Report text available as:

  • TXT
  • PDF   (PDF provides a complete and accurate display of this text.) Tip ?
104th Congress                                            Rept. 104-550
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES                         

 2d Session                                                      Part 1
_______________________________________________________________________

                                     



 
          OMNIBUS CIVILIAN SCIENCE AUTHORIZATION ACT OF 1996

                               __________

                              R E P O R T

                                 of the

                          COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                                   on

                               H.R. 3322

                             together with

                            DISSENTING VIEWS

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]




                  May 1, 1996.--Ordered to be printed
           OMNIBUS CIVILIAN SCIENCE AUTHORIZATION ACT OF 1996
104th Congress                                            Rept. 104-550
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

 2d Session                                                      Part 1
_______________________________________________________________________



           OMNIBUS CIVILIAN SCIENCE AUTHORIZATION ACT OF 1996
_______________________________________________________________________


                  May 1, 1996.--Ordered to be printed

                                _______


   Mr. Walker, from the Committee on Science, submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                            DISSENTING VIEWS

                        [To accompany H.R. 3322]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on Science, to whom was referred the bill 
(H.R. 3322) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 1997 
for civilian science activities of the Federal Government, and 
for other purposes, having considered the same, report 
favorably thereon without amendment and recommend that the bill 
do pass.



                            C O N T E N T S

                                                                   Page
  I. Purpose of the Bill..............................................2
 II. Background (By Title) and Need for Legislation...................2
III. Summary of Hearings (By Subcommittee)............................8
 IV. Committee Actions...............................................19
  V. Summary of Authorizations and Major Provisions of the Bill (By 
     Title)..........................................................21
 VI. Section-By-Section Analysis and Committee Views.................26
     Title I. National Science Foundation............................26
     Title II. National Aeronautics and Space Administration.........36
     Title III. United States Fire Administration....................80
     Title IV. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.......83
     Title V. Environmental Protection Agency.......................100
     Title VI. National Institute of Standards and Technology.......105
     Title VII. Federal Aviation Administration, R,E&D..............108;
     Title VIII. National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program......114
     Title IX Miscellaneous.........................................115
VII. Committee Cost Estimates.......................................116
  
VIII.Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimates.....................116

 IX. Effects of Legislation on Inflation............................127
  X. Oversight Findings and Recommendations.........................127
 XI. Oversight Findings and Recommendations by the Committee on 
     Government Reform and Oversight................................127
XII. Changes in Existing Law made by the Bill, As Reported..........127
XIII.Committee Recommendations......................................186

XIV. Dissenting Views...............................................186
 XV. Proceedings of Full Committee Markup...........................206

                         I. Purpose of the Bill
    The purpose of the bill is to authorize appropriations for 
fiscal year 1997 for most programs and missions under the 
jurisdiction of the Science Committee. H.R. 3322 contains $19.7 
billion in authorizations for these programs. Department of 
Energy programs are not included in this bill, as FY97 
authorizations for these programs were passed by the House on 
October 12, 1995 as part of H.R. 2405, the Omnibus Civilian 
Science Authorization Act of 1995.

                FY 1997 SCIENCE COMMITTEE AUTHORIZATIONS                
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Mark vs.
               H.R. 3322                    FY96    FY97 Mark     '96   
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Title                                                                   
I. NSF                                     3,220.0    3,250.5       30.5
II. NASA                                  13,909.9   13,501.8     -408.1
III. Fire (USFA in FEMA)                      28.5       27.6       -0.9
IV. NOAA                                   1,858.2    1,794.9      -63.3
V. EPA                                       506.7      490.0      -16.7
VI. NIST                                     552.0      385.8     -166.2
VII. FAA                                     185.7      185.7        0.0
VIII. Earthquake                                                        
    FEMA                                      19.9       18.8       -1.1
    USGS                                      46.1       46.1        0.0
                                        --------------------------------
BILL TOTAL                                20,327.0  19,701.2      -625.8
House Passed DOE:                                                       
General Science                              981.0      950.0      -31.0
Energy Supply R&D;                          2,727.4    2,600.0     -127.4
Fossil R&D;                                   377.0      221.0     -156.0
Cons. R&D;                                    412.5      230.1     -182.4
                                                                        
DOE TOTAL                                  4,497.9    4,001.1     -496.8
SCIENCE COMMITTEE TOTAL                   24,824.9   23,702.3   -1,122.6
------------------------------------------------------------------------

           II. Background (By Title) and Need for Legislation

Title I--National Science Foundation

    The National Science Foundation (NSF) Act of 1950 
authorizes and directs NSF to initiate and support basic 
research and programs to strengthen research potential and 
education at all levels in the sciences and engineering. The 
Act reinforces that basic research and education have 
traditionally constituted the heart of the NSF's mission.

Title II--National Aeronautics and Space Administration
    The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) 
faces an even greater budget decline in the outyears than was 
anticipated last year. Under the Administration's budget for 
fiscal year 1997, NASA faces additional cuts of $3.2 billion 
from fiscal years 1998-2000. Last year's outyear budget was 
adjusted by NASA to a level of $13.2 billion by fiscal year 
2000, after the Administration cut $5 billion out of NASA's 
budget for President Clinton's tax cut. That amount has 
subsequently been adjusted to $4 billion from fiscal years 
1996-2000.
    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) sent a budget 
back to NASA that takes the agency down to $11.6 billion in 
fiscal year 2000, instead of the anticipated $13.2 billion. 
Further, the Administration has defined its five priorities for 
NASA that are to be protected as the budget starts its downward 
spiral in fiscal year 1998. These five priorities are: (1) 
Mission to Planet Earth; (2) International Space Station; (3) 
Advanced Subsonic Technology and High Speed Research in 
Aeronautics; (4) High Performance Computing and Communications; 
and (5) New Millennium. Space Science and Space Technology 
(beyond New Millennium) are noticeably absent and will be 
subject to a disproportionate share of the cuts in the 
outyears.
    Furthermore, the Administration's budget request for fiscal 
year 1997 fails to make the tough decisions this year, that are 
necessary to put NASA on a track for the outyear budget. Under 
the Administration's budget, $557 million is cut in fiscal year 
1998; $1.05 billion is cut in fiscal year 1999; and $1.55 
billion is cut in fiscal year 2000. It would seem prudent to 
start the process, in fiscal year 1997, instead of waiting 
until fiscal year 1998 or 1999 to cancel whole programs after 
they have been funded in fiscal year 1997. A budget line that 
approximates a slope is much more desirable than one that falls 
off a cliff. It is critical that tough choices be made this 
year and that a balance among NASA's core missions is attained.
Title III--United States Fire Administration

    In 1974 Congress enacted the Federal Fire Prevention and 
Control Act in response to a nationwide concern with the loss 
of life and property from fires. The Act established the United 
States Fire Administration in an effort to prevent and reduce 
this loss of life and property. The USFA coordinates the 
nation's fire safety and emergency medical service activities. 
The USFA works with state and local units of government to 
educate the public on fire prevention and control, collect, and 
analyze data related to fire, promote the use of sprinkler 
systems in residential and commercial buildings, conduct 
research and development on fire suppression, promote 
firefighter health and safety, and coordinate with other 
federal agencies charged with emergency response activities.
    The USFA also administers the National Fire Academy (NFA), 
which provides training to fire and emergency service personnel 
in fire protection and control activities.
    During the first session of the 104th Congress, the House 
passed H.R. 1851, which was a two-year authorization for the 
USFA. Except for a change in the authorization funding level 
for FY 1997 from $28 million to $27.56 million, to conform to 
the Administration's FY 1997 request, this title includes the 
text of H.R. 1851.

Title IV--National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

    The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 
created in 1970 by Executive Order of President Nixon, has 
obtained most of the funding for its programs over the past 
twenty years through direct appropriation without annual 
legislative authorization.
    NOAA programs under the jurisdiction of the Science 
Committee include all of the National Weather Service, the 
Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research (OAR), the National 
Environmental Satellite, Data, and Information Services 
(NESDIS), and portions of the National Oceans Service (NOS).
    In the 98th Congress, legislation authorizing NOAA 
activities for fiscal year 1984, S. 1097, was vetoed on October 
19, 1984. In the 99th Congress, the Consolidated Omnibus Budget 
Reconciliation Act of 1986 (Public Law 99-272) authorized 
various NOAA activities, including nautical and aeronautical 
chart programs, marine research and monitoring, ocean pollution 
research, and weather modification research. During the 100th 
Congress, provisions authorizing fiscal year 1989 
appropriations for NOAA's satellite, atmospheric, and weather 
programs (previously approved by the House of Representatives 
and the Senate as S. 1667) were included in Title IV of S. 
2209, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration 
Authorization Act for fiscal year 1989, which was signed into 
law on November 17, 1988 (Public Law 100-685).
    During the 102nd Congress, the first comprehensive NOAA 
authorization bill was approved and signed into law, the 
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Authorization 
Act of 1992 (Public Law 102-567). With three exceptions, Public 
Law 102-567 only authorized funding for fiscal years 1992 and 
1993. The exceptions are portions of the Next Generation 
Weather Radar (NEXRAD) program and the Geostationary 
Operational Environmental Satellite (GOES) program which are 
authorized to completion, and NOAA Fleet Modernization which is 
authorized through FY 1997. No comprehensive NOAA authorization 
bills have been signed into law since the 102nd Congress.

Title V--Environmental Protection Agency

A. EPA'S RESEARCH PROGRAM

    The Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Office of 
Research and Development is responsible for EPA's in-house and 
extramural research programs. The Office of Research and 
Development budget represents the majority of the new Science & 
Technology (S&T;) Appropriations account. The VA, HUD and 
Independent Agencies Conference Report funded the new S&T; 
account at $525 million for FY1996.
    The EPA's $7 billion request includes $537,610,200 for the 
Office of Research and Development. The FY 1997 request for the 
Office of Research and Development represents an $81,960,000 
increase over the estimated FY 1996 level.
    Within the broad category of multimedia research, the EPA 
proposes to continue funding for the Administration's 
Environmental Technology Initiative (ETI) in the Office of 
Research and Development. In 1994, EPA was designated the lead 
agency for the ETI. The initiative is intended to expand the 
development and use of innovative environmental technology 
through federal/state and private sector partnership.
    The Office of Research and Development controls twelve 
research laboratories and four assessment offices. These assets 
have been reorganized to fall under the management of three 
national laboratories and two national centers. They are the 
National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory 
(NHEERL) in Triangle Park, NC, the National Exposure Research 
Laboratory (NERL) in Triangle Park, NC, the National Risk 
Management Laboratory (NRML) in Cincinnati, OH, the National 
Center for Environmental Research Quality Assurance (NCERQA) 
and the National Center for Environmental Assessment (NCEA), 
both of which are located in Washington, DC.
    The Science and Technology Appropriations account also 
includes appropriations for the following non-Office of 
Research and Development Laboratories, National Vehicles and 
Fuels Emission Laboratory, National Radiation Laboratories, 
Analytical and Environmental Chemistry Laboratories, Drinking 
Water Program Laboratory, and National Enforcement 
Investigations Center.
    Currently the programs of the Office of Research and 
Development are unauthorized. The last authorization for the 
Office of Research and Development, the Environmental Research, 
Development and Demonstration Act of 1981 (P.L. 96-569), 
expired on September 30, 1981.

Title VI--National Institute of Standards and Technology

    Title VI of H.R. 3322 provides an authorization for fiscal 
year 1997 appropriations for the National Institute of 
Standards and Technology's (NIST) Scientific and Technical 
Research Services (STRS), as well as for Construction of 
Research Facilities.
    NIST's mission is to promote economic growth by working 
with industry to develop and apply technology, measurements, 
and standards. This mission is integral to our nation's 
competitiveness in the global marketplace. Established by 
Congress in 1901 as the National Bureau of Standards, NIST is 
the nation's oldest federal laboratory. The Omnibus Trade and 
Competitiveness Act of 1988 (P.L. 100-48) renamed the 
laboratories to NIST, and added new responsibilities to NIST's 
mission. NIST, which is part of the Department of Commerce, 
supplements its appropriated funds with contributions from 
industry, and payments for contracts from other government 
agencies.
    The Committee believes that Title VI reflects both the 
Committee's strong commitment to fundamental basic science, 
which is vital to our nation's future, and the need to maintain 
budgetary discipline.

Title VII--Federal Aviation Administration, R,E&D;

    Title VII of H.R. 3322 authorizes fiscal year 1997 
appropriations for the activities for the Federal Aviation 
Administration's (FAA) FY97 research, engineering and 
development; and mandates the guiding principles for the 
conduct of research, engineering and development activities.
    The FAA was created in 1958 to develop air commerce and 
promote safety in the air. As part of the Airport Development 
and Airway Trust fund established by Congress in 1982, it was 
decided that a comprehensive research and development program 
was necessary at FAA to maintain a safe, efficient air traffic 
system. In order to fund both these research and development 
programs and improve airport and airways capital improvements, 
a series of user fees and taxes were established.
    The 100th Congress, seeking to strengthen the FAA research 
and development programs, enacted the 1988 Aviation Safety 
Research Act P.L. 100-591. This bill created the FAA Research, 
Engineering and Development Advisory Board. The terrorist 
bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 demonstrated the need for new 
technology to detect explosives; and, Congress subsequently 
passed the Aviation Safety Improvement Act of 1990 which 
required FAA to support activities to accelerate the research 
and development of new technologies to protect against 
terrorism.
    As directed by P.L. 104-50, the FAA recently began phasing 
in a new acquisition management system. FAA programs have 
experienced significant problems in costs, schedules, and 
performance and the Committee believes improvements in 
modernizing the nation's air traffic will require fundamental 
changes in FAA's acquisition management processes, and 
oversight structure.

Title VIII--National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program

    Earthquakes kill more people and destroy more property than 
any other natural disaster. Over the past fifteen years, 
earthquakes have caused over 100,000 deaths and hundreds of 
billions of dollars in economic losses worldwide. Because much 
of these losses can be prevented or reduced through 
promulgation of adequate zoning and building codes, emergency 
planning, public education and prompt response, Congress 
established the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program 
(NEHRP).
    Since its inception in 1977, NEHRP endeavors to reduce 
earthquake hazards and risk through research, development, and 
implementation. The program combines the efforts of four 
federal agencies--the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the 
United States Geological Survey, the National Science 
Foundation, and the National Institute of Standards and 
Technology.
    The NEHRP has been reauthorized eight times since the 
originating legislation, PL 95-124. Two of these 
reauthorizations made significant policy changes.
    Although the committee reported its authorization bills 
individually last year, they were brought to the House floor 
under a single unified bill, H.R. 2405, the Omnibus Civilian 
Science Authorization Act of 1995. It is the committee's belief 
that by taking an omnibus approach to its authorization 
responsibilities it is taking the opportunity to protect basic 
research and heighten the awareness of the impact science has 
on the future economic well-being of the nation, as 
demonstrated by the following illustrative chart and graph.


               III. Summary of Hearings (By Subcommittee)

Subcommittee on Basic Research

    On March 22, 1996 the Subcommittee on Basic Research held a 
hearing titled ``National Science Foundation FY97 
Authorization'' to receive testimony on NSF's FY 1997 budget 
request. Dr. Neal Lane, Director of NSF, presented the 
President's FY 1997 budget request of $3.325 billion, 4.6% 
above the 1996 Appropriations Conference level. Dr. Lane 
emphasized that this budget reflects a clear prioritization of 
NSF programs and reiterated NSF's strategic plan, which focuses 
on four major areas: (1) maintaining balanced support for 
programs across all fields of science and engineering; (2) 
maintaining NSF's long-term commitment to world-class projects 
such as optical and radio telescopes, particle accelerators, 
Antarctic research, Lazer Interferometer Gravitational Wave 
Observatory (LIGO), the Research Fleet, etc.; (3) promoting 
interdisciplinary work between pure research and education; and 
(4) promoting partnerships among individuals, colleges and 
universities, industry and government. He also stated that NSF 
has made tough choices required by a balanced budget, noting 
that the FY 1997 budget reduces and transfers the $100 million 
Academic Research Infrastructure Program (ARI) to the Research 
and Related Activities Account (RRA), and that a mere 4% of 
NSF's budget is allotted for administration, overhead, etc. The 
NSF research and education programs were reviewed, with 
emphasis on their overall contributions to the nation. The 
Subcommittee discussed the out-year planning for long term 
support of basic research. Discussions of priority setting and 
the reduction and transfer of the ARI were of importance to the 
Subcommittee.
    On March 16, 1995 the Subcommittee on Basic Research held 
an oversight hearing on the programs of the USFA under the 
Federal Fire Prevention and Control Act of 1974. Witnesses 
included Representative Steny Hoyer, Co-chairman, Congressional 
Fire Caucus; Carrye Brown, Administrator, USFA; Gary Tokle, 
Assistant Vice President, National Fire Protection Association; 
Francis McGarry, President, National Association of State Fire 
Marshals, Bill Jenaway, CIGNA Corporation; and Dan Shaw, Chief 
of the Placitis, New Mexico Fire Department.
    All of the witnesses testified to the success and 
importance of the United States Fire Administration.
    On October 24, 1995 the Subcommittee on Basic Research held 
an oversight hearing on the NEHRP. Witnesses included Dr. Paul 
Komor, former project director and author of the report 
``Reducing Earthquake Losses'' issued by the Office of 
Technology Assessment (OTA); Dr. Daniel Abrams, Professor of 
Civil Engineering at the University of Illinois; Richard Moore, 
Associate Director for Mitigation for FEMA; Dr. Robert 
Hamilton, Program Coordinator for Geological Hazards for the 
USGS; Dr. Joseph Bordogna, Assistant Director for Engineering 
for the NSF; Dr. Richard Wright, director of the Building and 
Fire Research Laboratory for NIST; Dr. Paul Somerville, 
seismologist at Woodward-Clyde Federal Services; Dr. Thomas 
Jordan, professor of Earth Science at the Massachusetts 
Institute of Technology; Dr. Thomas Anderson, Fluor Daniel; and 
Dr. Anne Kiremidjian, professor of civil engineering at 
Stanford University.
    The witnesses were unanimous in their support for the NEHRP 
and all urged the Committee to reauthorize the program.

Subcommittee on Energy and Environment

    On October 17, 1995 the Subcommittee on Energy and 
Environment held a hearing titled ``Next Generation Weather 
Radar (NEXRAD): Are We Covered?'' to examine the National 
Weather Service's (NWS's) current plan for modernization 
focusing on Next Generation Weather Radar (NEXRAD) coverage for 
the United States. The witnesses were: Congressman Steve Buyer; 
Congressman Phil English; Congressman George Gekas; Congressman 
Mark Souder; Congressman Wally Herger; Congressman Mac 
Thornberry; Mr. Joe Friday, Jr., Assistant Administrator for 
Weather Services at NOAA; Dr. William E. Gordon, Chairman of 
the NEXRAD Panel, and Floyd Hauth, Study Director, for the 
Committee on the Modernization of the NWS; and Jack L. Brock, 
Jr., Director of the Defense Information and Financial 
Management Systems for the Accounting and Information 
Management Division of the United States GAO. Witnesses 
commented on recommendations made by the NEXRAD Panel and the 
NRC.
    On February 29, 1996, the Subcommittee on Energy and 
Environment held a hearing titled ``National Weather Service 
Modernization Program Status.'' The focus of the hearing was on 
the General Accounting Office (GAO) and Department of Commerce 
Inspector General (IG) reports which raised concern about the 
lack of quality assurance and the unrealistic timetable 
associated with the cornerstone of the NWS modernization 
program, the Advanced Weather Prediction System (AWIPS). The 
witnesses were: The Honorable Dr. D. James Baker, Administrator 
of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and 
Under Secretary for Oceans and Atmosphere at the Department of 
Commerce; Mr. Frank DeGeorge, Inspector General at the U.S. 
Department of Commerce; Mr. Arthur Zygielbaum, Senior Member of 
the Technical Staff in the Observational Systems Division of 
the Jet Propulsion Laboratory at the California Institute of 
Technology; and Mr. Jack L. Brock, Jr., Director of Information 
Resources Management/Resources Community and Economic 
Development at the U.S. GAO. According to the panel, NWS 
believes that a minimal amount of risk is associated with the 
aggressive deployment schedule but acknowledges that there is 
some technical risk of schedule slip due to the overlap of 
certain development steps.
    On March 21, 1996, the Subcommittee on Energy and 
Environment held a hearing titled ``Budget Hearing on FY 1997 
Request for DOE, NOAA, EPA and Safe Drinking Water R&D;'' and 
received testimony on the Administration's FY 1997 budget 
request for NOAA. The Honorable Dr. D. James Baker, 
Administrator of NOAA and Under Secretary of Oceans and 
Atmosphere for the U.S. Department of Commerce, testified that 
NOAA's budget request increase is primarily driven by systems 
costs. He stated that the budget reflects a decrease of $25 
million for Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) and administrative 
reductions and that by 1999 NOAA will have reduced its FTEs by 
more than 2000 people. He also noted the Administration's 
support for the elimination of the NOAA Corps and the 
downsizing of NOAA ship operations. Dr. Baker stressed that the 
budget is allocated according to NOAA's strategic plan and its 
four elements: (1) advancing short-term warnings and forecasts; 
(2) implementing seasonal to interannual forecasts; (3) 
predicting decadal to centennial change in order to provide 
accurate measurements of the changing environment; and (4) safe 
navigation.
    On March 21, 1996, the Subcommittee on Energy and 
Environment held a hearing titled ``Budget Hearing on FY 1997 
Request for DOE, NOAA, EPA and Safe Drinking Water R&D;'' and 
received testimony on the Administration's FY 1997 budget 
request for EPA. The Honorable Dr. Robert J. Huggett, Assistant 
Administrator for Research and Development at the EPA, 
testified that EPA has reorganized twelve research laboratories 
and five headquarters offices into three national research 
laboratories, two national research centers, and two 
headquarters offices. He also testified that the Office of 
Research and Development headquarters' staff has been reduced 
from 300 to less than 150. He stated that EPA is working with 
its Science Advisory Board (SAB), the National Academy of 
Sciences, the National Research Council and the private sector 
to obtain recommendations and guidance. Dr. Huggett highlighted 
areas of primary concern for the Office of Research and 
Development in FY1997, these include drinking water research, 
including disinfection by-products, particulate matter (PM10); 
and endocrine disruptors. Dr. Huggett discussed the 
establishment of an independent Board of Scientific Counselors 
to the Office of Research and Development and its composition 
of outside scientists responsible for evaluating EPA's Science 
and engineering programs, risk-management programs and 
laboratories and research management.

Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics
    The Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics held two formal 
authorization hearings during the early part of 1996. On March 
28, NASA Administrator Daniel S. Goldin testified about the 
agency's programs.
    On April 17, Mr. Richard Wisniewski, Deputy Associate 
Administrator for the Office of Space Flight at NASA; Dr. 
Anthony England, Space Studies Board of the National Research 
Council; Dr. W.D. Kay, Associate Professor for the Department 
of Political Science at Northeastern University; Col. Gary 
Payton, Director of the Space Transportation Division at NASA; 
Maj. Gen. Lance Lord, Director of Plans at Air Force Space 
Command; Mr. Rick Fleeter, President of AeroAstro; Mr. Ray 
Morgan, Vice President for Aerovironment; Mr. Louis J. 
Lanzerotti, Distinguished Member Technical Staff of Lucent 
Technologies; Dr. John Hester, Assistant Professor of Physics 
and Astronomy at Arizona State University; Dr. Holland Ford, 
Department of Physics and Astronomy at Johns Hopkins 
University; Dr. Anneila Sargent, Chair of the Department of 
Astronomy at California Institute of Technology and Chair of 
the NASA Space Science Advisory Committee; Dr. Louis Friedman, 
Executive Director for The Planetary Society; Dr. Jerry Grey, 
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics; Col. 
Michael S. Francis, Tactical Technology Office at the Defense 
Advanced Research Projects Agency; Dr. Fred Billig, Applied 
Physics Lab at Johns Hopkins University; Mr. Wilbur C. Trafton, 
Associate Administrator for the Office of Space Flight at NASA; 
Mr. Kent Black, Chief Executive Officer for United Space 
Alliance; Mr. Dan Tam, Space Station Business Manager at NASA; 
VADM Robert F. Dunn, Aerospace Safety & Advisory Panel; Mr. Jim 
Pagliasotti, Executive Director for the Aerospace States 
Association; and Dr. Joel Snow, Director for the Institute for 
Physical Research & Technology at Iowa State University 
testified before the Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics on 
the U.S. Space Program, including NASA.
    At the March hearing, Mr. Goldin testified that the agency 
asked for stable funding through FY97 and that the President's 
budget for FY97 was essentially the same level as FY96, $13.8 
billion. However, from his testimony, Mr. Goldin was not ready 
to accept the outyear numbers in the proposed budget. Goldin 
maintained that the outyear budget which drops to $11.6 billion 
by FY00 was ``not chiseled in stone'' and that he would ``not 
take any precipitous action'' to carry out the cuts in the 
outyear budget. Mr. Goldin referenced the statement by the 
Office of Management and Budget in the NASA FY97 Budget 
request, ``The outyear numbers should not be considered final 
policy numbers. They are going to be refined further by the 
Administration as it reviews possible savings (in the form of 
spending reductions or new fees) in all agencies. Once 
identified, these savings will contribute to the outyear 
numbers for NASA.'' Goldin also testified that since 1993, the 
agency has reduced its outyear budget plan by 36% (saving 
taxpayers nearly $40 billion) by rescoping programs, 
eliminating low-priority efforts, reducing support contracts, 
and conducting two employee buyouts. The Administration has set 
NASA's five priorities to be maintained in the outyears: 
Mission To Planet Earth; Space Station; High Speed Research and 
the Advanced Subsonic Technology programs within the 
Aeronautics program; High Performance Computing and 
Communications; and New Millennium.
    On April 17, 1996, the Subcommittee on Space and 
Aeronautics held a hearing on the ``Fiscal Year 1997 NASA 
Authorization.'' The hearing consisted of six panels of 
witnesses with detailed testimony regarding various NASA 
enterprises including: (1) Zero Base Review; (2) Space 
Technology; (3) Space Science; (4) Aeronautics; (5) Human 
Exploration and Development of Space; (6) and Outreach and 
Education.

PANEL 1--Zero Base Review

    Last year, in response to the President's $5 billion cut in 
NASA's projected budget (in order to pay for part of the 
President's tax cut), the agency initiated the Zero Base Review 
(ZBR) to reduce expenditures through efficient, streamlined 
agency management. Currently, the ZBR has only identified about 
$4 billion in savings. Details about where the cuts will 
specifically come from have not been provided by NASA. In 
conjunction with the ZBR, NASA is transferring many program 
responsibilities from headquarters to its field centers. The 
purpose of this panel was to discuss ZBR as an agency effort 
that will both affect NASA's ability to reduce costs and its 
ability to continue creating and using new technology in 
pursuit of the nation's scientific, technical, commercial, and 
national security interests.

KEY ISSUES

    Mr. Richard J. Wisniewski, NASA's Deputy Associate 
Administrator for the Office of Space Flight, testified that 
the ZBR has met the President's challenge of $4 billion in 
budget reductions between FY97 and FY00. He stated that the ZBR 
has been successful in fundamentally changing the way that NASA 
does business. Dr. Anthony W. England, from the Space Studies 
Board of the National Research Council, discussed the impact of 
budget reductions on space science. His testimony included 
recommendations that: (1) Science Institute planning should be 
part of a larger science plan that considers how national space 
goals will be attained by the sum of all NASA science 
activities, and (2) that ``program management'' activities 
should be split between headquarters and the field centers. Dr. 
W.D. Kay, Associate Professor for Political Science at 
Northeastern University, praised Administrator Goldin's efforts 
at successfully restructuring and reducing costs at NASA.
    At 2:30 that afternoon, Administrator Goldin released a 
press statement stating that the current level of headquarters 
Full-Time Equivalents (FTE's), 1430, would be reduced to 1191 
by moving 239 FTE's to centers. The remaining 1191, according 
to the press release, are subject to a RIF that reduces 
headquarters staff to a level of 650-700 by October 1, 1997. 
The House and Senate Appropriations conferees have directed 
NASA ``to suspend immediate implementation of the 
administrative steps to execute this proposed reduction-in-
force, pending full consideration by the Congress of the 
agency's budget for fiscal year 1997.'' (H. Rept. 104-537, 
Conference Report on H.R. 3019, Balanced Budget Down Payment 
Act, II).

PANEL 2--Space Technology

    This panel dealt principally with the creation of new 
technology for conducting NASA's science and space missions. 
NASA is developing advanced technology in several areas that 
will help take the U.S. into the next century of space 
activity. Unfortunately, the perception sometimes exists within 
NASA that is the only source of new and innovative space 
technology. This is not the case. Largely as a result of 
government investments in NASA and the Department of Defense 
(DoD) during the Cold War, new and innovative technologies are 
flowing from the National Security laboratory system and the 
private sector as well as NASA. Greater use can be made of 
these technologies in order to reduce the costs of NASA 
activities and in order to create new capabilities for the 
civil space agency.

KEY ISSUES

    Colonel Gary Payton, USAF (retired), Director of NASA's 
Office of Advanced Space Transportation, testified about the 
agency's program to develop technologies for a Reusable Launch 
Vehicle (RLV) that will prove significantly less costly to 
operate than the Space Shuttle. Col. Payton, a former 
astronaut, served previously as Director of the Ballistic 
Missile Defense Organization's Technology Directorate, which is 
the source of many new DoD-related space technologies. At this 
hearing, Col. Payton testified that the DC-XA test vehicle had 
been completely rebuilt using new lightweight technologies that 
could possibly be used in the X-33 program. The DC-XA is 
expected to begin flight testing soon. He also updated Members 
on the status of NASA's program for new thermal protection 
systems that would increase vehicle flexibility and lower 
costs, possibly for use on both the RLV and Space Shuttle. Maj. 
Gen. Lance Lord, USAF, Director of Plans for the Air Force 
Space Command, testified about the relationship between NASA 
and the U.S. Air Force (USAF) in developing new technology. 
NASA and the USAF are in the process of working out 
arrangements for personnel exchanges and creating technology 
planning groups with members from both agencies to ensure that 
individual programs have access to expertise available in both 
the DoD and NASA and to ensure that costly duplication is 
avoided. Finally, Maj. Gen. Lord noted that the USAF was 
leveraging several NASA programs, such as the Clark Remote 
Sensing Technology Demonstrator, against some USAF mission 
requirements. Mr. Rick Fleeter, President of AeroAstro Inc., 
testified about the possibility of using microsatellites to 
perform more specialized space missions at a considerably lower 
cost than those of currently available satellites (these 
satellites tend to be very large). Dr. Fleeter noted that 
microsatellite technology today is in a position roughly 
comparable to that of the computing industry in 1976, meaning 
that industry and government are just starting to experiment 
with microsatellites and that we could look forward to 
explosive growth of this technology over the next two decades. 
Dr. Fleeter suggested that NASA's current approach to satellite 
constellation design was not appropriate for promoting 
microsatellite development. Using the computer industry 
analogy, he suggested that NASA's efforts to make satellites 
cheaper were similar to industry's efforts to make mainframe 
computers cheaper in the late 1970s when what was really needed 
was the philosophical change that created the desk-top 
computer. Mr. Ray Morgan is Vice President of AeroVironment, 
Inc., a California-based company participating in NASA's 
Environmental Research Aircraft and Sensor Technology (ERAST) 
program to build and operate a high-altitude, long-endurance, 
solar-powered, unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV), essentially a 
pilotless airplane capable of flying continuously for thousands 
of hours in the stratosphere. Mr. Morgan indicated that such 
aircraft could act as virtual satellites for different 
environmental monitoring and research efforts because they had 
certain performance and cost advantages over satellites and 
manned aircraft for several different missions. Their 
performance advantages include: (1) no requirement for space 
qualification of instruments; (2) changeable payloads; (3) low 
cost; and (4) continuous, in situ measurement of environmental 
phenomenon.

PANEL 3--Space Science

    The FY97 NASA budget request for Space Science declines 9% 
from last year's funding ($2,032.6 million to $1,857.3 million) 
and reflects a total decline of 21% from FY96-FY00, not 
counting further cuts which will take the agency down to 11.6 
billion in 2000. The purpose of this panel was to discuss the 
consequences of budget reductions in space science and compare 
big science missions with NASA's current emphasis on ``cheaper, 
faster, better.''

KEY ISSUES

    Dr. Anneila Sargent, Chair of the CalTech's Department of 
Astronomy and Chair of NASA's Space Science Advisory Committee, 
maintained that NASA would have to cut missions if the 
requested budget decline were to actually come to fruition. In 
her testimony, Dr. Sargent stated, ``space science in the 
twenty-first century seems to be in jeopardy.'' Dr. John 
``Jeff'' Hester, lead investigator on the Hubble Space 
Telescope (HST) for the images of the Eagle Nebula, mentioned 
his concern about the direction NASA is going with ``faster, 
better, cheaper'' missions. Dr. Hester noted that some space 
astronomy projects require large, expensive spacecraft in order 
to maintain mission quality. Without adequate funding for these 
basic research, big science missions, the U.S. risks losing its 
scientific advantage as the world's leader in space. Mr. Louis 
Lanzerotti, from Lucent Technologies and formerly of the Space 
Studies Board, stated that the space program has become 
fragmented and has lost synergy. His testimony urged that a 
bipartisan commission be set up to review the space program in 
its entirety. Dr. Holland Ford, of Johns Hopkins University, 
stated that the declining budget will inevitably curtail both 
large and small space programs. Dr. Louis Friedman, Chief 
Executive Officer of The Planetary Society, stated that the 
budget numbers are causing serious concerns and the outyear 
numbers are ``disastrous.'' He also pointed out that Mission to 
Planet Earth has a solid constituency of Senators and the 
Administration; whereas the constituency for space science is 
the general public, and they are the ones that need to be 
represented.

PANEL 4--Aeronautics

    The purpose of the Aeronautics panel was to address the 
direction NASA's aeronautics research programs in the next 
decade. The FY97 budget for Aeronautic Research and Technology 
is divided into five areas: (1) Research and Technology Base; 
(2) High Performance Computing and Communication (HPCC); (3) 
Numerical Aerodynamic Simulation; (4) High Speed Research (HSR) 
program; and (5) Advanced Subsonic Technology (AST) program. 
The budget request submitted for FY97 reflects little change 
from the FY96 VA/HUD/IA conference report [H. Rept. 104-353, 
November 17, 1995]. The major item of interest was the 
extension of the termination date of the AST program from FY02 
to FY04 and an increase of $205 million in total costs of the 
program. Completion of the HSR program is scheduled for FY02. 
As both AST and HSR are scheduled to end early in the next 
decade, interest has been raised about the direction of NASA's 
aeronautics programs in the future.

KEY ISSUES

    Under the Administration's budget request for FY97, the AST 
program increases from $169 million to $187 million. Last year, 
the House authorized this program at $133 million (an $8 
million increase from FY95). The VA/HUD/IA conference report 
[H. Rept. 104-353, November 17, 1995] restored a portion of the 
funding sought last year, which boosted the program to its 
current level ($169 million). Some have argued that the AST 
program invested in ``applied research'' which yields only 
incremental advances in mature technologies. These applied 
research areas enjoy the strong support of many aerospace 
companies. Once again, it comes down to the funding priorities. 
A high risk, basic research program like hypersonic research 
has received only $25 million a year, for five years, out of 
the Research and Technology Base.

PANEL 5--Human Exploration and Development of Space

    The challenge facing this NASA strategic enterprise is the 
successful and timely construction of the International Space 
Station while undertaking significant management restructuring, 
including the initial steps toward substantially private 
operation of the U.S. Space Shuttle, the primary workhorse in 
Space Station assembly.

KEY ISSUES

    Mr. Wilbur Trafton, NASA's Associate Administrator for the 
Office of Space Flight, testified that the International Space 
Station was on schedule despite a recently publicized concern 
with the Node 1 pressurization test. The test was delayed until 
the analytical model could be validated by a low pressure test, 
which was successfully conducted. Mr. Trafton noted NASA is 
entering the most critical stages of Space Station development 
in FY97, when most of the U.S. hardware elements are at the 
critical design and integration stage. He emphasized that 
performance to date has laid an excellent technical and 
business foundation for entering these critical phases, and 
expressed full confidence in NASA's ability to meet the 
technical and fiscal challenges that would be confronted in 
FY97 and FY98. Mr. Kent Black, Chief Executive Officer of the 
United Space Alliance (USA), testified that NASA recently 
novated its existing contracts with Lockheed Martin and 
Rockwell, transferring them, unchanged, to USA. This ``early 
start'' agreement was intended to assure continuity in Shuttle 
operations while full Space Flight Operations Contract (SFOC) 
negotiations proceeded between NASA and USA. The full SFOC 
contract amount, which is a subject of negotiations, was not 
disclosed during the hearing. VADM Robert F. Dunn (retired), 
representing NASA's Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel (ASAP), 
discussed the work of the ASAP with respect to NASA's 
restructuring and consolidation efforts.

PANEL 6--Outreach and Education

    NASA interfaces with the broad, non-aerospace public in 
several ways, including its educational programs at 
universities and in grades K through 12 and with its technology 
transfer programs, which seek to apply federally-developed 
technologies to U.S. commercial interests. In recent years, 
questions have been raised about the effectiveness of both of 
these programs within NASA, including their ability to leverage 
non-NASA dollars and to maximize the return on program costs.

KEY ISSUES

    Mr. Jim Pagliasotti, Executive Director of the Aerospace 
States Association (ASA), noted that this state government-
based organization had developed an educational program that 
successfully leveraged state dollars to increase the private 
funding for space education in grades K-12. He argued that NASA 
does not do a very effective job of partnering with state and 
local governments to maximize the educational benefits of 
NASA's spending on space education because the agency sometimes 
leaves these government organizations out of its planning 
process and disproportionately focuses on school systems which 
are physically near one of NASA's regional centers. He 
recommended that Congress and NASA consider a pilot program to 
out-source some of NASA's educational programs, resources, and 
responsibilities to state-based organizations in a manner 
consistent with the current practice of transferring power from 
Washington back to the states. Dr. Joel Snow, Director of the 
Institute for Physical Research and Technology, testified about 
Iowa State University's (ISU) experience in managing large 
federal science programs and described the University's model 
for transferring technology from these programs to the private 
sector. According to information provided by Dr. Snow, the ISU 
has been much more effective in leveraging its research budget 
for commercial applications than NASA, largely because ISU 
takes a different approach than NASA. Dr. Snow suggested that 
NASA consider adopting the approach.
    A Committee hearing on the U.S Global Change Research 
Program (USGCRP) was held on March 6, 1996, and panel 1 
testified about the Mission to Planet Earth (MTPE) program. 
Although this hearing took place before release of the FY97 
budget request, the issues raised were relevant to the program, 
especially since the funding profile of the program through 
FY00 is essentially unchanged.
Subcommittee on Technology

    On April 16, 1996, the Subcommittee on Technology held a 
hearing to receive testimony regarding the Fiscal Year 1997 
budget for the Technology Administration (TA) and the National 
Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). The tragic death 
of Commerce Secretary Ron Brown forced the postponement of the 
previously scheduled field hearing at NIST. To lessen the 
burden on NIST's staff during this time of mourning, the 
hearing was rescheduled and consisted of a single panel with 
one witness, Dr. Arati Prabhakar, Director of NIST, accompanied 
by Mr. Gary Buchula, Deputy Undersecretary of TA.
    Dr. Prabhakar, testified in support of the fiscal year 1997 
budget request. She stated that two major factors are shaping 
our economy: globalization of the marketplace and the rapid 
pace of technological change. She testified because of these 
changes companies are shifting to narrower and more focused 
research and development, and smaller manufacturers are having 
a harder time keeping pace.
    Dr. Prabhakar stressed the importance of the Office of 
Technology Policy and the Technology Administration because of 
their ``unique'' programs. She explained that NIST has four 
major programs: the laboratories which provide a common 
language measurement to support manufacturing and commerce, the 
Advanced Technology Program (ATP), the Manufacturing Extension 
Program (MEP), and the Malcolm Baldrige Quality Award Program. 
She stated that NIST receives only about 1 percent of the $70 
billion the Federal Government spends on R&D.; The requested 
funding for construction, she stated, is necessary to support 
NIST's basic research laboratory mission.
    On May 16, 1995, the Subcommittee held an oversight hearing 
to examine the Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) research 
and acquisition management. Although the FAA began efforts to 
modernize the Air Traffic Control (ATC) in 1981, limited 
progress has been made despite 14 years of efforts and the 
expenditure of several billion dollars. The FAA has 
historically been criticized for its bureaucratic, ``process 
over substance'' culture. The following witnesses testified: 
Dr. Gerald L. Dillingham, Mr. Kevin P. Dopart, Dr. George L. 
Donohue.
    Mr. Dillingham, Associate Director, Transportation and 
Telecommunications issues, GAO, testified regarding the 
problems in FAA's research and development programs. He 
addressed FAA's problems in developing and deploying systems in 
the R&D; area, citing many examples of projects which are behind 
schedule and above budget. He spoke about FAA's recent 
reorganization of its R&D; and acquisition programs, noting that 
the changes incorporate integrated products into the R&D; 
process, but cautioned that the FAA has not included the end 
users in the process.
    Mr. Dopart, Senior Analyst, Energy, Transportation and 
Infrastructure Program, Office of Technology Assessment, 
testified regarding OTA's study on Federal Research and 
Technology for Aviation. He spoke about the chronically delayed 
implementation of new technologies. He said, ``Bridging 
cultural gaps is essential for effective Air Traffic Control 
development...FAA needs stronger and more stable leadership and 
R&D; that is more operationally focused.''
    Dr. Donohue, Associate Administrator for Research and 
Acquisition, FAA, testified that FAA's RE&D; activities were 
crucial in helping the U.S. develop the safest and most 
efficient aviation system in the world. He testified that the 
FAA is transforming its acquisition process by purchasing 
commercial items when possible. Dr. Donohue spoke of further 
changes required to equip FAA to fulfill its mission during the 
balance of this decade.

An Industry Perspective of Federal Aviation Administration 
Research & Development Programs

    On December 7, 1995, the Subcommittee held a second 
oversight hearing regarding the FAA's acquisition management. 
According to the testimony provided, the major issues are FAA's 
long-standing internal management problems and cultural 
impediments to improving the acquisition process. Major 
improvements to the National Airspace System (NAS) will require 
fundamental changes in FAA's acquisition management. The 
following witnesses testified: Dr. John J. Fearnsides, Mr. 
Robert J. Stevens, Mr. J. Roger Fleming, Mr. Sigbert B. 
Poritzky, Dr. Robert E. Whitehead, Dr. Alan R. Thomas, Mr. 
William ``Bud'' Laynor.
    Dr. Fearnsides, Senior Vice President and General Manger of 
the MITRE Corporation, testified that the FAA needs more than 
acquisition changes. He said FAA should examine its decision 
making process from the top management down and create an 
integrated product team in small steps. He stated that the FAA 
needs to bring technology into the field instead of just 
investing in it.
    Mr. Stevens, of Loral Federal Systems, stated that his 
company is ``absolutely on schedule'' with the restructuring of 
the display system program. By October of 1998, he said, the 
new software and hardware will be operational at the Seattle 
test sight. He mentioned the need for Integrated Product Teams 
(IPT) to ensure quality from the top down.
    Mr. Fleming, Senior Vice President of the Air Transport 
Association, testified that the FAA has no sense of urgency 
about the current problems it faces and, therefore, needs more 
accountability. Money is not the only problem; he stressed the 
FAA needs to direct its resources to the highest priority 
programs. He also said the Administrator needs to take the 
initiative to eliminate unsuccessful programs. He suggested 
that the FAA simplify its regional establishments and make 
adjustments in its personnel and procurement procedures.
    Mr. Poritzky, former member of the FAA R&D; Advisory 
Committee, stated that decisions must be made hands on, in a 
timely manner by dedicated upper level management personnel 
using more than one element. He testified that it is imperative 
the FAA display a willingness to work together and innovate. To 
understand how the organization operates, he suggested 
qualified employees should be rotated to the different 
divisions to demonstrate how important team integration is to 
the accomplishment of work goals.
    Dr. Whitehead, Office of Aeronautics--National Aeronautics 
and Space Administration (NASA), testified that the FAA and 
NASA are working jointly to develop technology for air traffic 
control. He stated that they are pursing environmental topics 
such as weather and noise reduction. He testified that for NASA 
to be an equal partner of the FAA, a clear, unified strategy 
needs to be established.
    Dr. Thomas, of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
Administration, stated that the FAA needs to focus R&D; on 
operation needs. He said if he could make changes at the FAA, 
he would use a quality management approach to give the 
customers what they want and address the internal coordination 
issue.
    Mr. Laynor, National Transportation Safety Board, testified 
that his organization relies on FAA for information regarding 
R&D.; He said the FAA needs to address issues as they arise 
instead of procrastinating. He also said that more planning 
should go into the budget, and that better coordination and 
stability in management is needed.

