and retrieve
seafarers who may be adrift at sea.
Additionally, the investigation revealed gaps or insufficient
oversight in the inspection regime, and the bill deals with those.
Title II also includes several new requirements to shore up the
oversight and investigation of third-party inspectors, who should be
reviewing the safety of these ships.
I also strongly support title III, which contains my legislation--I
know you are surprised with that support, but nonetheless--H.R. 6026,
to authorize the Coast Guard to establish a Blue Technology center of
expertise.
Unlike the Navy, ocean industry sectors, and ocean science community,
the Coast Guard has not embraced the
[[Page H7644]]
adoption and use of a wide assortment of advanced ocean technologies,
systems, sensors, and platforms. This is unfortunate because I suspect
that several such technologies have the potential to dramatically
improve the Coast Guard's operational capability.
Therefore, title III simply draws upon the existing authority to
direct the Coast Guard to establish a Blue Technology center of
expertise. The overarching goal is to improve from within the Coast
Guard's awareness of blue technologies that apply or align with Coast
Guard mission needs.
In addition, this new Blue Technology center will facilitate a
dialogue and sharing of information between the Coast Guard and the
growing number of Blue Tech stakeholders in the private sector,
academia, and ocean research community.
A 2015 study by NOAA identified over 400 Blue Technology firms across
the United States who generate some $7 billion in annual revenue. These
firms, along with our academic and research institutions, stand ready
to put their innovations to work in the service of the American people,
using the Coast Guard as a mechanism to accomplish that.
I am confident that this Blue Technology center will open doors of
opportunity for the Coast Guard to better protect and patrol the vast
oceans and complex waterways.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues on both sides to join with me in
support of this noncontroversial maritime legislation, and I reserve
the balance of my time.
{time} 1445
Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Alaska (Mr. Young), dean of the House, a gentleman that has been
working maritime issues because he represents all of Alaska. Whether it
is fisheries, energy exploration, to pollution, Mr. Don Young from
Alaska knows what he is talking about probably more than anybody in
this body.
(Mr. YOUNG of Alaska asked and was given permission to revise and
extend his remarks.)
Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman Hunter and Ranking
Member Garamendi and, of course, Peter DeFazio.
This is a good piece of legislation. I had a House bill similar in
fact, too. This came over from the Senate side, but I am not really
interested in whose bill it is but, more likely, getting things done.
So this is a good bill.
And debris is what I am interested in as one of our biggest issues;
it has been well explained by both speakers prior to me. It is getting
bigger, like I say. What is it? Tenfold more. And the tonnage is
already there.
We have to look at preventing the debris, but also what do we do once
it is in the ocean. I have some ideas. And, hopefully, later on, we can
explore those ideas, how we will recover and utilize that debris,
because it does harm our maritime lives, and it makes the ocean really
a garbage dump, and we don't want that.
So this is a good piece of legislation. I thank each person that has
been involved in it, and I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes.''
Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time I have
remaining?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from California (Mr.
Garamendi) has 13\1/2\ minutes remaining.
Mr. GARAMENDI. That should be enough for Mr. DeFazio, the ranking
member of the committee, to share his views on this legislation.
I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio).
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague, both for his
leadership on these issues, and for the time. And I also would
congratulate Chairman Young and others, particularly Suzanne Bonamici,
from my State, who has taken a real leadership role on the issue of
marine debris.
We are choking the oceans to death. The lifeblood of our planet, the
lungs of our planet, it is becoming a giant garbage dump. The Pacific
Gyre can be seen from space. It is a massive gyre in the middle of the
Pacific Ocean and we have to begin to deal seriously with these issues.
It was just this week in the New York Times, photographs of the
Dominican Republic, known for its pristine beaches, which had giant
bulldozers on the beach trying to eat through about an 8-foot tall pile
of plastic debris on the beaches. So this threatens the marine
environment and all that which is dependent upon it, the creatures that
live there, and those of us who harvest from that. And it is
threatening tourism and recreation. Obviously, this has to be dealt
with.
I will say, this is good legislation, but it is a pathetic amount of
money. The amount of money that Congress is putting out to deal with
something that is threatening the very oceans that surround us probably
isn't adequate to clean up the little--I live on a boat down there
inside Hains Point--probably that little section of water inside Hains
Point down by Fort McNair. I don't even think $10 million could clean
that up, let alone the oceans. So we need to get a little more serious
about this and really put up additional funds.
So that is very important legislation. Title II is something about
which I am very passionate. The worst maritime disaster since 1983, and
obviously, there is a lot of blame to go around on that disaster. But
one of the factors was that ship was not fit. It had been certified by
an independent party which is called, under the law, a recognized
organization, as fit to go to sea.
Now, why would that happen? Well, because the recognized
organizations get paid by the shipping companies. Now, I am not going
to hire you if you tell me my ship isn't fit to go to sea, which is
what they should have been telling TOTE. They didn't tell them because,
hey, we want more of your business. We will go out and certify some
more of your unfit ships and kill more people. This has got to end.
The Coast Guard is also at fault. They were not providing enough
oversight to these recognized organizations, and had let their own
marine safety division, under this privatization scheme, deteriorate to
the point where they couldn't even keep up with the paperwork.