Federal Aviation Administration--Research, Engineering, and 
Development Fiscal Year 1997 Authorization and Management 
Reform

    On April 18, 1996 the Subcommittee held a hearing to 
receive testimony regarding the President's fiscal year 1997 
budget request for FAA Research, Engineering and Development 
(RE&D;), and to review the management reform initiatives 
directed toward improving FAA's RE&D; activities. The hearing 
consisted of one witness panel, including the Honorable David 
R. Hinson, Administrator, FAA and Dr. George L. Donohue, the 
Associate Administrator for Research and Acquisitions, FAA.
    The Honorable David R. Hinson, Administrator, Federal 
Aviation Administration, testified that after reviewing the 
proposed bill he firmly believes that ``the management and 
organizational changes made over the past year, in conjunction 
with the new acquisitions management system that went into 
effect on April 1st, fully address the Committee's concerns.'' 
He stated the first key to the new organization system is IPTs 
which bring together representatives from various disciplines. 
The second key is early involvement of customers and aviation 
representatives to help define, develop and implement 
requirements. The third key is the introduction of corporate 
level oversight mechanisms which include continual independent 
reviews and evaluations of all major acquisition programs. He 
also stated that the FY97 request for RE&D; is $195.7 million--a 
five percent increase above the FY96 appropriation. This 
amount, he said, will enable the FAA to continue R&D; in several 
critical areas including aircraft and airport safety, air 
traffic control, and hazardous weather.
    Dr. Donohue, Associate Administrator, Research and 
Acquisitions, Federal Aviation Administration, testified that 
significant progress has been made with the new acquisition 
management system. He noted progress in the area of 
requirements, and the simplified procurement procedures, as 
well as the cradle-to grave responsibility and accountability 
by IPTs. He stated that one of the ``big cultural changes for 
the FAA is to try work their systems around what can be bought 
affordably, rather than to state their procedures and then have 
to develop something to meet their procedures.'' He testified 
that market surveys are now used to develop a listing of 
qualified vendors instead of having full and open competition 
which required a lot of staff time dealing with individuals who 
would like to become manufacturers, but had no demonstrated 
track record. The new management system, he stated, will enable 
the FAA to make a smooth transition from air traffic control to 
air traffic management.

                         IV. Committee Actions

    Each subcommittee held authorization hearings for those 
programs under its jurisdiction. These hearings are discussed 
in the previous section. Subcommittee markups were not held in 
order to speed up the process and take advantage of House floor 
time available in early May.
    The full committee marked up a committee print of the 
Omnibus Civilian Science Authorization Act on April 24, 1996. 
Original cosponsors include Chairman Walker, along with 
Subcommittee Chairs Sensenbrenner, Morella, Schiff and 
Rohrabacher. The committee print was adopted, as amended, by a 
roll-call vote of 24-19 and ordered reported, by voice vote, to 
the full House for consideration. A motion was then adopted to 
prepare a clean bill for introduction in the House, and that 
the measure be deemed reported by the Committee. Amendments to 
the committee print were offered in the following order:

    1. Amendment in the nature of a substitute offered by Mr. 
Brown which included, among other things, authorizations for 
FY97 for the Department of Energy programs under the 
jurisdiction of the Science Committee at the President's 
request. Defeated--Roll Call--21-27.

TITLE I--National Science Foundation

    2. Amendment to develop a reorganization plan to reduce 
administrative costs offered by Mr. Cramer. Mr. Cramer offered 
this amendment to increase funding for the Salaries and 
Expenses account and to request an NSF study on how to 
consolidate the directorates. No offsets were offered to 
counteract the increase in this account. Defeated--Roll Call--
19-24.
    3. Amendment to rename the National Science Foundation and 
the National Science Board offered by Mr. Barton. Mr. Barton 
offered an amendment to change the name of the National Science 
Foundation and the National Science Board to the National 
Science and Engineering Foundation and the National Science and 
Engineering Board. Adopted--Roll Call--23-22.

TITLE II--National Aeronautics and Space Administration

    4. Amendment to cancel the space station offered by Mr. 
Roemer. Mr. Roemer offered an amendment to cancel the space 
station program. Defeated--Roll Call--11-33.
    5. Amendment to reduce funding for the space station 
offered by Mr. Roemer. Mr. Roemer offered an amendment to 
reduce funding for the space station program by $100 million. 
Defeated--Roll Call--12-32.
    6. Amendment to remove the provision prohibiting excess 
funds from being obligated to the Mission to Planet Earth 
Program (MTPE) offered by Mr. Bartlett and Ms. Harman. Mr. 
Bartlett and Ms. Harman offered this amendment to delete a 
provision in the bill which prohibits funds in excess of those 
authorized to be obligated for MTPE. Adopted by voice vote.
    7. Amendment to implement certain recommendations of a 1995 
National Research Council (NRC) study on the MTPE program 
offered by Ms. Jackson-Lee. Ms. Jackson-Lee offered an 
amendment to implement all near-term components of EOS 
including Landsat 7, AM-1, PM-1, and TRMM, with no delay to the 
Chemistry-1 mission. Landsat 7, AM-1, TRMM, and PM-1 
instruments are all provided for in the bill. Although the 
amendment contained no stated funding increases, implementation 
of this provision would require an additional $204.4 million be 
added to the MTPE program. This increase in the MTPE program 
would come out of Space Science, which would result in a $69.6 
million reduction from the FY96 level. Defeated--Roll Call--17-
27.

TITLE III--United States Fire Administration

    There were no amendments offered to this title.

TITLE IV--National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

    8. Substitute amendment to restore the certification 
process for the Weather Service Modernization Program offered 
by Mr. Cramer and Mr. Roemer. Mr. Cramer and Mr. Roemer offered 
an amendment to modify but keep the certification requirements 
for every National Weather Service (NWS) office under the 
Modernization Plan. This amendment would reestablish the 
certification requirements identified by the Department of 
Commerce Inspector General as costly and unnecessary. 
Defeated--Roll Call--17-20.
    9. Amendment to restore funding for the Global Climate 
Research Program offered by Ms. Lofgren. Ms. Lofgren offered an 
amendment that would have fully funded NOAA's Global Climate 
Change Program at the President's request. The Chairman noted 
that this program has averaged a 10% growth rate per year since 
1990 which is sufficient in order for the research to go 
forward. Funding in the bill is at the FY 1996 current level. 
Defeated--Roll Call--15-25.
    10. Amendment to remove the authorization cap placed on 
NOAA offered by Ms. Rivers. Ms. Rivers offered an amendment 
that would eliminate Sec. 442(a) of the bill which places an 
overall limitation on the amount that can be spent on NOAA 
programs. The Chairman noted here that the cap has been 
increased $73 million above the cap set last year, which leaves 
room for a number of programs. Defeated--Roll Call--18-25.

TITLE V--Environmental Protection Agency

    11. Amendment to Title V offered by Mr. Graham. Mr. Graham 
offered an amendment which removes the prohibition on funding 
for the Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research 
(EPSCOR). Adopted by voice vote.

TITLE VI--National Institute of Standards and Technology

    12. Amendment to authorize the Advanced Technology Program 
(ATP) and the Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) program 
offered by Mr. Tanner, Mr. McHale and Ms. Johnson. This 
amendment would have authorized such sums as may be available 
for the ATP and MEP programs within NIST in conflict with the 
FY 1996 Concurrent Budget Resolution and House-passed Commerce 
Dismantling Act. Mr. Sensenbrenner raised a point of order 
against the amendment and the Chair ruled the amendment out of 
order because it would expand the scope of Title VI and, 
therefore, was not germane to the Title.

TITLE VII--Federal Aviation Administration R,E & D
    13. Amendment to consolidate FAA R&D; activities offered by 
Mr. Tanner. Mr. Tanner offered an amendment that would 
consolidate the R&D; activities of the Research, Engineering and 
Development account and activities of ``Engineering, 
Development, Test and Evaluation'' of the Facilities and 
Equipment account in one FAA R&D; account, strengthen the role 
of FAA's outside advisory committee for R&D;, and streamline the 
National Aviation Research Plan. Adopted by voice vote.

TITLE VIII--National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program

    There were no amendments offered to this section.

TITLE IX--Miscellaneous

    There were no amendments offered to this section.
    14. Amendment to add a new Title X offered by Mr. Tanner. 
Mr. Tanner offered the same amendment that was offered 
previously to Title VI as a new Title X. Defeated--Roll Call--
21-21.
    *Mr. Davis offered report language similar to an amendment 
he offered last year in an Energy and Environment Subcommittee 
markup which would allow the Science Committee to later adjust 
FY 1997 authorizations consistent with the Congressionally-
passed conference report on the FY 1997 Concurrent Budget 
Resolution. Adopted by voice vote.

   V. Summary of Authorizations and Major Provisions of the Bill (By 
                                 Title)

Title 1--National Science Foundation

    Title I of H.R. 3322, the National Science Foundation 
Authorization Act of 1996, authorizes appropriations for the 
major activities and budget categories of the NSF for FY 1997. 
In addition, the bill establishes new requirements for NSF 
preparation of a strategic plan; eliminates one or more of 
NSF's directorates; places a funding ban on institutions which 
receive appropriations earmarks; requires options for a 10% 
reduction in the proportion of federal indirect costs; 
prohibits expenditure of unauthorized funds for construction of 
major national research facilities; subjects temporary NSF 
employees to the same financial disclosure requirements as 
permanent employees; directs NSF to consider the impact of 
research grants on undergraduate science education; and 
redesignates the Critical Technologies Institute as the Science 
Studies Institute, with a redefined mission, and places limits 
on NSF funding.
    Title I of H.R. 3322, as amended, authorizes appropriations 
to NSF for FY 1997 in the amount of $3,250,500,000 as follows:

           Budget Activities--Authorizations Fiscal Year 1997           
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                        
------------------------------------------------------------------------
RESEARCH AND RELATED ACTIVITIES:                          $2,340,300,000
SUBTOTAL                                                  $2,340,300,000
Education and Human Resources                                600,000,000
Major Research Equipment                                      80,000,000
Academic Research Facilities Modernization Program           100,000,000
Salaries and Expenses                                        120,000,000
Office of the Inspector General                                5,000,000
NSF Headquarters Relocation                                    5,200,000
TOTAL                                                      3,250,500,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The major provisions of the title are as follows:
    Title I of H.R. 3322, as amended, imposes new requirements 
on the NSF for long-range program planning and organization. 
The NSF Act of 1950 is amended by transforming the existing NSF 
annual report to Congress into a 3-year strategic plan to be 
updated annually. In addition, NSF is required to prepare and 
submit annually to Congress a 5-year plan for new construction, 
repair, and upgrades to National Research Facilities. The bill 
prohibits obligation of funds appropriated for national 
facilities costing in excess of $50 million, unless the project 
for which the funds are to be expended has been explicitly 
authorized.
    The major provisions of the title, as reported by the 
Committee: provides authorizations for one year (fiscal year 
1997); specifies that $3.2505 million is authorized to be 
appropriated for the NSF programs in fiscal year 1997; 
transforms the existing NSF annual report to Congress into a 
three-year strategic plan to be updated annually; requires an 
annually updated 5-year plan for new construction, repair, and 
upgrades to NSF-funded national research facilities; and 
prohibits obligation of unauthorized funds appropriated for 
national facilities costing in excess of $50 million. Further, 
the name of the National Science Foundation is amended to 
become the National Science and Engineering Foundation, and the 
National Science Board to be renamed the National Science and 
Engineering Board.

Title II--National Aeronautics and Space Administration
    On March 19, 1996, the President transmitted to Congress a 
request of $13,804,200,000 for NASA for FY97. The Committee 
recommends an authorization level of $13,495,500,000.
    The major provisions of the bill are the following:
    Authorizes appropriations for all NASA programs;
    Authorizes appropriations for the Office of Commercial 
Space Transportation and the Office of Space Commerce;
    Requires the NASA Administrator to report on projected 
restructuring activities, by fiscal year, and the President to 
submit a proposal for enabling legislation to carry out actions 
in the Administrator's report;
    Amends the Commercial Space Launch Act to establish a 
statutory framework for the Office of Commercial Space 
Transportation to license commercial reentry activities;
    Requires the NASA Administrator to submit a market study to 
Congress on how commercial ventures can supply, use, service or 
augment the International Space Station;
    Creates procurement initiatives to encourage NASA to take 
advantage of innovations in the private sector;
    Encourages NASA to purchase space science data from the 
U.S. private sector instead of building complete systems to 
generate the data;
    Requires the NASA Administrator to submit a detailed report 
on Mission to Planet Earth; to acquire earth science data from 
the U.S. private sector; and to conduct a study on how the 
baseline scientific requirements of MTPE can be met by the U.S. 
private sector;
    Requires the NASA Administrator to prepare for the 
potential privatization of the Space Shuttle program;
    Establishes the Office of Space Commerce within the 
Department of Commerce with details on the Office's primary 
responsibilities;
    Requires the NASA Administrator to, where cost effective, 
award one or more contracts for microgravity parabolic flight 
services to a microgravity flight provider; and
    Establishes the position of Procurement Ombudsman at NASA 
to review new NASA missions to determine if they can be 
provided by U.S. commercial providers and to serve as a point 
of contact for contractors (procurement contracts) and for U.S. 
commercial providers (issues relating to competition from the 
federal government).
Title III--United States Fire Administration
    Title III authorizes appropriations for the activities of 
the United States Fire Administration and the National Fire 
Academy for FY 1997.
    Title III amends section 31 of the Federal Fire Prevention 
and Control Act. This section requires the installation of 
hard-wired smoke detectors in all multifamilty housing owned or 
operated by the federal government by October 25, 1995. H.R. 
3322 extends this deadline for three years for housing 
controlled by the Department of the Army.
    Title III requires the Administrator to inform the Congress 
60 days prior to terminating or privatizing any USFA activities 
or programs.
    Finally, title III directs the Administrator to submit a 
detailed report, three months after enactment, on what, if any, 
programs will be reduced or eliminated in order to meet the 
final appropriations levels.

Title IV--National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

    Title IV of H.R. 3322, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
Administration Authorization Act of 1996, authorizes all 
unauthorized NOAA programs within the Committee's jurisdiction 
for fiscal year 1997. Title IV of H.R. 3322 holds the 
authorization for NOAA's Operations, Research and Facilities 
(ORF) Account to $1,765,359,000 for FY1997. This level is 
consistent with the glide-path necessary to attain a balanced 
budget by 2002.
    In March of 1996, the President transmitted to Congress a 
request of $2.11 billion for NOAA for fiscal year 1997, an 
increase of $15.7 million--or 8%--over the fiscal year 1996 
estimate of $1.95 billion.
    The Committee recommends an authorization level of 
$1,794,929,000 for fiscal year 1997, a decrease of $315,799,000 
from the request level, and a decrease of $158,475,000 from the 
fiscal year 1996 estimate.
    The major provisions of Title IV are as follows:
    Authorizes appropriations for the National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) for fiscal year 1997;
    Authorizes the Advanced Weather Interactive Processing 
System (AWIPS) to completion;
    Gives the Secretary of Commerce the authority to contract 
out for data and days-at-sea;
    Terminates 19 programs and accounts;
    Reforms and authorizes the National Sea Grant College 
Program;
    Requires the Secretary to submit a report to Congress 
certifying that all programs and accounts listed to be 
terminated will be terminated by September 30, 1996;
    Does not authorize funding for any fiscal year after 1997 
for carrying out programs authorized under this Act;
    Eliminates the NOAA Corps after fiscal year 1996;
    Prohibits unauthorized persons from interfering with any 
National Data Buoy Center weather data buoys; and authorizes 
the Administrator to assess a penalty for each violation and to 
offer and pay rewards for information regarding violations;
    Delineates the duties of the National Weather Service;
    Stipulates that the National Weather Service will not 
compete with the private sector when a service is provided, or 
can be provided, by commercial enterprise, unless the Secretary 
finds that the private sector is unwilling or unable to provide 
the service, and the service provides vital weather warnings 
and forecasts; and
    Requires the Secretary to submit a report to Congress 
detailing all National Weather Service activities which do not 
conform to the requirement and outlines a timetable for their 
termination.

Title V--Environmental Protection Agency

    Title V authorizes appropriations for environmental 
research, development, and demonstration activities of the 
Environmental Protection Agency for FY 1997, including all 
programs, except Superfund, of the Office of Research and 
Development, and the following other programs funded under the 
Science and Technology Appropriations account: National 
Vehicles and Fuels Emission Laboratory, National Radiation 
Laboratories, Analytical and Environmental Chemistry 
Laboratories, Drinking Water Program Laboratory, and National 
Enforcement Investigations Center.
    Title V directs authorizations for general and specific 
research under EPA and sunsets all programs authorized by the 
Act after FY 1997.
    Title V assigns scientific research review responsibilities 
to the Assistant Administrator of EPA and requires the 
Assistant Administrator to report to the Administrator of the 
EPA, the House Science Committee and the Senate Committee on 
Environment and Public Works annually on all agency research 
which is not of high quality or is duplicated by other Agency 
research.
    Title V requires the EPA Administrator to ensure that any 
fellowship award to a student selected after the date of 
enactment is used only to support Office of Research and 
Development research in fields in which there exists, or there 
is projected to exist, a shortage in the number of scientists.
    Title V requires: (1) the Science Advisory Board (SAB) to 
submit to Congress and to the Administrator a report on the 
Board's views on proposed research programs as described in the 
President's budget for research, development and demonstration 
activities of the EPA; (2) the SAB to select and conduct 
evaluations of planned research development and demonstration 
activities of the EPA; (3) the SAB to annually review research 
activities of the EPA and include results in the report; and 
(4) the Administrator to submit to Congress any report required 
to be submitted to the Administrator by the SAB. Such 
submissions shall be made no later than 60 days after the 
Administrator receives the report.

Title VI--National Institute of Standards and Technology

    Title VI authorizes appropriations for the Scientific and 
Technical Research and Services (STRS) and Construction of 
Research Facilities (CRF) accounts of the National Institute of 
Standards and Technology (NIST). For Fiscal Year 1997, $280.6 
million is authorized for the NIST STRS account and $105.240 
million is authorized for the NIST CRF account.

Title VII--Federal Aviation Administration, R,E&D;

    The major provisions of the bill accomplish the following:
 Authorize of appropriations for Federal Aviation 
        Administration Research, Engineering, and Development 
        (RE&D;) activities;
 Authorize of appropriations for other Federal Aviation 
        Administration research, engineering, and development 
        activities described in the President's fiscal year 
        1997 to the Congress under the category ``Engineering, 
        Development, Test, and Evaluation'' of Facilities and 
        Equipment;
 Mandate guiding principles for conducting Federal 
        Aviation Administration research, engineering, and 
        development activities;
 Require the Federal Aviation Administration to 
        consolidate all its research and development activities 
        in to a single budget account;
 Strengthen the role of the Federal Aviation 
        Administration RE&D; advisory committee in setting 
        priorities for the annual budget request; and
 Restructure the annual National Aviation Research Plan 
        requirements.

Title VIII--National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program

    Title VIII authorizes appropriations for the activities of 
the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program for FY 1997.

Title IX--Miscellaneous

    Title IX contains three sections. The first section deals 
with language on prohibition of lobbying activities; the second 
section deals with limitation on appropriations for fiscal year 
1997 and succeeding fiscal years, and the third section deals 
with eligibility for agency award grants.

          VI. Section-by-Section Analysis and Committee Views

Title I--National Science Foundation 

       NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION FY 1997 BUDGET REQUEST SUMMARY       
                        [In millions of dollars]                        
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        FY 1996     FY 1997     FY 1997 
            ACCOUNT TITLE              Estimate     Request      Auth.  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Research and Related Activities.....       2274        2472      2340.3 
Education and Human Resources.......        599         619         600 
Major Research Equipment............         70          95          80 
Academic Research Facilities                                            
 Modernization......................        100           0         100 
Salaries and Expenses...............      127.3        *134         120 
Office of Inspector General.........        4.5           5           5 
Headquarters Relocation.............        5.2          --         5.2 
                                                                        
TOTAL...............................       3180        3325      3250.5 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Includes $5.2 million for HQ Relocation.                               

Sectional Analysis

Sec. 101. Short Title.

    Entitles the Title the ``National Science Foundation 
Authorization Act of 1996.''

Sec. 102. Definitions.

    Section 102 defines: (1) ``Director'' as the Director of 
the Foundation; (2) ``Foundation'' as the National Science 
Foundation; (3) ``institution of higher education'' as the term 
in section 1201(a) of the Higher Education Act of 1965; (4) 
``national research facility'' as a research facility funded by 
the Foundation which is available for use by all scientists and 
engineers affiliated with research institutions located in the 
U.S.; (5) ``United States'' as the several States, the District 
of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin 
Islands, Guam, American Samoa, the Commonwealth of Northern 
Mariana Islands, and any other territory or possession of the 
United States.

SUBTITLE A--NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION AUTHORIZATION

Sec. 111. Authorizations of Appropriation

    (a) Congress finds that (1) the programs of the Foundation 
are important to the nation; (2) the primary mission of the 
Foundation continues to be the support of basic research and 
science education; and (3) the Foundation's contribution to the 
United States' economic competitiveness should be in accord 
with its primary mission.

    (b) Authorizes $3,250,500,000 for FY 1997 of which; (1) 
$2,340,300,000 is for Research and Related Activities; 
(2)$600,000,000 is for Education and Human Resources 
Activities; (3) $80,000,000 is for Major Research Equipment; 
(4) $100,000,000 is for Academic Research Facilities 
Modernization; (5) $120,000,000 is for Salaries and Expenses; 
(6) $5,000,000 is for Office of Inspector General; and, (7) 
$5,200,000 is for Headquarters Relocation.

    (c) Funds appropriated under subsection (b)(1) of this 
section shall be available

to not more than six scientific directorates.

Sec. 112. Proportional Reduction of Research and Related 
Activities Amounts

    Specifies if the amount appropriated pursuant to the 
authorization is less than the amount authorized, each 
directorate shall be reduced by the same proportion.

Sec. 113. Consultation and Representation Expenses

    Not more than $10,000 may be used in each fiscal year for 
official consultation, representation, or other extraordinary 
expenses at the discretion of the Director.

Sec. 114. Reprogramming

    (a) The Director may transfer appropriated funds among the 
subcategories of Research and Related Activities, so long as 
the transfer does not exceed $500,000.
    (b) The Director may propose a transfer among the 
subcategories exceeding $500,000 provided Congress receives 
proper notification and after a 30 day period.

SUBTITLE B--GENERAL PROVISIONS

Sec. 121. Annual Report

    Amends Section 3(f) of the National Science Foundation Act 
of 1950 so that: The Foundation provides an annual report to 
the President which shall be submitted by the Director to the 
Congress when the President submits his annual budget. The 
report shall--(1) contain a strategic plan, or an update to a 
previous strategic plan, which defines for a three-year period 
the overall goals for the Foundation, including specific goals 
for each major activity of the Foundation and each directorate 
and the polar programs office and describes how the identified 
goals relate to national needs and will exploit new 
opportunities in science and technology; (2) identify the 
criteria and describe the procedures which the Foundation will 
use to assess progress toward achieving goals; (3) review the 
Foundation's activities during the previous year, summarize 
activities planned for the next three years, with emphasis on 
planned contributions to major multi-agency research and 
education initiatives; (4) contain such recommendations as the 
Foundation considers appropriate; and, (5) include information 
on the Foundation's acquisition and disposition of any patents 
or patent rights.

Sec. 122. National Research Facilities

    Stipulates that the Director shall provide to Congress, 
annually, a plan covering a five year period for construction 
of, repair and upgrades to, and operations and maintenance 
costs for, national research facilities. Only funds which are 
specifically authorized to be appropriated shall be obligated 
for any project of new national research facilities, unless the 
total estimated cost is less than $50,000,000.

Sec. 123. Eligibility for Research Facility Awards

    Requires that for the Academic Research Facilities 
Modernization Program, the Director give priority to 
institutions or consortia that have not received such funds in 
the preceding 5 years, except for previous funding received for 
the same multi-year project.

Sec. 124. Administrative Amendments

    Amends sections of the National Science Foundation Act of 
1950, the National Science Foundation Authorization Act of 
1976, and the National Science Foundation Act of 1988 for 
administrative and technical purposes.

Sec. 125. Indirect Costs

    Stipulates that matching funds required of the Academic 
Research Facilities Modernization Act of 1988 shall not be 
considered facilities costs for purposes of determining 
indirect cost rates. Also, the Office of Science and Technology 
Policy (OSTP), and other relevant agencies such as Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB), National Institutes of Health 
(NIH) and Office of Naval Research (ONR), shall report to the 
Congress on how to reduce by ten percent the Proportion of 
Federal research funds used for indirect costs by institutions 
of higher education.

Sec. 126. Financial Disclosure

    Requires persons temporarily employed by or at the 
Foundation to be subject to the same financial disclosure 
requirements under the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 as are 
permanent employees of the Foundation.

Sec. 127. Educational Leave of Absence for Active Duty

    Stipulates that, in order to be eligible to receive a 
grant, an institution of higher education must provide a member 
of the National Guard or other reserve component of the Armed 
Forces called or ordered to active duty to be restored to the 
educational status they had attained prior to their being 
ordered to military duty without loss of academic credit, 
scholarships, or tuition and other fees.

Sec. 128. Science Studies Institute

    Redesignates the Critical Technologies Institute as the 
Science Studies Institute, disestablishes the CTI operating 
committee; and modifies the duties of the new Institute.

Sec. 129. Educational Impact

    Requires the NSF to consider the impact of any grant on the 
undergraduate and graduate education at an institution, when 
considering a grant request. This will apply to all awards 
after September 30, 1997. The Director shall provide a plan to 
the Congress for the implementation of this section by December 
31, 1996.

Sec. 130. Divisions of the Foundation

    Requires the Director to maintain not more than six 
Assistant Directors and transmit to Congress a report by 
November 15, 1996 on the reorganization of NSF resulting from 
this provision.

Sec. 131. National Science and Engineering Foundation

    The National Science Foundation and the National Science 
Board are hereby renamed as the National Science and 
Engineering Foundation and the National Science and Engineering 
Board, respectively.

Committee Views

The Future of the National Science Foundation

    The Committee on Science strongly asserts that the mission 
statement for the NSF as contained in section 3 of the NSF Act 
of 1950 requires that the NSF continue its focus in support of 
basic research and education in science and engineering. The 
Committee further asserts that the NSF mission may be altered 
only by amendment of the NSF Act of 1950, and consequently, the 
Committee expects the NSF's programs and activities to conform 
to the functions authorized by the 1950 Act, as amended.
    The Committee's purpose in section 121 of the bill, which 
establishes the requirement for an annually updated strategic 
plan, is to (1) clarify the connections between NSF programs 
and national needs, and (2) identify the criteria and 
procedures that the Foundation will use to assess the progress 
and achievements of its research and education programs. The 
Committee intends that the evaluation criteria identified be 
consistent with the assessment of research programs which have 
multi-year lifetimes associated with fundamental research. The 
Committee understands that methodology for assessment of basic 
research is not well established, but strongly believes that 
the NSF must make every effort to develop methodology that will 
provide a sound basis for justifying current and future Federal 
support for the NSF, as required by the Government Performance 
and Results Act (PL 103-62).

Academic Research Facilities

    The Committee notes that the President's budget request for 
fiscal year 1997 provides no funds for academic infrastructure 
improvement, compared with the Congress' appropriation of $100 
million in fiscal year 1996. The Committee is deeply concerned 
that the Administration has proposed terminating the ARI 
account. By moving the instrumentation portion of the account 
into the RR&A; account, not only does this in effect over state 
the Administration's research proposal, the Administration does 
not propose any other remedies for facilities modernization 
backlog estimated at up to $10 billion. The Committee feels 
support of this program has continued merit.
    Title I authorizes $100 million for the NSF Academic 
Research Facilities Modernization Program for fiscal year 1997. 
This program is consistent with the Foundation's major role in 
support of research at institutions of higher education and 
justified in light of the academic facilities problem. The 
Committee continues to support the creation of an interagency 
program.
    The Committee notes that of the total amount requested for 
NSF's Academic Research Infrastructure activity, only one half 
is designated for the Academic Research Facilities 
Modernization Program, with the remainder allocated for major 
research instrumentation. The Committee supports the rationale 
for the instrumentation program, but does not accept that funds 
allotted for the instrumentation program contribute to meeting 
the goals of the facilities program. The authorizations in the 
title for improvement of academic facilities are explicitly for 
the Academic Research Facilities Modernization Program 
established by Public Law 100-570.
    The Committee is also concerned that NSF's biennial survey 
of academic research facilities needs, mandated by Public Law 
99-159, has not focused adequately on the needs of 
undergraduate institutions. The Committee reminds NSF that 
undergraduate institutions are included among the categories of 
institutions eligible for awards under the Academic Research 
Facilities Modernization Program. The Committee expects future 
biennial surveys to provide data on the needs of all categories 
of institutions eligible to participate in the Academic 
Research Facilities Modernization Program.
    The Committee recognizes that NSF alone should not have to 
provide the federal share of academic research infrastructure 
improvement. Many federal agencies support academic research 
and all must contribute to facilities improvement. The 
Committee strongly urges the Office of Science and Technology 
Policy to take the lead in organizing and initiating a 
coordinated federal response to the facilities problem. 
Modification of the R&D; and other tax credits should also be 
explored as a way to encourage private sector investment in 
academic infrastructure.

National Research Facilities

    The Committee has included the requirement in section 122 
of the bill for an annual national facilities report in order 
to track the full costs of facilities construction, operations 
and maintenance, and for a multi-year plan for projected 
capital costs and construction milestones. The Committee 
believes that the process implied by NSF's establishment of the 
Major Research Equipment (MRE) activity will contribute to the 
preparation of the formal facilities plan requested by the 
bill. As the current MRE account decreases with the phase-down 
of funding for the Laser Interferometer Gravitational Wave 
Observatory (LIGO), funding for any new approved major 
construction projects should be made available out of other NSF 
resources, but through the MRE account.

Undergraduate Education

    The Committee continues to be concerned that federal 
research grants to colleges and universities have shifted the 
focus of faculty away from one of their primary obligations--
undergraduate teaching. Federally funded research should 
enhance, not detract from, the educational experience of 
undergraduate and graduate students. The Committee believes 
that the NSF and other federal agencies must do more to ensure 
that federal grants are indeed improving the quality of science 
and engineering education at our nation's colleges and 
universities.
    The bill requires the NSF to submit a report to the 
Committee by December 31, 1996 describing what actions the 
agency will take to ensure that educational impact is a factor 
in awarding grants. The report should describe in detail the 
actions the agency will take, and how and when they will be 
implemented. Educational impact must be a factor in award-
making by no later than the beginning of fiscal year 1998. 
Additional requirements placed on NSF applicants should be 
enforceable and should be significant enough to produce a 
noticeable improvement in the commitment to education at 
colleges and universities.

Competition with Private Laboratories

    The Committee is pleased to note that the Grant General 
Conditions Guide now includes reference to Important Notice 91. 
However, the language in the guide should clearly articulate 
the position of the Foundation as stated in the Grant Policy 
Manual: ``It is contrary to NSF's intent for grantees to use 
NSF-supported research instrumentation or facilities to provide 
services for a fee in direct competition with private companies 
that provide equivalent services.''

Computer Security

    The Committee notes that the use of the Internet and other 
computer networks is growing at an unprecedented rate, with 500 
million users expected to be on-line by the year 2000. As these 
networked systems become larger and more complex, however, the 
frequency and severity of unauthorized intrusions into 
computers connected to these networks has become an 
increasingly serious problem. Unless the associated risks and 
vulnerabilities are properly addressed, the full potential of 
networking will not be realized.
    The National Science Foundation is turning over the 
principal responsibility for providing network information 
services for the academic and research communities to the 
private sector. The Committee strongly supports this 
development. Nevertheless, traditional security measures will 
not be sufficient to assure that valuable or sensitive 
information stored or processed on computer networks will not 
be lost, stolen, corrupted or misused. The Committee encourages 
NSF to continue collaborating with the Software Engineering 
Institute's Computer Emergency Response Team (CERT) 
Coordination Center and other government agencies to raise the 
awareness of security issues among service providers so that 
security becomes a standard business practice. By implementing 
enhanced security practices at the network access point and 
service provider levels, CERT and the NSF will reach a wide set 
of end users and will also make the Internet a more viable 
medium for the security conscious end user community.

U.S. Antarctic Program

    The Committee recognizes the unique value of the research 
activities supported under the U.S. Antarctic Program (USAP) 
managed by NSF and understands that these activities are 
possible only because of the critical logistical support 
provided, on a reimbursable basis, by the Department of Defense 
(DOD) through the Navy. The Committee is aware that the DOD is 
considering terminating some of the logistical support it has 
historically provided and has recommended that the NSF seek 
alternative means of support, possibly from the private sector.
    The Committee supports changes in the current arrangements 
for logistical support for the USAP if they result in improved 
efficiency, cost savings or other tangible benefits to the 
USAP. The Committee would object to any change which would 
degrade the safety of Antarctic operations or significantly 
reduce the level of support service available for research 
activities. In particular, the Committee would view the 
withdrawal of the DOD from aircraft operations and support as 
an extremely serious step that should not be undertaken unless 
it can be satisfactorily documented that alternative 
organizations exist which can provide this nation with the 
capability to maintain an active and influential presence as 
well as meet the high standards for training, air crew 
proficiency, and aircraft maintenance which have characterized 
the Navy's flight activities in Antarctica. The Committee 
expects the DOD to continue to provide, on a reimbursable 
basis, air operations support for the USAP until such time as 
the Committee has received assurance that the DOD's withdrawal 
is in the best interests of the USAP.
    The Committee has been, and remains, a strong supporter of 
the U.S. Antarctic Program. The Committee recognizes the need 
for this nation to retain an active and influential presence on 
the continent. This presumes that Presidential Memorandum 6642 
still represents the Administration's policy with respect to 
the funding, operation and management of the U.S. Antarctic 
Program. In that light, the Committee applauds the Foundation's 
long standing support and management of this important national 
program.
    A number of important issues continue to face this program 
and are likely to increase in significance over the next few 
years. Within the authorization of the Major Research Equipment 
account, $25 million is available for appropriation to the 
South Pole Safety Project. The Committee shares NSF's concern 
for safety of personnel and the protection of the environment. 
The Committee is awaiting the Administration's report on the 
future of the U.S. Antarctic Program, and expects to review 
this report in detailed oversight hearings this year.

Financial Disclosure

    To avoid any appearance of conflict of interest, the 
Committee expects all personnel, temporary and permanent, to 
fully comply with the Ethics in Government Act and Financial 
Disclosure requirements.

Educational Leave of Absence for Active Duty

    The Committee believes service to the Nation's armed forces 
is commendable. Furthermore, the Committee believes a member of 
the armed services should not be financially harmed because 
that member is ordered to active duty.

Grant Review Process

    The Committee demands that use of taxpayers' federal 
revenues be maximized to the greatest extent. Should a grant be 
awarded which duplicates or competes with work done by the 
private sector, and this is brought to the attention of the 
Director in a timely manner, the Director is responsible for 
taking appropriate action to end this conflict.
    The Committee is aware that the Foundation has extensive 
merit review and appeal procedures to guide the Foundation, 
potential principal investigators, and their institutions 
through the proposal and grant process. However, the Committee 
is concerned that NSF lacks a formal mechanism to review and 
act accordingly on substantive concerns which may be raised 
after an award is made. In the Committee's view, substantive 
concerns might include clear duplication of research already 
performed, or support for an activity that results in unfair 
competition with a service or activity provided by the private 
sector. The Committee, therefore, directs NSF to review and 
develop an appropriate set of procedures to be employed to 
handle and remedy such claims. The Committee requests NSF to 
submit a report to the Committee outlining its procedures by 
December 31, 1996.

Duplication of Federal Resources

    The Committee notes that the Department of Energy programs 
dealing with generic pre-college education, teacher and 
university faculty training, science literacy, scientific and 
technical manpower development, university instrumentation 
support and fellowship programs (such as the Albert Einstein 
Distinguished Educator Fellowship) are overlapping with and 
duplicative of efforts of the National Science Foundation. In 
H.R. 1816, the Department of Energy Civilian Research and 
Development Act of 1995, the Committee recommended the 
termination of these programs. The Committee directs NSF to 
review the phase-out of these DOE programs and to consider 
adopting those programs or aspects of those programs that are 
worth continuing. The Director is encouraged to work with the 
Secretary of Energy to reach an agreement that will make 
available the Department's facilities for Foundation support of 
any of these generic activities, on a reimbursable basis, that 
are consistent with the Foundation's mission.

The Science Studies Institute

    The Committee believes that reconstituting and renaming the 
Critical Technologies Institute as the Science Studies 
Institute (SSI) reflects a more proper and appropriate role.
    Further, the Committee intends for the budget support of 
SSI to be multi-agency. For FY 97, the Committee believes OSTP 
should further reduce NSF's share as other agencies provide 
support for SSI. Beginning with the President's budget for FY 
1998, funding requests for SSI should be included as part of 
OSTP's request.

Affirmative Action

    The Committee is aware that the NSF has recently come under 
strong criticism and litigation for its conduct, or the conduct 
of its contractors/grantees, of one program designed to 
increase the number of minorities in science. While the 
Committee continues to support the overall goal of such 
programs, it does not condone discrimination in any form. In 
particular, the Committee does not support the use of race, 
sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin as the sole criterion 
for granting preferential treatment for admission to NSF-
sponsored research or education programs.
    The NSF currently spends approximately $80 million dollars 
annually to support encouraging participation of women and 
minorities in science, engineering, and math. In keeping with 
the tradition of the Foundation, where merit is the standard 
for evaluating proposals, the Committee expects the Foundation 
to critically review these programs to ensure merit is also of 
over-riding importance in their administration.
    The Committee will closely monitor the NSF's response to 
last year's U.S. Supreme Court decision in Adarand Constructors 
v. Pena, the Administration's review of affirmative action 
programs, and the NSF's response to ongoing litigation in these 
matters to determine if the NSF is fully complying with the law 
and the Committee's guidance prohibiting discrimination.

Reorganization of NSF

    The Committee is aware that NSF has been evaluating its 
management organization as part of the National Performance 
Review. The management organization necessary to accomplish 
NSF's mission to support basic scientific and engineering 
research and education should be re-evaluated not only in light 
of the probable out year funding profile, but also the changing 
requirements of NSF's ``customer''--the basic research and 
education community.
    As shown in the President's out-year projections, provided 
to the Committee by NSF, the agency proposes reducing salaries 
and expenses to a greater degree than the FY 96 Congressional 
budget resolution recommendations.

                  PRESIDENTIAL POLICY BUDGET AUTHORITY                  
                        [in millions of dollars]                        
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            FY      FY      FY      FY  
            BUDGET AUTHORITY               1997    1998    1999    2000 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Research and Related Activities (054)         63      58      53      47
Research and Related Activities (251)      2,409   2,415   2,421   2,428
SUBTOTAL                                   2,472   2,473   2,474   2,475
TOTAL, RRA                                 2,472   2,473   2,474   2,475
Academic Research Infrastructure               0       0       0       0
Major Research Equipment                      95      95      95      95
Education and Human Resources                619     619     619     619
Salaries & Expenses                          129     118     107     101
*Relocation Expense                            5       5       5       5
Office of Inspector General                    5       5       4       4
TOTAL, DISCRETIONARY                       3,325   3,315   3,304   3,294
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*In the President's request, Relocation is included in the Salaries and 
  Expenses account.                                                     

    The Committee urges NSF to focus more of its future 
management resources at the levels closest to the customer and, 
therefore, is limiting the number of Assistant Directors to not 
more than six (a decrease of one from the current number). The 
Committee directs the Director, in consultation with the 
National Science Board, to deliver a report, including 
reprogramming requests, to the Committee by November 15, 1996, 
on how it intends to reorganize its management structure to 
accomplish its mission in the 21st Century.
    In evaluating and restructuring the NSF, the Committee has 
given discretion to the Director, requiring only that he report 
his reorganization plan to the Congress by November 15, 1996. 
However, the Committee urges the Director to look to the 
current Social, Behavioral and Economics (SBE) Directorate to 
determine if its current program level reflects sound 
priorities within overall science funding. The Committee is 
concerned that, while the activities and proposals of SBE are 
merit reviewed, as are other programs of the NSF, they appear 
to reflect trends toward support of more applied research and 
research in areas, that in tight budget times, are of a lower 
scientific priority. As the newest and smallest Directorate, 
and one whose research areas are cross-cutting, SBE is a 
candidate for integration into other research Directorates. SBE 
programs should directly compete for research funds with other 
disciplines to assure that scarce research dollars are 
allocated in the national interest.

Two Year and Community College Programs

    The Committee commends the Foundation for improving the 
education of science and engineering technicians at two-year 
and community colleges under the authority of P.L. 102-476. The 
Committee supports the efforts of associate degree-granting 
institutions working in partnership with secondary schools, 
colleges and universities and with business and industry to 
develop more support for these programs and to put in place 
appropriate mechanisms to assess the effectiveness of the 
programs.

Indirect Cost

    The Committee continues to be concerned that too great a 
share of academic research funds may be allocated to indirect 
costs. According to the President's budget, fully one-quarter 
of the $12 billion the government spends on research at 
universities and colleges are used to cover indirect costs. 
While the government has a responsibility to reimburse that 
portion of the overhead directly associated with carrying out 
federally sponsored research, the Committee is concerned that 
the current system of indirect cost payments is consuming too 
large a share of a limited research budget.
    The bill directs the Office of Science and Technology 
Policy (OSTP) to develop a menu of options to reduce by at 
least 10 percent the proportion of Federal assistance to 
universities that is allocated for indirect costs, and to 
reduce the variation among indirect cost rates at different 
institutions. The report should also evaluate the benefits and 
other impacts that each option would have on colleges and 
universities. OSTP should work with other relevant agencies, 
particularly the Office of Management and Budget, the Office of 
Naval Research, the Department of Health and Human Services, 
and the National Institutes of Health in preparing the report. 
The report is due by December 31, 1996.
    The Committee understands that negotiations have been 
underway between the Administration and representatives of 
universities to limit indirect cost payments. The Committee 
encourages the Administration to move as quickly as possible to 
finalize an indirect cost system that would achieve the goals 
referenced in this report. The Committee believes that any 
resultant savings in indirect cost payments should be used to 
increase overall federal research support.

Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research (EPSCoR)

    Since its inception, EPSCoR has made great strides toward 
developing the research infrastructure of the participating 
states. The Committee supports the program because future 
private-sector economic development depends upon scientific and 
technical infrastructure.
    EPSCoR contributes to increasing regional and institutional 
research capacity by ensuring that money is available for 
merit-based awards for proposals from states with a developing 
research base. EPSCoR offers the mechanism to help institutions 
in these states improve their competitive positions in selected 
research specialties and fields, including the development of 
the infrastructure necessary to sustain these new capabilities. 
Progress in building new research capability does not occur 
overnight, but results from long-term investments in people and 
facilities. Consequently, the Committee expects continued NSF 
participation in EPSCoR and continued leadership from NSF to 
encourage both cooperation among the departments and agencies 
supporting EPSCoR programs and adherence to the important 
infrastructure components of the original efforts.

Renaming the National Science Foundation and National Science 
Board

    In 1985, Congress adopted amendments to the Foundation's 
Organic Act which expanded the agency's mission in regard to 
engineering research and education and incorporated specific 
references to ``engineering'' in the body of the statute 
wherever ``science'' was referred. These amendments were 
intended to compel the Foundation to redress its historic 
inattention to engineering education and research. The 1985 
amendments have had precisely the effect that Congress 
intended; the agency's attention to engineering has accelerated 
since that time.
    It is not the Committee's intent by the name changes to 
signal any change in the Foundation's current mission, nor to 
diminish the visibility of science. On the contrary, renaming 
the Foundation and the Board are intended to stimulate greater 
intellectual partnership between science and engineering and to 
provide engineering with the opportunity to share in the 
respect and prominence currently granted to science.

Informal Science Education

    The Committee is concerned about the proposed 27.8 percent 
reduction in the funding of Informal Science Education. The 
Committee has long been supportive of these programs, which 
provide a way to reach young people who are often overlooked by 
school programs. The Committee understands that the Foundation 
must define its priorities in this budget climate, but that 
should be done without causing undue harm to succeseful 
programs. Therefore, the Cowmittee requests that the Foundation 
submit, with its fiscal year 1997 operating plan, a report 
describing the impact the cut in Informal Science Education 
will have on the ability of science and technology museums to 
carry out their work.