So this bill is going to begin to rectify those issues and revitalize
the Coast Guard maritime safety organization, and also, bring new
scrutiny on these recognized organizations so they don't kill any more
people and send unfit ships to sea.
Finally, the legislation, the third part of this is, I think, a
tremendous accomplishment by the Ranking Member, John Garamendi, which
is his Blue Tech center and Blue Oceans. The Coast Guard has,
unfortunately--again, we have underfunded the Coast Guard, so Congress
is at fault for many of these things; maritime safety and the lack of
initiative of the Coast Guard in terms of adopting new 21st century
technologies to better perform their mission and make the sea-lane
safer and better understand what is going on in the oceans around us.
So, maybe we will get, someday, to name the Blue Tech Center after
Mr. Garamendi, but not until he is long gone, so he is not in a hurry
for that.
So anyway, I want to congratulate him, and congratulate others who
have been involved, and thank Chairman Shuster for moving this
legislation.
Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the honorable
gentlewoman from the State of Oregon (Ms. Bonamici).
Ms. BONAMICI. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague from
California for yielding time, and also for his commitment to this
important issue.
I am honored to co-chair the Oceans Caucus with Representative Young,
and I thank him for his leadership on this important issue.
I also thank my Oregon colleague, Mr. DeFazio, for his commitment and
for his passion about the importance of marine debris and addressing
it.
I rise in support of the Save our Seas Act, a bill to clean up and
reduce marine debris. This bill would reauthorize the NOAA Marine
Debris Program through fiscal year 2022 and provide resources to help
States respond to severe marine debris events. The health of our oceans
reflects the health of our planet, and we must do more to keep garbage
out the ocean and off of our shores.
Every minute, the equivalent of a garbage truck full of plastic is
dumped into our oceans. According to the
[[Page H7645]]
United Nations, that is more than 8 million tons a year. Plastic
bottles, straws, grocery bags, cigarette butts, fishing gear, and
abandoned vessels litter the ocean.
Currents and atmospheric winds carry floatable marine debris. These
movements trap items in debris accumulation zones, also known as
garbage patches. A study published in the journal, Scientific Reports,
estimated that the Pacific garbage patch is comprised of about 1.8
trillion pieces of debris.
We still don't know how long it takes for plastic to biodegrade.
Estimates range from 450 years to never.
Marine debris harms our coastal economies, endangers marine life,
destroys important marine habitats, propagates invasive species, and
creates hazardous conditions for the maritime industry. Tiny pieces of
plastic, fiber, fragments, and microbeads also make their way into
marine life, blocking digestive tracts, altering growth and, in some
cases, killing animals and marine organisms.
Healthy beaches and waterways are critical to the marine ecosystems
that thousands of people rely on to earn a living in Oregon and other
coastal communities. After the tsunami hit the coast of Japan in 2011,
large materials like docks and boats that carried invasive species
ended up on the shores of the Pacific Northwest.
But it is not just tsunami debris that is a problem. According to
NOAA, a majority of the debris that covers our beaches come from storm
drains and sewers, demonstrating that this is not just a problem
resulting from those along our Nation's shorelines.
Marine debris is entirely preventable, but we must support
responsible disposal practices and provide coastal communities with the
resources they need. The NOAA Marine Debris Program has partnered with
Oregon Sea Grant, Oregon State University, Oregon Coast Aquarium, and
Lincoln County School District to create a curriculum to teach middle
and high school students about the effects of marine debris and to
promote stewardship activities.
There has been growing momentum on this issue, as many companies and
cities and jurisdictions across this country stop the use of plastic
straws and bags.
The ocean is resilient and we can help it heal, but we cannot afford
to wait. I urge my colleagues to support this bill to strengthen the
Federal response to marine debris.
I want to close, again, by thanking all of the bipartisan sponsors
and cosponsors of this legislation, but also, especially, the co-chair
of the Oceans Caucus, again, Representative Don Young, for his
leadership.
Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close. I will take my
few seconds that remain then and simply say this is a good piece of
legislation. I want to thank the chair of the Coast Guard and Maritime
Transportation Subcommittee for his work on this, and for working
across the aisle to solve problems, some very real, serious problems in
this legislation.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
First off, thanks to Mr. Garamendi. If there are two more folks in
this Congress from opposite sides of the aisle that disagree on some
things sometimes, but agree as much as possible and as much as we do on
the things that we are working on, I would be surprised. And I would
like to just thank him so much for his work and for coming up with
great legislation, great ideas, and pushing this forward.
There is an old military saying that if you control the ocean, you
control the world. And just as serious of a sense, if you destroy the
ocean, you destroy the world. I think that is one reason this bill is
so important.
S. 756 promotes action to address the marine debris, catastrophic
issues that we face now that will only get worse. It increases maritime
vessel safety so you will not have another tragic incident like you had
with the El Faro. And it establishes a Blue Technology center of
expertise so we can help the Coast Guard work smarter and not harder
with their limited funds. I urge all Members to support it.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young) that the House suspend the rules and
pass the bill, S. 756, as amended.
=========================== NOTE ===========================
July 25, 2018, on page H7645, the following appeared: the
gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter) that the House suspend the
rules and pass the bill, S. 756, as amended.
The online version has been corrected to read: the gentleman
from Alaska (Mr. Young) that the House suspend the rules and pass
the bill, S. 756, as amended.
========================= END NOTE =========================
The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the
rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________