Title II--National Aeronautics and Space Administration

                         FY97 NASA Authorization                        
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ACCOUNT   FY96 est.    FY97 Req.    FY97 Mark    FY97 Diff.   FY96 Diff.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HUMAN                                                                   
 SPACE                                                                  
 FLIGHT     5456.60      5362.90      5362.90         0.00       -93.70 
Space                                                                   
 Statio                                                                 
 n          1863.60      1802.00     1802.00          0.00       -61.60 
Mir                                                                     
 Suppor                                                                 
 t (w/i                                                                 
 $2.1B                                                                  
 cap)         29.20        38.20        38.20         0.00        +9.00 
Shuttle                                                                 
 Operat                                                                 
 ions       2485.40      2514.90      2514.90         0.00       +29.50 
Shuttle                                                                 
 Upgrad                                                                 
 es          663.40       636.00       636.00         0.00       -27.40 
Payload                                                                 
 &                                                                      
 Utiliz                                                                 
 ation       315.00       271.80       271.80         0.00       -43.20 
U.S./                                                                   
 Russia                                                                 
 n                                                                      
 Cooper                                                                 
 ation       100.00       100.00       100.00         0.00         0.00 
                                                                        
SCIENCE                                                                 
 , AERO                                                                 
 AND                                                                    
 TECH       5845.90      5862.10      5734.80      -127.30      -111.10 
                                                                        
Space                                                                   
 Scienc                                                                 
 e          2032.60      1857.30      2167.40      +310.10      +134.80 
  AXAF       237.60       178.60      178.60         0.00        -59.00 
  Cassi                                                                 
   ni        191.50       106.70       106.70         0.00       -84.80 
  GP-B        51.50        59.60        59.60         0.00        +8.10 
  Paylo                                                                 
   ad/                                                                  
   lnst                                                                 
   rume                                                                 
   nt                                                                   
   Dev.       30.70        16.90        32.50       +15.60        +1.80 
    Ast                                                                 
     ro-                                                                
     E         7.40         5.60         5.60        0.00         -1.80 
    Mar                                                                 
     s                                                                  
     In                                                                 
     st                                                                 
     ru                                                                 
     me                                                                 
     nt                                                                 
     s         1.40         0.60         0.60         0.00        -0.80 
    Shu                                                                 
     tt                                                                 
     le/                                                                
     ln                                                                 
     te                                                                 
     rn                                                                 
     at                                                                 
     io                                                                 
     na                                                                 
     l                                                                  
     Pa                                                                 
     yl                                                                 
     oa                                                                 
     ds       16.20        10.70        26.30       +15.60       +10.10 
    Tet                                                                 
     he                                                                 
     re                                                                 
     d                                                                  
     Sa                                                                 
     te                                                                 
     ll                                                                 
     it                                                                 
     e                                                                  
     Sy                                                                 
     st                                                                 
     em        5.70         0.00         0.00         0.00        -5.70 
  Explo                                                                 
   rers      132.20       135.00       160.00       +25.00       +27.80 
    ACE       31.50        24.70        24.70         0.00        -6.80 
    FUS                                                                 
     E        39.00        39.60        39.60         0.00        +0.60 
    MID                                                                 
     EX        0.00        19.80        19.80         0.00       +19.80 
    SME                                                                 
     X        39.50        38.70        38.70         0.00        -0.80 
    Exp                                                                 
     lo                                                                 
     re                                                                 
     r                                                                  
     Pl                                                                 
     an                                                                 
     ni                                                                 
     ng       22.20        12.20        37.20       +25.00       +15.00 
  Disco                                                                 
   very      102.20        74.80       104.80       +30.00        +2.60 
    Lun                                                                 
     ar                                                                 
     Pr                                                                 
     os                                                                 
     pe                                                                 
     ct                                                                 
     or       36.40        19.80        19.80         0.00       -16.60 
    Fut                                                                 
     ur                                                                 
     e                                                                  
     Mi                                                                 
     ss                                                                 
     io                                                                 
     ns       23.80        55.00        85.00       +30.00       +61.20 
    Mar                                                                 
     s                                                                  
     Pa                                                                 
     th                                                                 
     fi                                                                 
     nd                                                                 
     er       33.70         0.00         0.00         0.00       -33.70 
    NEA                                                                 
     R         8.30         0.00         0.00         0.00        -8.30 
  Mars                                                                  
   Surv                                                                 
   eyor      111.90        90.00       120.00       +30.00       +8.10  
    Mar                                                                 
     s                                                                  
     Gl                                                                 
     ob                                                                 
     al                                                                 
     Su                                                                 
     rv                                                                 
     ey                                                                 
     or       58.20         9.40         9.40         0.00       -48.80 
    Mar                                                                 
     s                                                                  
     Su                                                                 
     rv                                                                 
     ey                                                                 
     or                                                                 
     '9                                                                 
     8        52.30        77.50        77.50         0.00       +25.20 
    Fut                                                                 
     ur                                                                 
     e                                                                  
     Mi                                                                 
     ss                                                                 
     io                                                                 
     ns        1.40         3.10        33.10       +30.00       +31.70 
  New                                                                   
   Mill                                                                 
   enni                                                                 
   um         30.00        21.50        40.00       +18.50       +10.00 
  MO&DA;      563.80       592.40       642.40       +50.00       +78.60 
  Suppo                                                                 
   rtin                                                                 
   g                                                                    
   R&T;       238.90       259.20       309.20       +50.00       +70.30 
  Subor                                                                 
   bita                                                                 
   l                                                                    
   Prog                                                                 
   ram        88.00        69.10        97.10       +28.00        +9.10 
    SOF                                                                 
     IA       30.00        26.30        46.30       +20.00       +16.30 
    KAO        3.40         0.00         0.00         0.00        -3.40 
    Bal                                                                 
     lo                                                                 
     on                                                                 
     Pr                                                                 
     og                                                                 
     ra                                                                 
     m        16.00        14.00        16.00        +2.00         0.00 
    Sou                                                                 
     nd                                                                 
     in                                                                 
     g                                                                  
     Ro                                                                 
     ck                                                                 
     et                                                                 
     s        38.60        28.80        34.80        +6.00        -3.80 
  Launc                                                                 
   h                                                                    
   Serv                                                                 
   ices      254.30       253.50       282.50       +29.00       +28.20 
  Space                                                                 
   Scie                                                                 
   nce                                                                  
   Data                                                                 
   Purc                                                                 
   hase        0.00         0.00        34.00       +34.00       +34.00 
                                                                        
Life &                                                                  
 Microg                                                                 
 ravity                                                                 
 Scienc                                                                 
 e           488.50       498.50       498.50         0.00       +10.00 
  Life                                                                  
   Scie                                                                 
   nces      136.40       106.20       106.20         0.00       -30.20 
  Micro                                                                 
   grav                                                                 
   ity                                                                  
   Scie                                                                 
   nce       133.00       144.30       144.30         0.00       +11.30 
  Shutt                                                                 
   le/                                                                  
   Spac                                                                 
   elab                                                                 
   Miss                                                                 
   ions       77.60        54.40        54.40         0.00       -23.20 
  Aeros                                                                 
   pace                                                                 
   Medi                                                                 
   cine        8.00         6.50         6.50         0.00        -1.50 
  Stati                                                                 
   on                                                                   
   Payl                                                                 
   oad                                                                  
   Faci                                                                 
   liti                                                                 
   es        133.50       187.10       187.10         0.00       +53.60 
                                                                        
Mission                                                                 
 to                                                                     
 Planet                                                                 
 Earth      1289.40      1402.10      1028.40      -373.70      -261.00 
  Earth                                                                 
   Obse                                                                 
   rvin                                                                 
   g                                                                    
   Syst                                                                 
   em                                                                   
    AM-                                                                 
     1                                                                  
     Sp                                                                 
     ac                                                                 
     ec                                                                 
     ra                                                                 
     ft       81.20        40.00        40.00         0.00       -41.20 
    AM-                                                                 
     1                                                                  
     In                                                                 
     st                                                                 
     ru                                                                 
     me                                                                 
     nt                                                                 
     s        25.10         3.80         3.80         0.00       -21.30 
    AM-                                                                 
     1                                                                  
     Ma                                                                 
     na                                                                 
     ge                                                                 
     me                                                                 
     nt       63.70        31.10        31.10         0.00       -32.60 
    all                                                                 
     ot                                                                 
     he                                                                 
     r                                                                  
     AM                                                                 
     se                                                                 
     ri                                                                 
     es        0.00         9.80         4.00        -5.80        +4.00 
    Lan                                                                 
     ds                                                                 
     at                                                                 
     7                                                                  
     Sp                                                                 
     ac                                                                 
     ec                                                                 
     ra                                                                 
     ft       61.70        29.10        29.10         0.00       -32.60 
    Lan                                                                 
     ds                                                                 
     at                                                                 
     7                                                                  
     ET                                                                 
     M+        4.20         4.00         4.00         0.00        -0.20 
    Lan                                                                 
     ds                                                                 
     at                                                                 
     7                                                                  
     Gr                                                                 
     ou                                                                 
     nd                                                                 
     Sy                                                                 
     st                                                                 
     em        4.00         0.00         0.00         0.00        -4.00 
    Lan                                                                 
     ds                                                                 
     at                                                                 
     7                                                                  
     Ma                                                                 
     na                                                                 
     ge                                                                 
     me                                                                 
     nt        8.90        40.80        40.80         0.00       +31.90 
    PM-                                                                 
     1                                                                  
     Sp                                                                 
     ac                                                                 
     ec                                                                 
     ra                                                                 
     ft       20.80        82.10         0.00       -82.10       -20.80 
    PM-                                                                 
     1                                                                  
     In                                                                 
     st                                                                 
     ru                                                                 
     me                                                                 
     nt                                                                 
     s        69.40        44.20        44.20         0.00       -25.20 
    PM-                                                                 
     1                                                                  
     Ma                                                                 
     na                                                                 
     ge                                                                 
     me                                                                 
     nt       11.60        44.90         0.00       -44.90       -11.60 
    Che                                                                 
     m-                                                                 
     1                                                                  
     Sp                                                                 
     ac                                                                 
     ec                                                                 
     ra                                                                 
     ft        0.50         1.20         0.00        -1.20        -0.50 
    Che                                                                 
     m-                                                                 
     1                                                                  
     In                                                                 
     st                                                                 
     ru                                                                 
     me                                                                 
     nt                                                                 
     s        25.50        68.00         0.00       -68.00       -25.50 
    Che                                                                 
     m-                                                                 
     1                                                                  
     Ma                                                                 
     na                                                                 
     ge                                                                 
     me                                                                 
     nt        1.30         8.20         0.00        -8.20        -1.30 
  Speci                                                                 
   al                                                                   
   Spac                                                                 
   ecra                                                                 
   ft:        71.70        66.70        63.30        -3.40        -8.40 
    Alt                                                                 
     Ra                                                                 
     da                                                                 
     r-                                                                 
     1         8.60         9.30         9.30         0.00        +0.70 
    Alt                                                                 
     La                                                                 
     se                                                                 
     r-                                                                 
     1         1.90         5.50         3.50        -2.00        +1.60 
    Sol                                                                 
     st                                                                 
     ic                                                                 
     e                                                                  
     In                                                                 
     st                                                                 
     ru                                                                 
     me                                                                 
     nt        0.30         0.30         0.30        0.00          0.00 
    CER                                                                 
     ES                                                                 
     on                                                                 
     TR                                                                 
     MM        0.40         0.20         0.20         0.00        -0.20 
    LIS                                                                 
     on                                                                 
     TR                                                                 
     MM        0.30         0.30         0.30         0.00         0.00 
    CER                                                                 
     ES                                                                 
     Fo                                                                 
     ll                                                                 
     ow-                                                                
     On        1.40         3.30         3.30         0.00        +1.90 
    ACR                                                                 
     IM        4.90         3.80         2.40        -1.40        -2.50 
    Sea                                                                 
     wi                                                                 
     nd                                                                 
     s        23.70        21.00        21.00         0.00        -2.70 
    Oce                                                                 
     an                                                                 
     Co                                                                 
     lo                                                                 
     r         5.40         5.00         5.00         0.00        -0.40 
    SAG                                                                 
     E-                                                                 
     II                                                                 
     I                                                                  
     (R                                                                 
     us                                                                 
     si                                                                 
     an                                                                 
     )        14.80        11.40        11.40         0.00        -3.40 
    SAG                                                                 
     E-                                                                 
     II                                                                 
     I                                                                  
     (S                                                                 
     ta                                                                 
     ti                                                                 
     on                                                                 
     pa                                                                 
     yl                                                                 
     oa                                                                 
     d)        3.70         9.00         9.00         0.00        +5.30 
    all                                                                 
     ot                                                                 
     he                                                                 
     r                                                                  
     sp                                                                 
     ec                                                                 
     ia                                                                 
     l                                                                  
     sp                                                                 
     ac                                                                 
     ec                                                                 
     ra                                                                 
     ft        6.30        -2.40        -2.40         0.00        -8.70 
  New                                                                   
   Mill                                                                 
   enni                                                                 
   um                                                                   
   Prog                                                                 
   ram                                                                  
   (NMP                                                                 
   )          10.00        10.00        10.00         0.00         0.00 
  Algor                                                                 
   ithm                                                                 
   s          75.70       101.80        88.80       -13.00       +13.10 
  EOS                                                                   
   Data                                                                 
   Info                                                                 
   rmat                                                                 
   ion                                                                  
   Syst                                                                 
   em        244.20       261.10       130.00      -131.10      -111.20 
  Earth                                                                 
   Prob                                                                 
   es         46.00        47.10        47.10         0.00        +1.10 
Researc                                                                 
 h &                                                                    
 Data                                                                   
 Analys                                                                 
 is          337.80       379.10       368.10       -11.00       +30.30 
  MTPE                                                                  
   Scie                                                                 
   nce       248.20       277.10       277.10         0.00       +28.90 
    dat                                                                 
     a                                                                  
     pu                                                                 
     rc                                                                 
     ha                                                                 
     se        0.00        50.00        50.00         0.00       +50.00 
    res                                                                 
     ea                                                                 
     rc                                                                 
     h                                                                  
     an                                                                 
     d                                                                  
     an                                                                 
     al                                                                 
     ys                                                                 
     is      145.00       145.00       145.00         0.00         0.00 
    sci                                                                 
     en                                                                 
     ce                                                                 
     te                                                                 
     am                                                                 
     s        19.40        16.80        16.80         0.00        -2.60 
    EOS                                                                 
     sc                                                                 
     ie                                                                 
     nc                                                                 
     e        56.50        47.50        47.50         0.00        -9.00 
    Air                                                                 
     bo                                                                 
     rn                                                                 
     e                                                                  
     sc                                                                 
     ie                                                                 
     nc                                                                 
     e        27.30        17.80       17.80          0.00        -9.50 
  Ops/                                                                  
   Data                                                                 
   Retr                                                                 
   ieva                                                                 
   l/                                                                   
   Stor                                                                 
   age        89.60       102.00        91.00       -11.00        +1.40 
    MO&                                                                 
     DA       53.90        65.10        65.10         0.00       +11.20 
    HPC                                                                 
     C        26.10        28.30        17.30       -11.00        -8.80 
    Inf                                                                 
     or                                                                 
     ma                                                                 
     ti                                                                 
     on                                                                 
     Sy                                                                 
     st                                                                 
     em                                                                 
     s         9.60         8.60         8.60         0.00        -1.00 
Earth                                                                   
 System                                                                 
 Scienc                                                                 
 e                                                                      
 Buildi                                                                 
 ng           17.00                                                     
GLOBE          5.00         5.00         5.00        0.00          0.00 
Launch                                                                  
 Servic                                                                 
 es          107.10       124.10       119.10        -5.00       +12.00 
                                                                        
Aeronau                                                                 
 tical                                                                  
 Resear                                                                 
 ch &                                                                   
 Tech        845.90       857.80       823.40       -34.40       -22.50 
    Res                                                                 
     ea                                                                 
     rc                                                                 
     h                                                                  
     &                                                                  
     Te                                                                 
     ch                                                                 
     no                                                                 
     lo                                                                 
     gy                                                                 
     Ba                                                                 
     se      350.30       354.40       354.40         0.00        +4.10 
    HPC                                                                 
     C        32.20        23.30        23.30         0.00        -8.90 
    #                                                                   
     Ae                                                                 
     ro                                                                 
     nd                                                                 
     yn                                                                 
     am                                                                 
     ic                                                                 
     Si                                                                 
     mu                                                                 
     la                                                                 
     ti                                                                 
     on       48.10        38.60        38.60         0.00        -9.50 
    Hig                                                                 
     h-                                                                 
     Sp                                                                 
     ee                                                                 
     d                                                                  
     Re                                                                 
     se                                                                 
     ar                                                                 
     ch      245.50       254.30       254.30         0.00        +8.80 
    Adv                                                                 
     an                                                                 
     ce                                                                 
     d                                                                  
     Su                                                                 
     bs                                                                 
     on                                                                 
     ic                                                                 
     Te                                                                 
     ch                                                                 
     .       169.80       187.20       152.80       -34.40       -17.00 
                                                                        
Space                                                                   
 Access                                                                 
 & Tech      641.30       725.00       711.00       -14.00       +69.70 
    Adv                                                                 
     an                                                                 
     ce                                                                 
     d                                                                  
     Sp                                                                 
     ac                                                                 
     e                                                                  
     Tr                                                                 
     an                                                                 
     sp                                                                 
     or                                                                 
     ta                                                                 
     ti                                                                 
     on      188.50       324.70       324.70         0.00      +136.20 
    Spa                                                                 
     ce                                                                 
     cr                                                                 
     af                                                                 
     t                                                                  
     &                                                                  
     Re                                                                 
     mo                                                                 
     te                                                                 
     Se                                                                 
     ns                                                                 
     in                                                                 
     g       174.10       151.00       151.00         0.00       -23.10 
    Adv                                                                 
     an                                                                 
     ce                                                                 
     d                                                                  
     Sm                                                                 
     al                                                                 
     ls                                                                 
     at                                                                 
     Te                                                                 
     ch                                                                 
     .        39.10        30.00        30.00         0.00        -9.10 
    Spa                                                                 
     ce                                                                 
     Pr                                                                 
     oc                                                                 
     es                                                                 
     si                                                                 
     ng       54.00        41.80       41.80          0.00       -12.20 
    Fli                                                                 
     gh                                                                 
     t                                                                  
     Pr                                                                 
     og                                                                 
     ra                                                                 
     ms        8.80         0.00         0.00         0.00        -8.80 
    Com                                                                 
     me                                                                 
     rc                                                                 
     ia                                                                 
     l                                                                  
     Te                                                                 
     ch                                                                 
     .                                                                  
     Pr                                                                 
     og                                                                 
     ra                                                                 
     ms       27.40        24.20        11.80       -12.40       -15.60 
    Tec                                                                 
     h.                                                                 
     Tr                                                                 
     an                                                                 
     sf                                                                 
     er                                                                 
     Ag                                                                 
     en                                                                 
     t/                                                                 
     NT                                                                 
     TC       17.10         7.30         0.00        -7.30       -17.10 
    SBI                                                                 
     R                                                                  
     Fu                                                                 
     nd                                                                 
     in                                                                 
     g                                                                  
     Al                                                                 
     lo                                                                 
     ca                                                                 
     ti                                                                 
     on                                 -0.50        -0.50        -0.50 
    Adv                                                                 
     an                                                                 
     ce                                                                 
     d                                                                  
     Co                                                                 
     nc                                                                 
     ep                                                                 
     ts        6.60         3.80        10.00        +6.20        +3.40 
    SBI                                                                 
     R       125.70       142.20       142.20         0.00       +16.50 
                                                                        
Mission                                                                 
 Commun                                                                 
 icatio                                                                 
 n           441.30       420.60       410.60       -10.00       -30.70 
Academi                                                                 
 c                                                                      
 Progra                                                                 
 ms          106.90       100.80       95.50         -5.30       -11.40 
                                                                        
MISSION                                                                 
 SUPPOR                                                                 
 T          2502.20      2562.20      2380.80      -181.40      -121.40 
SRQA          37.60        36.70        36.70         0.00        -0.90 
Space                                                                   
 Commun                                                                 
 icatio                                                                 
 n           269.40       291.40       281.25       -10.15       +11.85 
  Space                                                                 
   Ntwk                                                                 
   .                                                                    
   (inc                                                                 
   lude                                                                 
   s                                                                    
   TDRS                                                                 
   )         156.70       185.10       185.10         0.00       +28.40 
  Telec                                                                 
   ommu                                                                 
   nica                                                                 
   tion                                                                 
   s         112.70       106.30        96.15       -10.15       -16.55 
Researc                                                                 
 h &                                                                    
 Progra                                                                 
 m Mgt.     2052.80      2078.80      1957.85      -120.95       -94.95 
  Perso                                                                 
   nnel                                                                 
   &                                                                    
   Rela                                                                 
   ted                                                                  
   Cost                                                                 
   s        1565.10      1611.00      1529.50       -81.50       -35.60 
  Trave                                                                 
   l          45.50        45.50       40.00         -5.50        -5.50 
  Resea                                                                 
   rch                                                                  
   Oper                                                                 
   atio                                                                 
   ns                                                                   
   Supp                                                                 
   ort       442.20       422.30       388.30       -34.00       -53.90 
    fac                                                                 
     il                                                                 
     it                                                                 
     ie                                                                 
     s                                                                  
     se                                                                 
     rv                                                                 
     ic                                                                 
     es      137.00       141.90       120.90       -21.00       -16.10 
    tec                                                                 
     hn                                                                 
     ic                                                                 
     al                                                                 
     se                                                                 
     rv                                                                 
     ic                                                                 
     es      150.60       132.40       132.40         0.00       -18.20 
    mgt                                                                 
     .                                                                  
     an                                                                 
     d                                                                  
     op                                                                 
     er                                                                 
     at                                                                 
     io                                                                 
     ns      154.60       148.00       135.00       -13.00       -19.60 
Constru                                                                 
 ction                                                                  
 of                                                                     
 Facili                                                                 
 ties        142.40       155.30       105.00       -50.30       -37.40 
                                                                        
INSPECT                                                                 
 OR                                                                     
 GENERA                                                                 
 L            16.00        17.00        17.00         0.00        +1.00 
                                                                        
TOTAL      13820.70     13804.20     13495.50     -308.70       -325.20 
                                                                        
Office                                                                  
 of                                                                     
 Space                                                                  
 Commer                                                                 
 ce            0.46         0.50         0.50         0.00        +0.04 
OCST           5.76         6.17         5.77        -0.40        +0.01 
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subtitle A--General Provisions

SECTION 201. SHORT TITLE

    This Act may be referred to as the ``National Aeronautics 
and Space Administration Authorization Act, Fiscal Year 1997.''

SECTION 202. FINDINGS

Sectional Analysis and Recommendation

    The Congress finds that: NASA should pursue reforms to 
reduce institutional costs; given the disparity between NASA's 
projected needs and the Administration's projected funding 
levels over the next four years, reforms provide no guarantee 
against cancellation of missions or elimination of centers in 
the event reform efforts fail to achieve cost reduction 
targets; NASA must return to its role as the nation's leader in 
basic scientific, air and space research; the economic return 
from commercial space activity has the potential to eclipse 
federal space activity; the United States is on the verge of 
creating and using new technologies in microsatellites, 
information processing, and space launches; the federal 
government's requirements for routine space transportation can 
be met most efficiently, effectively and economically by a free 
and competitive market in privately developed and operated 
launch services; NASA should aggressively promote the pursuit 
by the commercial sector of advanced space transportation 
technologies; the federal government should invest in the types 
of research and innovative technology in which the U.S. private 
sector does not invest, while avoiding competition with 
activities in which the United States private sector does 
invest; international cooperation in space exploration and 
science should be pursued when it satisfies particular 
conditions; NASA and the Department of Defense can reduce the 
cost of space missions by more effectively leveraging their 
mutual capabilities; and the Reusable Launch Vehicle program 
and the resulting vehicle are necessary for the protection of 
essential security interests for purposes of interpreting the 
obligations of the U.S. under the General Agreement on Tariffs 
and Trade.

Committee Views

    The Committee encourages NASA to pursue reforms that will 
produce reductions in institutional costs. Unfortunately, 
specific details about where the savings from the Zero Base 
Review (ZBR) effort have not been forthcoming from the agency. 
The ZBR effort has categorized savings into seven categories: 
(1) efficiencies ($850 million); (2) restructuring ($1.6 
billion); (3) privatization ($1.3 billion); (4) outsourcing 
($125 million); (5) performance-based contracting ($90 
million); (6) deregulation (to be determined); and (7) 
commercialization (to be determined). Breakdown of savings 
within these categories has not been provided to the Committee. 
However, the breakdown in savings by fiscal year does not have 
a further breakdown of savings in each individual code at NASA. 
For example, $522 million in savings for FY00 comes out of the 
Human Space Flight account, but there is no information on 
what, within that account, is cut. Although NASA has produced 
charts indicating that the agency has been able to achieve the 
$4 billion savings there are no specifics within the categories 
(i.e. outsourcing, restructuring) or within the programs (Space 
Science, Space Communications). Further there is no cross-
reference between ``categories'' and ``programs.''
    Last year, the General Accounting Office released a report 
entitled, ``NASA Budgets, Gap Between Funding and Projected 
Budgets Has Been Reopened'' May 1995, which revealed how the 
programs at NASA are currently underfunded and how this 
situation keeps escalating each year through FY00. GAO based 
its report on the FY96 runout which declined to the level of 
$13.17 billion by FY00. The FY97 runout from the President's 
budget request decreases NASA total funding authority to $11.6 
billion by FY00. Obviously the disparity between NASA's program 
needs and the Administration's projected funding levels 
continues to grow at such a level that there can be no 
assurance against mission cancellations and center 
eliminations. The situation is particularly acute given that 
the Administration fails to take the steps in FY97 to start 
preparing the agency for the dramatic cuts to come in FY98, 
FY99 and FY00.
    The Committee further finds that the United States is on 
the verge of a veritable revolution in the way space activity 
is conducted. First, new information and microsatellite 
technologies are maturing to the point where they can be 
applied to space missions, radically lowering costs and moving 
the United States away from launching large spacecraft and 
towards launching constellations of small spacecraft that 
cooperate with one another. Second, after years of promise the 
commercial space sector is rapidly maturing and moving into new 
activities, such as remote sensing. This industry is still at a 
delicate stage, however. Consequently, government space policy 
and activity must take into account the interests and fragility 
of the commercial space sector when conceiving, planning, 
developing, launching, and operating new space missions.
    In the area of space transportation, the Committee finds 
that private sector investment in new expendable and reusable 
launch vehicles and the emerging commercial sector are altering 
the supply and demand of space launch capabilities. In order to 
reduce costs, the Committee seeks to encourage a free market in 
commercial space transportation services, which could meet most 
routine government launch requirements.
    The Committee commends NASA and its international partners 
for their many cooperative ventures. These include the 
International Space Station, the exploration of Mars and 
Saturn, and the study of the Earth from space. The Committee, 
however, does not view international cooperation as an end in 
itself. Rather, the Committee supports international 
cooperation for the specific benefits it brings to the United 
States and its international partners, including a lowering of 
national space costs; an increase in U.S. space capabilities; 
and an enhancement in the pace of scientific progress. The 
Committee also notes that international cooperation can do net 
harm to all of these interests by increasing mission complexity 
and U.S. costs, undermining U.S. space capabilities in the 
government and U.S. private sector, and/or transferring 
commercially or militarily advantageous technology from the 
United States to the world market without an offsetting return 
to the United States. Consequently, the Committee directs NASA 
to consider these secondary effects of international space 
cooperation before entering into new agreements with foreign 
partners. Furthermore, the Committee expects that NASA will not 
enter into such agreements when the disadvantages outweigh the 
benefits.
    Finally, the Committee notes anecdotal evidence of 
successful cooperation between NASA and the Departments of 
Defense and Energy. The Committee supports such interagency 
cooperation because it lowers costs, eliminates duplication, 
and facilitates the transfer of technology among agencies and 
the private sector. In the past, such cooperation has been 
difficult due to the Cold War limitations on access to defense-
related space technology. The Committee notes that those 
limitations are breaking down and directs NASA to make use of 
defense-related technologies, information and expertise when 
they are relevant to civil space missions.

SECTION 203. DEFINITIONS

    Throughout the Act and Committee report, the term 
``Administrator'' refers to the Administrator of the National 
Aeronautics and Space Administration and the phrase 
``institution of higher education'' refers to the meaning of 
this phrase given in section 1201(a) of the Higher Education 
Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1141(a)).

Subtitle B--Authorization of Appropriations

Chapter 1--Authorizations

    It should be noted that FY96 funding levels used in this 
report do not account for the $83 million that was added to the 
NASA Science, Aeronautics, and Technology account by the 
Appropriations Conference Report [H. Rept. 104-537, Conference 
Report on H.R. 3019, Balanced Budget Downpayment Act, II].

SECTION 211. HUMAN SPACE FLIGHT

Sec. 211(1). The Space Station Program

Sectional Analysis and Recommendation

    The Committee has authorized the entire amount requested 
under the Human Space Flight account for the International 
Space Station (ISS) $1,840,200,000. Of this amount, $38,200,000 
is authorized to continue U.S. activities related to the 
Russian Mir orbital complex.

Committee Views

    The Committee notes the addition of $29,200,000 in FY96 and 
$28,600,000 in FY97, to the program's previously planned 
baseline. In the Committee's view, these upward adjustments do 
not violate the ``spirit'' of the program's annual $2.1 billion 
cap, which had previously projected a peak year funding level 
of $2,121,300,000 in FY98. According to the President's 
request, the new peak funding years for the program will be 
FY96 and FY97. These adjustments do not increase the program's 
total completion cap of $17.4 billion.

Sec. 211(2) and (3). Space Shuttle Operations; Space Shuttle 
Safety and Performance Upgrades

Sectional Analysis and Recommendation

    $2,514,900,000 are authorized for Space Shuttle operations 
in FY97. The Committee concurs with the request of $636,000,000 
for safety and performance upgrades.
    Of the funds authorized to be appropriated under subsection 
(3), Space Shuttle Safety and Performance Upgrades: (A) 
$1,800,000 are authorized for replacement of LC-39 Pad B 
Chillers (KSC); (B) $1,500,000 are authorized for restoration 
of Pad B Fixed Support Structure Elevator System (KSC); (C) 
$2,500,000 are authorized for rehabilitation of 480V Electrical 
Distribution System, Kennedy Space Center, External Tank 
Manufacturing Building (MAF); and, (D) $2,500,000 are 
authorized for restoration of the High Pressure Industrial 
Water Plant at Stennis Space Center.

Program Description

    The objective of the Space Shuttle program is to support 
the nation's launch requirements while balancing the goal of 
mission accomplishment with the primacy of program safety. 
Because of its unique capabilities, the Space Shuttle remains 
the cornerstone of America's space program. The Shuttle Orbiter 
is the world's first reusable space vehicle which can be 
reconfigured for a variety of payloads and missions. In 
addition to the transportation of personnel and equipment to 
orbit, the Space Shuttle stands alone among the world's space 
systems, due to its ability to retrieve material from space for 
repair or return to Earth. The Space Shuttle will serve as the 
primary transportation system for the assembly and operation of 
the International Space Station.

Committee views

    The Shuttle program is in a period of transition for many 
reasons. Numerous reviews conducted both within NASA and 
external to the agency have addressed subjects ranging from 
program safety to the status of the Shuttle workforce. Due to 
current budgetary constraints, there has been considerable 
effort on the part of the agency and outside groups to find 
ways to achieve cost savings within the program. The Committee 
recognizes that effort and commends the Administrator for the 
agency's difficult work in streamlining Shuttle operations 
without compromising safety.

1. Restructuring

    Declining NASA budgets have forced the agency into major 
restructuring efforts in order to continue programs, while at 
the same time, avoiding the closure of NASA centers. 
Accomplishing this goal requires an overall reduction in agency 
personnel, which in the case of human space flight programs, 
has led to questions about the impact this reduction would have 
on safety. The agency has commissioned a series of reviews of 
both internal and independent teams to provide recommendations 
for reaching the requisite budget goals while avoiding any 
compromise to program safety. One of these studies, the Shuttle 
Workforce Review recommended that 3,200 government and 
contractor jobs could be eliminated from the nearly 30,000 
member Shuttle workforce without jeopardizing safety of flight. 
These cuts would be in addition to ongoing reductions.

2. The Kraft Commission

    The Space Shuttle Management Independent Review Team was 
formed by the NASA Administrator in November 1994 and chaired 
by Dr. Christopher Kraft to provide independent recommendations 
to supplement internal reviews. The study, now referred to as 
the ``Kraft Report,'' sought to evaluate the current process 
and procedures for conducting Space Shuttle operations at the 
NASA space centers and associated contractor facilities in 
order to provide recommendations to the Administrator to 
establish a more efficient operational structure.
    The Kraft report made a series of recommendations on 
efficiency, cost savings, and improved service to customers 
without jeopardizing safe operation of the Shuttle. The most 
significant recommendations included relinquishing the 
operational responsibility of the program to a prime 
contractor, reducing NASA's involvement in daily operations of 
the Shuttle, and minimizing modifications to the Shuttle fleet 
to only those which would improve safety or otherwise reduce 
operating costs.

3. The SAIC Report

    In response to the recommendations of the Kraft report, 
NASA commissioned a study by Science Applications International 
Corporation (SAIC) to perform a risk-assessment study of the 
entire Shuttle mission profile in order to assess where 
concentrated efforts would reduce operating costs without 
compromising flight safety. The study looked at all the 
potential events which could lead to a critical failure, with 
the goal of directing resources to a more focused risk 
reduction effort. Even though this process can reduce the 
potential for a mishap, the inherent risks associated with such 
a complex program as the Space Shuttle cannot be eliminated. 
The report concluded that the ``median estimate of failure'' 
for a given mission has been reduced to one in 248 launches 
from one in 78 at the time of the Challenger accident.

4. GAO

    Oversight by Congress led to ongoing studies of the 
restructuring of NASA, in general, and its effects on the 
Shuttle program. The General Accounting Office (GAO) has 
reviewed the findings of the 1986 Rogers Commission, which 
investigated the Challenger accident, and applied them to the 
current restructuring plans of NASA. The GAO has identified a 
few key principles which it believes should remain as 
guideposts during the transition of the Shuttle program: to 
foster a culture that encourages open communication of safety 
concerns, provide sufficient parallel safety reviews and 
improve communications channels, implement accessible 
management information systems that provide complete and 
accurate data in a timely manner, and prioritize programs so 
that safety comes before schedule or cost.

5. Consolidation of the Shuttle Program

    In following the recommendations of the Kraft report, NASA 
is in the process of consolidating Space Shuttle Program 
contracts into a ``single prime'' contract. This ``single 
prime'' concept, which was first used by the Space Station 
program, is intended to collapse the fee structure (profits 
paid to contractors) while rewarding the single prime 
contractor with additional fee incentives for achieving cost 
reduction goals. Many observers recognize the transition from 
today's multiple prime contracts to a single prime as the first 
step in the broad policy goal of privatizing the Space Shuttle 
program. Under a single prime contract, the firm chosen would 
obtain general control over the day-to-day operations of the 
Space Shuttle program, while ultimate authority to certify and 
fly the system would continue to be held by the federal 
government. Privatization would likely transfer this ultimate 
authority to the private firm, while NASA's role would be 
reduced to that of being a ``customer'' of the privatized 
system.

Sec. 211(4). Payload and Utilization Operations

Sectional Analysis and Recommendation

    $271,800,000 are authorized for Payload and Utilization 
Operations, fully funding the President's request for FY97.

Program Description

    This program supports the processing and flight of Shuttle 
payloads.

Committee Views

    The Committee recognizes the tireless efforts by the 
Shuttle management and the Shuttle workforce in streamlining 
this program to ensure maximum returns on the research 
investment, continual improvement of the processing evolution, 
and reduction in costs of operations. The Committee urges the 
NASA Administrator to monitor error rates during further 
reductions in the workforce to ensure acceptable risk rates are 
not exceeded.

Sec. 211(5). Russian Cooperation

Sectional Analysis and Recommendation

    $100,000,000 are authorized for Russian Cooperation, fully 
funding the President's request for FY97.

Program Description

    The Russian Cooperation line pays the Russian Space Agency 
and Russian space enterprises under its jurisdiction for 
necessary designs, data, and support services required to carry 
out the Joint Statement on Space Cooperation of the U.S. Joint 
Commission on Economic and Technological Cooperation, under the 
terms of NASA Contract #NAS15-10110, entered into on June 23, 
1994. The firm fixed-price contract provides for the U.S. 
purchase of discrete technological products, services, and 
space hardware, not to exceed $400,000,000 during fiscal years 
1994 through 1997. The annual request of $100,000,000 is 
consistent with these contract terms.
    Separate from the $38,200,000 authorized above from within 
the Human Space Flight account for Russian Cooperation, 
$100,000,000 is authorized for the final year of the NASA-
Russian Space Agency (RSA) Contract. The reason for identifying 
these funds separately is two-fold. First, the $38,200,000 
amount is contained within the ISS program's $2.1 billion cap; 
the NASA-RSA contract is not. Second, the $38.2 million is 
spent primarily in the U.S., whereas the $100 million is spent 
entirely in Russia. The NASA-RSA $400 million contract has been 
performing well. No funds are paid to Russia until work 
products identified by the contract are delivered, inspected 
and accepted by NASA. The Committee notes with satisfaction 
that NASA has not requested funds to extend or expand this 
contract.

Committee Views

    Insofar as the $400 million contract is concerned, the 
Committee notes that no funds appropriated and obligated 
pursuant to this authorization are transferred to Russian 
entities until the U.S. has received deliverable items in good 
condition, inspected them, and accepted them. It is not 
possible under the terms of this contract for NASA to pay for 
something it does not receive, does not want, or cannot use. 
The Committee commends NASA for negotiating these terms of the 
contract, and appreciates the Russian Space Agency's agreement 
to abide by such terms.

SECTION 212. SCIENCE, AERONAUTICS, AND TECHNOLOGY

Sec. 212(1) Space Science

Sectional Analysis and Recommendation

    $2,167,400,000 are authorized for Space Science in FY97. 
This authorization represents an increase of $310,100,000 over 
the President's request. The authorization represents an 
increase over the FY96 funding level of $134,800,000. The 
Administration requested a decrease in Space Science funding of 
$175,300,000 (down 9%) from the FY96 funding level.

Program Description

    There are two general science areas within space science: 
(1) physics and astronomy and (2) planetary exploration. The 
core physics and astronomy missions include the Advanced X-Ray 
Astrophysics Facility (AXAF); Gravity Probe-B (GPB); the 
Explorer Program; and the Stratospheric Observatory for 
Infrared Astronomy.
    Within planetary exploration, activities include Cassini; 
the Discovery Program; and New Millennium. Launch support, 
mission operations, and scientific data analysis of mission 
results are also funded within the space science program.

Committee Views

    The Committee considers space science to be one of the core 
science programs at NASA, and thus, one of the highest priority 
missions of NASA. The Committee continues to believe that space 
science should maintain its standing as a top priority at NASA 
as it has in previous years. The Committee notes that NASA has 
not provided a wedge of funding in the outyears to initiate new 
space science projects. In fact, space science has the fastest 
declining budget in the agency. The budget is cut 21% in the 
span of four years (FY96-FY00). Many space scientists are 
concerned about the dramatic cuts. ``During the past few years, 
the space science office has restructured every major program 
under its control--radically scaling back the size and scope of 
the Advanced X-ray Astrophysics Facility, postponing other 
observatories, and chopping funds to operate a host of 
missions. In addition, the space science office at headquarters 
has cut its own work force by half.'' [Science, Volume 271, 
March 22, 1996]
    The Committee recommends continued funding of AXAF, Gravity 
Probe B, and Cassini, at the levels requested, in order to 
maintain these programs on schedule and on budget. The 
Committee further supports continued funding for complete 
mission operations, research, and data analysis in order to 
take advantage of the scientific research opportunities created 
by the funding of these space science missions.

Explorer

    The Explorer program has been increased by $25 million. The 
Committee intends for NASA to use this additional amount for 
future planning to ensure a solid foundation from which to plan 
future Explorer missions. The Committee commends NASA for 
continuing its Explorer program to launch small, low-cost, 
highly-focused space missions exploring the realm of space 
physics and astrophysics. The Committee also agrees with NASA's 
finding that the Explorer program represents an opportunity to 
develop new technologies for low-cost, high-capability 
spacecraft. The Committee encourages NASA's Explorer program to 
take advantage of miniaturized spacecraft technologies 
developed in the Departments of Defense and Energy, as well as 
the private sector.

Discovery

    The Discovery program has been increased from the FY97 
request by $30 million for future missions. The Committee 
commends NASA for continuing the Discovery program to promote 
low-cost exploration of the solar system, and endorses the 
program because it is demonstrating a real commitment to 
innovative management techniques that lower the costs of space 
exploration. Furthermore, the Discovery program addresses the 
problems associated with NASA's recent approach to space 
exploration, which relied on large, expensive spacecraft in 
development for a decade or more. Consequently, the Committee 
recommends full funding for the Lunar Prospector, a low-cost 
science probe to the moon which will build on the Defense 
Department's successful Clementine mission of 1994 and now has 
a strong educational component provided separately by the 
private sector. Lunar Prospector represents the type of 
resource-leveraging that NASA must perform in an era of 
constrained budgets.

Mission Operation and Data Analysis

    The Committee believes that with the amount of spacecraft 
in orbit, an increase in the Mission Operation and Data 
Analysis (MO&DA;) program is absolutely essential. NASA expects 
to be operating 25 spacecraft at the end of FY97 compared to 13 
at the beginning of FY95. Using data provided by the FY95 NASA 
budget request, the average spent on MO&DA; per spacecraft was 
approximately $42 million. Using the FY97 request, this average 
is reduced by $24 million per spacecraft. The Committee feels 
that this increase is needed for adequately operating the 
spacecrafts and for analyzing the data. Therefore, the 
Committee increased MO&DA; by $50 million over the FY97 request. 
The purpose of the MO&DA; program is to maximize the scientific 
return from NASA's investment in spacecraft and other data 
selection sources. MO&DA; is fundamental because it funds the 
operations of the data collecting hardware and the data 
analysis that produces scientific discoveries. Funding supports 
satellite operations during the performance of the core 
missions, extended operations of selected spacecraft, and 
ongoing analysis of data after the usable life of spacecraft 
has expired. The Hubble Space Telescope (HST) is returning data 
almost on a daily basis and is among the eleven current 
missions being supported by this account. More missions, 
specifically, Hubble Space Telescope, AXAF, Galileo, NEAR, Mars 
Surveyor, and Mars Pathfinder, in the near future will be 
returning data and it will be necessary to have adequate 
funding to pay for the analysis by the scientists and to 
disseminate the information to the American public.

Supporting Research and Technology

    Supporting Research and Technology (SR&T;) is increased by 
$50 million over the FY97 request. SR&T; is designed to do four 
things: (1) optimize the design of future missions through 
science definition, development of advanced instruments and 
concepts, and definition of proposed new missions; (2) 
strengthen the technological base for sensor and instrument 
development; (3) enhance the value of current space missions by 
carrying out ground-based observations and laboratory 
experiments; (4) conduct the basic research necessary to 
understand astrophysics phenomena, solar-terrestrial 
relationships and develop theories to explain observed 
phenomena and predict new ones.
    The Committee encourages NASA to use a portion of the 
increase in the Supporting Research and Technology line to fund 
TIMED (Thermosphere, Ionosphere, Mesosphere, Energetics and 
Dynamics) at $50 million in FY97. The Committee notes that this 
level of funding will give the taxpayers the greatest value for 
their dollars by keeping the program on schedule and on the 
projected budget. TIMED, a program to be carried out by the 
Applied Physics Laboratory at Johns Hopkins University, 
promises to greatly enrich our basic knowledge of the 
previously unexplored transition region between the Earth's 
atmosphere and outer space.

Suborbital programs

    The Committee has authorized an additional $28,000,000 for 
FY97 for Suborbital Programs. While these programs often 
receive less attention than their space-based counterparts, 
they represent an important opportunity to conduct frequent, 
low-cost, scientific research. NASA has an accomplished history 
of using high-altitude balloons and sounding rockets in 
addition to airborne platforms such as SOFIA or the Kuiper 
Observatory. During the authorization process for NASAs FY97 
budget, the Committee received testimony on April 17, 1996 from 
Dr. Holland Ford, a distinguished scientist from Johns Hopkins 
University in Baltimore, Maryland on POST, a polar 
stratospheric telescope. POST would address two of NASA's four 
major science themes, the origin of planets and the origin of 
galaxies. The Committee encourages NASA to seek a timely review 
from the National Academy of Sciences on the concept of POST.

New Millennium

    The New Millennium program is increased by $18.5 million 
over the FY97 request. NASA's briefing to the Committee, 
``Exploration for the 21st Century: The New Millennium,'' 
indicates that New Millennium intends to create new-capability 
space missions at a reduced cost and increased flight rate 
through improvements in key technology areas, including micro-
electronics, autonomy, and instruments. Because this initiative 
is intended to create advanced technologies that will carry 
space science and earth observation forward into the next 
century at reduced costs, the Committee increases funding for 
the initiative with the expectation that NASA can accelerate 
bringing the benefits of this program to the science community. 
Because this initiative is intended to create advanced 
technologies that will carry space science and earth 
observation forward into the next century at reduced costs, the 
Committee increases funding for the initiative with the 
expectation that NASA can accelerate bringing the benefits of 
this program to the science community. While the Committee 
commends NASA for recognizing that these technologies are 
necessary to lower costs, it also notes that the Departments of 
Defense and Energy have been working on such technologies since 
at least the late 1980s.
    NASA's New Millennium program has considerable potential to 
meet its goals if NASA and DOD work together. Furthermore, this 
section is consistent with the Technology Procurement 
Initiative goal outlined in Title II, Sec. 205 (b): ``achieve a 
continuous pattern of integrating advanced technology from the 
commercial sector and from federal sources outside NASA...''
    The Committee finds that NASA can reduce the cost of New 
Millennium while increasing and accelerating the benefits of 
New Millennium if it takes advantage of the miniaturized 
technologies already paid for by the U.S. taxpayer and 
developed in the Departments of Defense and Energy. To the 
degree that NASA demonstrates technological cooperation with 
the microsatellite technology programs in DoD and DoE, the 
Committee expects that New Millennium will meet its 
programmatic goals and serve the national interest. Therefore, 
the Committee directs NASA to brief the Science Committee on 
the manner in which NASA will make use of the technology, 
personnel, facilities, and expertise related to New Millennium 
program goals within the USAF Phillips Laboratory Space 
Experiments Directorate, the Lawrence Livermore National 
Laboratory Physics and Space Technology Directorate, and the 
Naval Research Laboratory Naval Center for Space Technology in 
conjunction with NASA's own capabilities and those of the 
private sector, prior to obligating any funds for the New 
Millennium program. The Committee commends NASA for the 
willingness and desire to work directly with DoD and DoE 
personnel on New Millennium programs, as expressed in briefings 
to Committee staff, and will closely monitor this program's 
progress in promoting NASA cooperation with DoD and DoE. The 
Committee further finds that failure to achieve such 
cooperation will result in wasteful duplication of capabilities 
and may give cause to terminate the New Millennium program.
    The Committee believes NASA's technology and space science 
programs can benefit from the Clementine 2 mission. Because 
Clementine 2 will rendezvous with two near-Earth asteroids, 
NASA would be able to improve U.S. understanding of near-Earth 
objects at a cost significantly less than that required to fund 
its own mission. The Committee encourages NASA to participate 
in the Air Force's efforts to define science goals and 
participate in the mission.

Sec. 212(2) Life and Microgravity Sciences and Applications

Sectional Analysis and Committee Recommendation

    The entire request, $498,500,000, are authorized for the 
Office of Life and Microgravity Sciences and Applications 
(OLMSA).

Program Description

    OLMSA conducts the basic research required to enable human 
space flight and is responsible for the health of astronaut 
crews who live and work in space. As a function of this, OLMSA 
performs a wide variety of life sciences research that use the 
absence of gravity as a medium for understanding the human 
immune system; the development and loss of bone mass and 
connective tissues; and, human and plant adaptation to zero 
gravity, including their attending cellular and molecular 
effects. OLMSA is responsible for carrying out the NASA-
National Institutes of Health (NIH) Protocol, which has served 
to make space-based biomedical research relevant to other basic 
health research. OLMSA is also NASA's occupational health 
program office, which promotes the health and safety of all 
NASA employees. On the microgravity sciences front, OLMSA is 
responsible for programs to discover new space-based 
manufacturing processes, the study of materials and fluids in 
space, and other gravitational research programs.

Committee View

    The Committee is concerned with the future direction of 
NASA's Office of Life and Microgravity Sciences and 
Applications (OLMSA), in the context of agency restructuring 
and outyear budgets. The Committee notes with some concern that 
the percent of OLMSA's budget devoted to research and analysis 
is essentially frozen while Space Station payloads and 
facilities increase. Assuming OLMSA's budget is subject to the 
President's prioritization in terms of additional cuts forecast 
by OMB, only that part of OLMSA's budget which is contained in 
the Space Station's $2.1 billion cap ($267,800,000 of the 
$498,500,000 in FY97) would be held harmless under such a 
percentage reduction formula. As OLMSA's Station-related 
activities increase through FY00 to $396,900,000, resources for 
research and analysis could become nonexistent exactly when 
they will be most needed to support research on the Station.
    Of secondary concern, the Committee observes the potential 
restructuring of OLMSA to become a direct subsidiary of the 
Human Exploration and Development of Space strategic 
enterprise, either by accident through headquartering OLMSA at 
the Johnson Space Center, or on purpose to support the ISS. 
Whatever the short-term reasoning, the long-term impact on 
OLMSA may be the undesired distancing of NASA's microgravity 
research activities from the scientific and biomedical research 
communities on which it relies for high quality basic research.
    Accordingly, the Committee encourages the NASA Advisory 
Council to commission the Space Studies Board of the National 
Academy of Sciences to conduct a Life and Microgravity Sciences 
and Applications ten-year horizon assessment that (1) provides 
guidance for determining the appropriate relationship between 
research and analysis spending and spending on enabling 
facilities and functions, (2) provides guidance to the NASA 
Administrator before a closer organizational relationship is 
attempted between Human Space Flight activities and OLMSA, (3) 
provides OLMSA a core research plan and research planning 
process, including minimum funding levels, which would be 
appropriate to maintain irrespective of OLMSA's ISS facilities, 
and (4) sets forth biomedical and microgravity sciences 
research objectives and priorities for OLMSA during ISS 
construction, including interagency and international 
cooperation, and resources required by fiscal year.
    The Committee regards OLMSA's upcoming Neurolab mission, 
the final Spacelab module flight, to be an extremely important 
life sciences mission and commends NASA for initiating this 
mission with the NIH.

Sec. 212(3) Mission to Planet Earth

Sectional Analysis and Recommendation

    $1,028,400,000 are authorized for Mission to Planet Earth, 
of which $50,000,000 are to be used for commercial data 
purchases. This authorization represents a decrease of 
$261,000,000 from the FY96 estimated funding level and 
$373,700,000 from the President's request. Funds may not be 
expended to duplicate private sector or other federal 
activities or to procure systems to provide data, unless the 
Administrator certifies that no private sector or federal 
entity can provide suitable data in a timely manner.

Program Description

    In 1990 the federal government initiated the interagency 
U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP) at a time when 
NASA's budget was expected to increase 10% per year. NASA's 
contribution to this effort is Mission to Planet Earth (MTPE), 
which averages 70% of the total USGCRP and applies NASA's 
sensor technologies to the purpose of monitoring Earth's 
environment. The main elements of MTPE are the Earth Observing 
System (EOS) and the Earth Observing System Data Information 
System (EOSDIS). EOS consists of a series of satellites with 
various instruments to observe the Earth continuously for 15 
years. EOSDIS is the data collection and management system for 
the constellation of satellites.
    The three main EOS spacecraft groups are: morning (AM), 
afternoon (PM), and the Chemistry series. Each series has three 
satellites that will fly for six years. For example, AM-1 flies 
in 1998; AM-2 flies in 2004, and AM-3 flies in 2010. Each 
series contains a different suite of instruments to observe 
different parts of the Earth and its atmosphere. The AM series 
will cross the equator in the morning when cloud cover is at a 
minimum so it can observe terrestrial surface features. The PM 
series will focus on cloud formation, precipitation and 
radiative properties; thus, an afternoon equatorial crossing is 
preferred. PM-1 is scheduled for launch in 2000. The Chemistry 
series will study atmospheric chemical species and their 
transformations. Chem-1 is scheduled for launch in 2002.
    The original program has undergone restructuring three 
times since its approval in 1990. The program was originally 
estimated to cost $17 billion through the year 2000, and it was 
to fly six large polar-orbiting satellites, two at a time, over 
15 years. In the summer of 1991, the program was brought down 
to $11 billion at the request of the Office of Management and 
Budget and the National Space Council. In the fall of 1992, the 
program was further reduced to $8 billion. In FY95, the program 
was reduced to $7.25 billion through the year 2000 (this figure 
represents about two-thirds of MTPE). NASA has since reported 
that it completed a rebaselining of EOS that will break up the 
second and third series of EOS spacecraft in order to reduce 
costs. However, the Agency expected no additional savings 
before FY00 from this rebaselining. The program is expected to 
run until 2022. Funding for MTPE from fiscal year 1991-2000 is 
expected to be over $12 billion.
    EOSDIS will be the first data information system to collect 
such immense quantities of data, which will result in a very 
complex system. It is estimated that when MTPE is fully 
operational, the instruments will generate an average of 2100 
gigabytes (gigabyte = 1 billion bytes of data) per day. Data 
from other U.S. and foreign satellite systems could double this 
amount. The architecture of EOSDIS is intended to be 
decentralized through the use of nine interconnected 
Distributed Active Archive Centers (DAACs). These DAACs are 
located across the United States and they each have a different 
function.
    For FY97, NASA initiated the following new programs in 
MTPE: the Earth System Science Pathfinder program and the New 
Millennium program. Pathfinder is supposed to consist of small, 
short-duration, low-cost, focused science missions to provide 
MTPE with scientific flexibility in studying changing earth 
science phenomenon. MTPE's New Millennium program is intended 
to cooperate with the Space Science New Millennium program to 
develop new technologies that NASA hopes will reduce the 
outyear costs of EOS. Additionally, the White House Office of 
Management and Budget increased the MTPE budget by $50 million 
in order to facilitate direct purchases of earth science data 
from the emerging commercial remote sensing industry.

Committee views

    The Committee supports the goals of the Mission to Planet 
Earth program and appreciates NASA's efforts to reduce Mission 
to Planet Earth cost projections after FY00. However, the 
program does not appear fiscally sustainable in the out-years. 
The Committee has several concerns about Mission to Planet 
Earth. First, Mission to Planet Earth was added to NASA's suite 
of programs in 1990, when it was expected that NASA's budget 
would grow by 10% per year to accommodate these new programs 
and missions. In 1992, the Science Committee raised concerns 
that outyear funding might not be available for Mission to 
Planet Earth if the agency's budget did not receive the 
projected increases. The NASA Multiyear Authorization Act of 
1992 [H. Rept. 102-500] treated Mission to Planet Earth as 
``discretionary in nature'' and declared that it should be 
funded after the fiscal requirements of NASA's core mission 
areas were satisfied, assuming additional resources were 
available. The report concluded on page 39, ``EOS is a special 
initiative that is not intended to be part of the core space 
science program.'' The report further noted, ``It is clear that 
EOS cannot be funded at the planned level unless NASA obtains 
double digit percentage increases each year through at least 
fiscal year 1995 or major program reductions are made elsewhere 
in NASA.'' NASA did not receive an increasing budget through 
FY95. Instead, its budget declined.
    Although EOS has since been restructured, accomplishing the 
baseline EOS program still requires an increasing budget or 
significant cuts in other program areas between FY97 and FY00. 
The General Accounting Office estimates that the EOS system 
alone will cost $33 billion dollars to complete. The 
President's FY97 NASA budget request contains a total NASA 
budget that declines to $11.6 billion in FY00, and the required 
fiscal resources are unlikely to be available, unless other 
programs are dramatically cut.
    The 1992 Committee report further concluded, ``It is 
possible that funding constraints will delay significantly all 
but the first EOS satellite. . .'' As a result of NASA's 
declining budget, those concerns have come to pass and the 
Committee is at this time taking the steps that were predicted 
in 1992 by the Committee. The Committee is fully funding AM-1, 
the first EOS satellite scheduled for launch, Landsat-7, the 
TRMM mission, Earth Probes, and MTPE Science. Full funding for 
PM-1 instruments continues, but the spacecraft, along with the 
Chem-1 mission, is delayed.
    Based on the President's FY96 budget submission to 
Congress, spending on Mission to Planet Earth will exceed 
spending on space science in FY00. This dilemma is only 
expected to worsen. According to briefings provided by NASA to 
the Committee, the Administration's budget priorities for FY97 
and beyond are: (1)Mission to Planet Earth; (2) Space Station; 
(3) Advanced Subsonic Technology and High Speed Research in 
Aeronautics; (4) High Performance Computing and Communications; 
and, (5) the New Millennium program. Given the likelihood of a 
declining NASA budget, the Administration's priorities suggest 
that space science is likely to bear a disproportionate share 
of budget cuts. This alters the bipartisan prioritization of 
space science that this Committee has always held. The 
Committee remains concerned that MTPE not displace space 
science as a NASA priority during a period of stringent budget 
constraints, especially since the assumption, made at the time 
of Mission to Planet Earth's initiation, of an annual 10% 
increase in the agency's budget is no longer realistic.
    Second, it remains to be demonstrated that MTPE, as 
currently organized, has the proper scientific focus and 
priorities. The program appears to be overly focused on 
hardware. Inadequate attention has been paid to scientific 
content. At a March 6, 1996 hearing of the Science Committee, 
for example, Dr. Richard Lindzen, a meteorologist at the 
Massachusetts Institute of Technology and member of the 
National Academy of Sciences, observed, ``From the beginning, 
EOS science teams were chosen to support instruments rather 
than to do science which would be assisted by the instruments. 
EOS provided no support for developing the basic science that 
might provide a foundation for the program.'' While reaffirming 
that data collection and continuity are highly important, Dr. 
Lindzen further observed, ``EOS initially was starting with the 
instruments and hoping the [scientific] questions would 
arise.'' Drs. Balling and Davis endorsed Dr. Lindzen's 
concerns.
    Similarly, at the same hearing, representatives from the 
General Accounting Office noted that the funded science teams 
for EOS, a multi-decade program costing some $33 billion 
dollars, were slightly smaller than the funded science teams 
for two earlier earth science missions, Upper Atmosphere 
Research Satellite (UARS) and Topex-Poseidon. For comparison 
purposes, these missions were an order of magnitude less 
expensive and of considerably shorter duration than EOS. In 
addition, EOS will provide data at a rate of 42,000,000 bits 
per second to 49 science teams, while UARS and Topex-Poseidon 
produced a combined data rate of 48,000 bits per second for 60 
science teams. There appears to be a definite imbalance.
    At the March 6th hearing, Chairman Walker raised his 
concern that 30% of USGCRP funding was supposed to be devoted 
to process studies, the actual analysis of data and improvement 
of theory, but within Mission to Planet Earth, only 9% of 
funding was devoted to process studies, with the remaining 
being devoted to data collection and management systems such as 
EOS and EOSDIS. Dr. MacCracken confirmed that this is where the 
funding stood. Dr. Watson indicated that reducing the cost of 
EOS was important to achieve a balance among data collection, 
laboratory studies, and theory, from which one can conclude 
that the program as it exists today is not optimally balanced.
    NASA has indicated that MTPE data will be used to improve 
the predictive capability of climate models, both in terms of 
reliability and regional effects. While the Committee 
recognizes that there is substantial room and need for 
improvement in computer models of the climate system, the 
Committee notes that such models are only as good as the theory 
behind them. At the March 6, 1996 hearing before the Science 
Committee, Dr. Robert Davis, an atmospheric physicist at the 
University Of Virginia concluded, ``The simple fact is that the 
current generation of GCMs [General Circulation Models] are 
incapable of reproducing the historic climate of the earth 
sufficiently at anything but the broadest time and space 
scales. These modelled (sic) errors are not merely a function 
of lack of computing power--they underscore our lack of 
understanding of the atmospheric processes that govern the 
earth's climate.'' Dr. Davis raised the further concern that 
computer models were being used to verify themselves, instead 
of comparing such models against the actual climate record. 
This gives rise to the concern that MTPE funds are being used 
disproportionately to improve models rather than theory, the 
latter of which is clearly more important and does not always 
require billions of dollars of investments in data collection 
and management systems.
    Third, the Committee is concerned about EOSDIS. According 
to NASA, the system will download some 2100 gigabytes of new 
data from MTPE sensors every day. This amounts to about 766,500 
gigabytes of data per year. NASA estimates a user community of 
some 10,000 investigators will use this data, meaning each one 
would have to completely analyze 210 megabytes of data every 
day of the year in order to use each byte of data just once. 
Mr. Jack Brock of the GAO testified before the Subcommittee on 
Space and Aeronautics on March 16th, 1995 that EOSDIS will be 
the largest civil data management and distribution system ever 
attempted and could accumulate data amounting to 1,000 times 
the entire printed contents of the Library of Congress over its 
lifetime.
    The Committee is concerned that NASA may be spending 
hundreds of millions of dollars to acquire data that will never 
be used. For example, NASA's estimate of 10,000 earth science 
investigators is vastly over-estimated. In fact, this 
represents the total membership of earth and environmental 
science professional associations and societies and their 
undergraduate students and graduate-level teaching assistants. 
According to the GAO, NASA has just 500 principal investigators 
to examine EOS data for specific investigations. GAO 
investigators also commented that NASA's investment in EOSDIS 
focused on near-term development of systems and formats for a 
small group of primary users, without much regard to the needs 
of secondary and tertiary users. EOSDIS was not downsized when 
EOS restructuring took place. Additionally, the GAO noted that 
information technologies change very rapidly; thus, NASA's 
over-emphasis on EOSDIS development at the beginning of Mission 
to Planet Earth may preclude using more capable and affordable 
information technologies available when the EOS satellites 
actually begin collecting data after the turn of the century.
    The National Research Council recommended restructuring 
EOSDIS to address some of these problems. In general, the NRC 
recommended that ``ownership'' of EOSDIS be give to a 
federation of organization, including the government, 
universities, corporations, and other organizations. Such an 
approach would presumably reduce EOSDIS costs and make the 
system more responsive to changes in information technologies 
and the state of our knowledge.
    The Committee is also concerned that inadequate attention 
has been paid to the structure and organization of MTPE 
relative to the activities of other federal agencies and other 
countries. The failure to survey foreign efforts has already 
been mentioned, but there are additional indications that point 
to substantive problems with the program. The problem is not 
limited to insufficient coordination with foreign earth-
observation programs. According to the National Research 
Council, ``[I]nterdisciplinary and interagency linkages are 
central to successful implementation of the program. The needed 
programmatic integration is not currently being achieved 
adequately. Specifically, important elements of the USGCRP may 
be lost due to agency boundaries and individual agency funding 
difficulties.'' This failure to provide interagency 
coordination occurs above the level of the NASA Administrator 
and leads to wasteful spending practices. It makes little sense 
to continue the current pace of the program until this 
interagency coordination is demonstrated and waste is 
eliminated.
    In March of 1995, NASA and NOAA embarked on a mission to 
explore ways to enhance interagency collaboration in global 
change research. The NASA Office of Mission to Planet Earth and 
NOAA National Environmental Satellite, Data and Information 
Service have established three working groups on collocation, 
technology infusion, and data and information systems. At the 
senior program level, a roundtable has been formed to monitor 
the activities of the working groups and is scheduled to report 
to the Administrators of NASA and NOAA on August 1. The 
Committee is encouraged by these activities to increase 
interagency collaboration. It is concerned, however, that the 
effort was solely prompted by the prospect of cuts to the 
respective elements of USGCRP; this coordination should have 
been ongoing since the inception of the USGCRP.
    Some critical measurements to maintain are the observations 
of global temperature data taken by the NOAA Polar Orbiting 
Environmental Satellite (POES), yet it is not apparent that 
NASA planned to make effective use of such data as part of 
MTPE. The Committee recommends that NASA accord this activity a 
higher priority and take steps to ensure continuity of this 
existing data set, as discussed at the March 6th Science 
Committee hearing on the USGCRP. MTPE as currently designed 
will make significant demands on NASA resources for operations 
at a time when the agency must move away from being an 
operational organization and back into an R&D; organization. 
MTPE must not be allowed to transform itself into an open-ended 
operational program that displaces the exploration of space or 
impedes reform efforts directed at transforming the agency into 
a cutting-edge R&D; organization.
    Finally, the Committee does not see sufficient evidence to 
conclude that NASA has adequately considered the emergence of a 
commercial remote sensing industry as a prospective source of 
environmental data. The Committee has frequently encouraged 
NASA to think more creatively about how to acquire 
environmental data, from straightforward purchases of 
privately-gathered data to leverage use of data already 
gathered for other purposes, such as weather records developed 
by the Department of Defense during the Cold War. While the 
agency has launched some commendable pilot programs to explore 
direct purchasing of commercial data, the Committee expects the 
agency to move more aggressively to capitalize on these 
emerging commercial capabilities in its reorganization of MTPE.

Committee Action and Intent

    The bill reduces the MTPE program request by $373,700,000 
in FY97. The Committee intends that the PM-1 and Chem-1 
satellites be halted to allow several different things to 
happen. First, this delay will give NASA time to survey and 
assess foreign systems and the Department of Defense's airborne 
and space-based sensor programs to avoid duplication and a 
waste of taxpayer dollars. Second, a delay will allow time for 
NASA to develop its ``faster, cheaper and better'' spacecraft 
under the New Millennium program and the Small Satellite 
Technology Initiative and incorporate these new technologies 
into PM-1 and Chem-1. Also, the delay will enable NASA to fully 
explore options for lowering EOS costs by using commercial, 
off-the-shelf, satellite busses for PM-1 and Chem-1 instruments 
under a fixed-price contract. A Department of Energy 
representative testified before the Committee on March 6, 1996 
that the first series of EOS spacecraft, which collectively 
cost over $2 billion between FY96 and FY00, could be replaced 
by a series of new-technology, advanced spacecraft that would 
accomplish most of the EOS mission at a cost of $370 million 
over five years. Third, such a delay will give NASA adequate 
time to assess and explore the use of commercially-gathered 
data to meet its scientific requirements. By making greater use 
of commercial data suppliers, NASA could further reduce the 
costs of MTPE and encourage the development of commercial 
remote sensing. These delays in the PM and Chemistry series of 
EOS satellites also will enable NASA to delay funding for 
EOSDIS, data analysis, and program management.
    In imposing a delay on PM-1 and Chem-1, the Committee 
retains funding to continue work on the sensors for PM-1, but 
eliminates all funding for Chem-1. Full funding is provided for 
AM-1, Landsat-7, the TRMM mission, Earth Probes, and MTPE 
Science, where fundamental research is performed. NASA's 
Special Spacecraft request of $66.7 million is reduced by $3.4 
million in the Alt-Laser 1 spacecraft and the ACRIM instrument, 
both of which are still in Phase A/B studies.

Sec. 212(4) Space Access and Technology

Sectional Analysis and Recommendation

    $711,000,000 are authorized for Space Access and 
Technology. Included in this authorization is $324,700,000 for 
Advanced Space Transportation and $10,000,000 for continuing 
the Launch Voucher Demonstration program. The authorization is 
$14 million less than the FY97 request.

Program Description

    Space Access and Technology operates numerous programs 
intended to provide new technologies for space activities and 
promote the commercial development of space. These include 
advanced space transportation, which is responsible for the X-
33 program and the X-34 and DC-XA technology testbeds; 
spacecraft and remote sensing, which provides sensors and small 
spacecraft technology; a program for advanced small satellites, 
which includes the Lewis and Clark spacecraft; space processing 
and flight programs; commercial technology programs; advanced 
space concepts; and NASA's Small Business Innovative Research 
program.

Advanced Space Transportation--In General

    The entire request for Advanced Space Transportation, 
$324,700,000, is authorized. The Advanced Space Transportation 
program contains NASA's breakthrough effort to develop the 
world's first ``Single Stage To Orbit'' (SSTO) space 
transportation system. The Committee notes that RLV activity 
encompasses three test vehicle programs, the DC-XA suborbital 
test vehicle, the X-34 ``pathfinder,'' and the X-33 pre-
commercial RLV. None of these test vehicles is required to 
achieve orbit or deliver useful payload; rather, the 
combination of technology development and flight testing is 
planned to be sufficient on which to base the full-scale 
development decision.
    The Committee is concerned, in light of testimony received 
from industry in October 1995, ``The X-33 Reusable Launch 
Vehicle: A New Way of Doing Business?,'' that significant 
private contributions to develop X-33 under the Cooperative 
Agreements are not expected. The use of a Cooperative 
Agreement, versus a traditional cost type development contract, 
implied to Congress significant financial participation by 
industry in the test vehicle program. The Committee also 
learned in testimony that industry would require the federal 
government's significant participation in any commercially-
developed RLV system which would follow X-33. The Committee, at 
industry's urging, encouraged NASA to increase the FY97 funding 
level for X-33 in order to reflect more of an X-vehicle funding 
profile where the bulk of funding comes early in the 
development cycle. It was also intended that such an increase 
would leverage greater industry participation in Phase 2 of the 
RLV program. NASA's request for RLV, $58,000,000 more than what 
was projected for FY97 in the FY96 NASA budget, responds fully 
to the Committee's expressed concern. The total funding profile 
for X-33 remains the same, with funding in the outyears shifted 
to the beginning of the program.
    Separately, the X-34 Cooperative Agreement fell apart 
recently when the industry partners could not agree on a 
profitable design for that test vehicle, which was to be 
capable of carrying useful payload to orbit. X-34's timing and 
technological relationship to X-33 was considered tenuous at 
best, since its cancellation was said not to have jeopardized 
the X-33. The Committee understands that NASA has redesigned 
the program objectives so that X-34 technology development 
relates directly to the X-33 program. NASA is now seeking 
proposals which more closely resemble the financing of 
traditional X-vehicles.
    NASA's new initiative in Advanced Space Transportation 
technology is authorized as requested. The action is responsive 
to the NRC report which pointed out advanced engine technology 
was the greatest weakness of the program. However, the 
Committee believes the specific breakdown of effort between its 
three stated goals: low-cost, light-lift launch systems; low-
cost, light-weight upper states; and Rocket Burning Combined 
Cycle engine technology, should be defined more clearly before 
funds are committed in FY97.
    One of the federal government's goals for the Advanced 
Space Transportation program is to find an economical 
functional replacement for the nation's aging Space Shuttle 
fleet. This goal must be made to work in harmony with the 
nation's commercial need to develop the world's least 
expensive, most reliable payload delivery system. In a world 
where even non-market nations have gained access to the 
commercial space launch market, the most effective government 
incentive for private capital infusion into next-generation 
reusable launch systems is a solid technological investment to 
develop a new launch system that will surpass all current 
systems in terms of economy, reliability, and performance.
    Traditionally, the government has taken the lead in 
developing new launch systems to meet national security 
requirements. But, as these strictly government demands have 
receded in recent years, new systems must instead base their 
capitalized cost on a highly competitive commercial market 
model. In order to facilitate such a large and essential 
private investment, NASA has been charged by the President's 
National Space Transportation Policy (released August 5, 1994) 
to provide up-front technological risk reduction sufficient to 
enable private investors to assume a reasonable business risk 
to then proceed with building an operational launch system.
    The development of a Space Shuttle functional replacement, 
however, should not be confused with the risk reduction phase 
of this first process. Government requirements, including those 
associated with ``man-rating'' a space launch vehicle, must 
take a back seat to commercial launch market demands. The 
replacement of the Space Shuttle should be derived from 
commercial vehicles developed by the private sector as a result 
of the Reusable Launch Vehicle program. When a privately 
developed reusable launch vehicle has become operational, then 
consideration may be given to human space transportation 
requirements. While it may soon be possible for commercial 
companies to offer human transportation services, the 
distinction between developing human space flight vehicles and 
commercial payload delivery systems is important at this stage 
to focus NASA's RLV effort solely on reducing the risks and 
costs facing industry to develop and certify a commercial RLV.

The RLV Programs

    The Committee supports NASA's request to develop reusable 
launch vehicles under the terms of the industry-led cooperative 
agreements. The Committee believes the full-scale development 
and fleet operations of such vehicles, however, must be 
undertaken by private companies using risk capital. 
Accordingly, the business viability of the designs is as 
important as technological viability.
    For several years the Committee has strongly supported 
technology development specifically aimed at achieving a 
single-stage-to-orbit, fully reusable launch vehicle even while 
NASA had no such program underway. Upon the successful testing 
of the DC-X prototype launcher by the Department of Defense, 
however, NASA and the Office of Science and Technology Policy 
determined that such a concept, if fully developed, could hold 
the promise of eventually replacing the Space Shuttle. 
Beginning in fiscal year 1995, NASA began to adopt the DC-X 
program for continued testing and issued the Cooperative 
Agreement Notices that led to formal agreements with industry 
to develop two Reusable Launch Vehicles, the X-33 and the X-34.

The X-34 Program

    The Committee endorses NASA's X-34 program as a technology 
pathfinder for an operational RLV. The program's cancellation 
by the industrial partners does raise some concerns about the 
prospects of public-private partnerships and the willingness of 
industry to commit private capital to programs with commercial 
potential. The Committee accepts that one may learn as many 
lessons from failure as from success, and still considers the 
government's experience to date on X-34 as valuable. NASA's 
decision to continue X-34 and rescope it as a technology 
testbed for an operational RLV should complement the X-33 
program's risk reduction benefits in making the decision to 
proceed to a fully operational RLV in the year 2000. 
Consequently, the Committee recommends full funding for the X-
34 program and expects that NASA will incorporate management 
lessons from X-34 into the management of X-33.

The X-33 Program

    The Committee balances the tight budget constraints that 
NASA is operating under with the need to develop a robust, 
reliable, and affordable reusable launch vehicle. Cheap access 
to space is not just a pipe dream, it is a reality, that we as 
a nation, must achieve. It has the potential to open up entire 
new markets. Further, cheap access to space positions American 
industry to dominate the international market for space 
transportation. The overtures from other space launching 
nations wishing to participate in the X-33 program, highlight 
the general consensus that the goal of achieving an SSTO 
reusable launch vehicle represents the future of space 
transportation.
    The Committee is concerned that the current X-33 program 
only calls for the construction of one flight test vehicle. 
Historically, experimental programs either build two different 
designs or two or more copies (tail numbers) of one design. 
Obviously, funding two different designs is an option that is 
too expensive. Nevertheless, NASA should be striving for a 
``robust'' program. The Committee urges NASA to push the X-33 
to the limits, and views the program's funding of a single copy 
of the X-33 as an obstacle to achieving a robust program. With 
no backup copy, NASA will be reluctant to ``push the 
envelope.'' Serious consideration, starting this year, must be 
given to the type of program structure necessary to 
aggressively pursue the goals of the X-33 program.

Spacecraft and Remote Sensing

    The Committee supports NASA's activities in this area to 
produce advanced technology and spacecraft systems intended to 
reduce the cost of conducting space missions and to support the 
commercial development of space.

Earth Applications Systems

    Earth Applications Systems includes activities by the 
Office of Space Access and Technology to produce active 
sensors, such as space-based radars and lasers, that will be 
compact enough to fit on small spacecraft. The program also 
includes development of mechanisms to reduce spacecraft 
``jitter'' and safer pyrotechnics.
    NASA's Commercial Remote Sensing Program is also funded 
through Earth Applications Systems. The Committee endorses and 
fully supports this program, which seeks to work with private 
sector data suppliers to improve the application of earth 
remote sensing data and increase the ability of the private 
sector to devote private capital to studying and understanding 
the earth from space. The Committee has directed the Commercial 
Remote Sensing Program to manage the pilot program to study the 
application of commercially generated earth science data and to 
purchase such data for Mission to Planet Earth as required in 
Section 259 of the bill.

Space Processing

    The Committee supports continuing space processing 
activities to help develop new products in space, bring the 
private sector into commercial space activities, and provide 
opportunities for student-industry interaction in space 
processing experiments. This activity will also benefit the 
space station program by providing direction for the 
utilization programs aboard the station. The Committee is aware 
that some space processing proposals from the university 
community have commercial potential, but may lack mature 
business plans due to the research background of academic 
investigators. The Committee supports efforts by NASA to help 
individuals with good concepts for space processing to develop 
sound business plans and partnerships with the private sector.

Small Spacecraft Technology Initiative

    The Committee supports the Small Spacecraft Technology 
Initiative (SSTI), as a low-cost means of developing and 
flight-qualifying small satellite technologies which industry 
and the government can then use. The Committee has some 
concerns, however, that NASA may offer services from Earth-
remote sensing platforms built under the SSTI that compete with 
the private sector. Because the United States government should 
encourage the commercial development of space to lower 
government costs and promote the creation of high-technology 
aerospace jobs that do not depend on federal outlays for their 
existence, the bill precludes NASA from conducting space 
technology missions that will compete with or otherwise 
preempt, any private sector activities to develop space 
commercially. The Committee, therefore, expects that the 
satellites created under the Small Spacecraft Technology 
Initiative will not release their data in a manner that 
undermines the commercial remote sensing industry.

Commercial Technology Programs and Technology Transfer Agents

    Commercial Technology Programs is reduced by $12.4 million 
from the FY97 request. The Technology Transfer Agents request 
at $7.3 million is eliminated. In FY96, the Committee 
recommended an authorization of $10.4 million for these 
programs. In FY97, the Committee recommends an authorization of 
$11.8 million and no funding for the National Technology 
Transfer Center in the Technology Transfer Agents Account. 
These programs raise several concerns for the Committee. While 
the Committee commends NASA's efforts to spin off technology to 
the private sector, it finds that many of the activities within 
the Commercial Technology Program are better performed within 
the private sector. These include activities funded under 
``business practices,'' in the President's request, an account 
which provides funding for NASA to perform market research, 
develop business plans for the private sector, and assist in 
raising capital. These should include effective use of the 
Internet and media for technology dissemination and marketing 
and more effective use of the Regional Technology Transfer 
Centers. The Committee also expects NASA to provide assistance 
to the private sector on a cost-reimbursable basis so that 
those companies which increase their profit margin with 
government assistance bear the financial burden of such 
government assistance.
    The Committee notes that Dr. Joel Snow of the Iowa State 
University in testimony before the Space and Aeronautics 
Subcommittee on April 17th, 1996, stated that Iowa State has 
developed a technology transfer model that works more 
effectively in some areas than NASA's technology transfer 
model. The Committee strongly urges NASA to explore this model 
and Iowa State's effectiveness in leveraging federal technology 
development as a means of improving the return on the 
Commercial Technology Programs budget.

Office of Advanced Concepts

    In FY95 the Administrator directed the formation of an 
Office of Advanced Concepts as part of establishing the new 
Office of Space Access and Technology. This activity is wholly 
dedicated to identifying and advancing new, high leverage, and 
``out of the box'' technical concepts that could potentially 
revolutionize our national space enterprise.
    In particular, the office will pursue those ideas which 
could enable major new commercial activities in space and/or 
help realize important science and exploration objectives, 
``faster, better, and cheaper.'' Once the feasibility, 
potential benefits, and technology strategy for a new concept 
is determined, the office will advocate its adoption by other 
NASA enterprises for incorporation into their technology 
development programs and implementation plans.
    The Committee notes that this activity was given a ``small 
start-up'' level of funding ($3.0 million) in FY95, grew to 
$6.6 million in FY96, but is cut back to $3.8 million for FY97, 
well below its originally-forecast level of $10.0 million.
    The Committee believes that it is important to leverage 
resources in a way that allows this office to plan for space 
activities in the 21st century. Given the Administration's 
outyear budget which cuts $3.2 billion out of the agency in a 
three-year timespan, it is natural and necessary for NASA to be 
focused on short-term issues. That is exactly why it is 
essential that the Office of Advanced Concepts be given the 
seed money to start thinking about the years after 2000.

Launch Voucher Demonstration Program

    $10,000,000 are authorized for the Launch Voucher 
Demonstration Program. This authorization allows for the 
continuation of the bi-partisan experiment, first authorized by 
the fiscal year 1993 NASA Authorization Act (P.L. 102-588). The 
goal of the program is to privatize suborbital and small 
orbital scientific payloads by demonstrating that the private 
sector can provide cheaper and faster launch services for small 
NASA missions. The voucher program will further identify 
providers of launch or payload integration services. The first 
voucher demonstration took place on April 3, 1996 with the 
successful launch of a Starfire rocket in conjunction with the 
University of Alabama at Huntsville and the University of 
Mississippi at Hattiesburg.

Sec. 212(5) Aeronautical Research and Technology

Sectional Analysis and Recommendation

    $823,400,000 are authorized for Aeronautical Research and 
Technology. This authorization includes: $354,400,000 for 
Research and Technology Base; $254,300,000 for High Speed 
Research; $152,800,000 for Advanced Subsonic Technology; 
$23,300,000 for High Performance Computing and Communication; 
and, $38,600,000 for Numerical Aerodynamic Simulation. There 
has been a significant increase in funding of the Advanced 
Subsonic Technology program since fiscal year 1994. This 
program has been reduced $34,400,000 from the FY97 request.

Program Description

    The Research and Technology Base, High Speed Research, 
Advanced Subsonic Technologies, Numerical Aerodynamic 
Simulation, and the High Performance Computing and 
Communications programs are the elements of NASA's aeronautical 
research efforts. The core of these programs can be found in 
the Research and Technology Base where the focus is directed 
towards leading-edge research in propulsion and structures.

Committee Views

    The Committee supports the goals of NASA's aeronautics 
programs to ensure that cutting-edge aeronautical research 
conducted within the United States is unsurpassed. During the 
104th Congress, however, the Congressional Budget Office has 
been critical of some NASA aeronautics programs, including some 
components of the Advanced Subsonic Technology (AST) program, 
as being beneficial primarily to airlines and aircraft 
manufacturers. The Committee views some of the elements of this 
program as more mature than basic research, and wishes to 
ensure that federal funding is invested in NASA programs which 
support broad aeronautical research efforts. With that in mind, 
the Committee encourages NASA review the AST program to 
determine which elements could be reimbursed by the private 
sector.
    The Committee encourages NASA to review funding levels for 
polymer-matrix composite programs to achieve a balance between 
composite and metallic technologies. Aluminum has been the 
material of choice for all significant commercial aircraft 
structures, and continues to offer opportunities for cost 
effective improvements in aircraft structural performance.

Sec. 212(6) Mission Communication Services

Sectional Analysis and Recommendation

    $410,600,000 are authorized for Mission Communication 
Services. This authorization represents a general reduction of 
$10,000,000 from the President's request.

Program Description

    Mission Communication Services provides the ground networks 
for every NASA flight mission from interplanetary spacecraft to 
the Space Shuttle. Services also include tracking, orbit and 
attitude determination, maneuver analysis, communications 
scheduling, spacecraft command, spacecraft health and safety 
data acquisition, and science data acquisition.

Committee Views

    The Committee recommends that NASA place Mission 
Communication Services (under Science, Aeronautics and 
Technology) and Space Communication Services (under Mission 
Support) under one account, as was the case in years previous 
to fiscal year 1995.

Sec. 212(7) Academic Programs

Sectional Analysis and Recommendation

    $95,500,000 are authorized for Academic Programs. This 
represents a reduction of $5,300,000 from the FY97 request.

Program Description

    Academic Program goals are to promote excellence in the 
United States' education system through enhancing and expanding 
scientific and technological competence.

Committee Views

    The Committee supports NASA's educational activities as an 
important means of generating student interest in mathematics 
and the hard sciences.
    In order to support and stimulate the effectiveness of NASA 
academic funding, NASA is encouraged to work with non-profit 
organizations to enhance the development of aerospace education 
programs through state-based teacher outreach. The goal of such 
a partnership should be to streamline the administration of 
NASA education programs, resulting in personnel reductions at 
NASA headquarters and field centers; lower costs; stimulate 
state participation in the civil space program; evolve the role 
of aerospace science in the classroom; and support teacher 
training in aerospace science.
    The Committee supports initiatives such as the Spaceweek 
International Association which holds an annual event with 
government, industry, and education organizations across the 
United States to educate the public about space. It is 
important to schedule this type of event during the school year 
in order to maximize student participation. Moreover, such 
programs bring state government and private funding into the 
process of supporting space education nation wide. In order to 
support and stimulate such benefits, the Committee strongly 
urges NASA to consider proposals from state-based educational 
groups for creating collaborative agreements between such 
organizations and the Agency that promote more effective use of 
federal space education dollars. The Committee notes with 
pleasure that one such group, the Aerospace States Association, 
discussed the improved performance and reduced cost potential 
of such a collaboration at an April 17th, 1996 hearing before 
the Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics and wholeheartedly 
commends the Association and its member state governments for 
supporting space education and creatively leveraging state 
education dollars to generate private sector funding of 
educational activities. The Committee believes that working 
with such groups will enable NASA to expand its educational 
outreach and make its existing educational dollars go much 
further.

SECTION 213. MISSION SUPPORT

Sec. 213(1) Safety, Reliability, and Quality Assurance

Sectional Analysis and Recommendation

    $36,700,000 are authorized for Safety, Reliability, and 
Quality Assurance. This authorization represents no change from 
the FY97 request.

Program Description

    NASA's agency wide efforts to develop policies and 
practices to ensure safe operations and practices, quality 
controls, and reliable flight systems are funded under this 
account.

Sec. 213(2) Space Communication Services

Sectional Analysis and Recommendation

    $281,250,000 are authorized for Space Communication 
Services. This authorization represents a reduction of 
$10,150,000 from the FY97 request.

Program Description

    Space Communications Services provides electronic 
communications which are essential to the success of every NASA 
flight mission, from interplanetary spacecraft to the Space 
Shuttle. All Space Network major development activities such as 
TDRS Replenishment are under this budget line.

Committee Views

    Within Space Communication Services, the telecommunications 
program supports NASA's programs in collaborative interagency, 
international and commercial enterprises. The Committee 
believes NASA could find further efficiencies in 
telecommunications by using those technologies from U.S. 
industry that are already well established.
    The GAO Report, ``Telecommunications Network, NASA Could 
Better Manage Its Planned Consolidation'' released in April 
1996, criticizes NASA's Telecommunications Network. The report 
noted that NASA opted to follow a plan proposed by Marshall 
Space Flight Center, which would consolidate the management, 
engineering, and operations of its networks under an existing 
support contractor at Marshall. Specifically, NASA ``did not 
consider other existing proposals that could result in 
potentially greater savings.'' Moreover, ``NASA has embarked on 
its present course of action in an ad hoc manner, without 
taking a comprehensive and objective look at its overall 
communications requirements independent of the approaches 
championed by officials who are currently managing NASA's 
networks.'' The adopted plan does not seek cost savings in the 
near term as aggressively as other existing proposals. The 
Committee urges NASA to review the findings of the GAO report 
and subsequently, to review its telecommunications network in a 
comprehensive and objective manner.

Sec. 213(2) Construction of Facilities

Sectional Analysis and Recommendation

    $105,000,000 are authorized for Construction of Facilities. 
This represents a $50,300,000 decrease from the FY97 request 
and a $37,400,000 decrease from FY96 funding.

Committee View

    The Committee notes that NASA will be able to fund all of 
the discrete Construction of Facilities projects that are 
listed in the FY97 request. The decrease comes from Minor 
Revitalization of Facilities at Various Locations and Facility 
Planning and Design. The Committee encourages NASA to pursue 
the types of cost savings activities described in the FY97 
budget request: ``[savings] resulted from favorable bids 
experienced in the marketplace, construction efficiencies 
realized from innovative designs, scope reductions due to 
efforts to downsize the Agency's physical plant as well as Zero 
Base Review determinations, and the design of fewer projects 
for future budgets due to constrained Agency resources.''
    As the Agency continues to downsize and makes efforts to 
meet the Administration's outyear funding targets, the costs of 
the Construction of Facilities line must be contained and 
reduced.

Sec. 213(4) Research and Program Management

Sectional Analysis and Recommendation

    $1,957,850,000 are authorized for Research and Program 
Management. This represents a reduction of $120,950,000 from 
the FY97 request. Personnel & Related Costs is reduced 
$81,500,000 and Research Operations Support is reduced 
$34,000,000.

Committee View

    The Committee based the reduction in Personnel & Related 
Costs on projected levels of Full Time Equivalents (FTEs) for 
the end of FY96 and FY97 provided by NASA. These charts 
indicated that NASA was projecting 21,555 FTEs at the end of 
FY96 and 21,031 FTEs at the end of FY97. As of February 1996, 
NASA was running at a level of 21,325 FTEs. Thus, it seemed 
apparent that NASA was running ahead of schedule for targeted 
reductions in the number of FTEs.
    During the afternoon of April 23 (the day prior to Full 
Committee markup of the bill, later introduced, H.R. 3322), 
NASA sent the subcommittee a new chart indicating that the 
Agency has actually been underrunning the level of FTEs by 
about 500 for both FY96 and FY97. To calculate the budget for 
FY96, the NASA budget office used the level of 21,055 FTEs. To 
calculate the budget for FY97, the NASA budget office used the 
level of 20,550 FTEs.

SECTION 214. INSPECTOR GENERAL

Sectional analysis and recommendation

    $17,000,000 are authorized in FY97 for the Office of 
Inspector General. The authorization represents no change from 
the President's request.

Program description

    Funding for this account supports activities of the NASA 
Office of Inspector General in carrying out its 
responsibilities under the Inspector General Act of 1978, 
including conduct of independent audits and investigations of 
agency programs and operations, prevention and detection of 
waste, fraud and abuse in agency activities, and promotion of 
economy and efficiency within the agency.

SECTION 215. TOTAL AUTHORIZATION

Sectional Analysis and Recommendation

    The total amount authorized under this Act for NASA for 
FY97 is $13,495,500,000.

SECTION 216. OFFICE OF COMMERCIAL SPACE TRANSPORTATION

Sectional Analysis and Recommendation

    $5,770,000 are authorized for the Office of Commercial 
Space Transportation within the Department of Transportation.

Committee Views

    The Committee remains concerned about the allocation of 
resources provided for regulatory functions within the Office 
of Commercial Space Transportation (OCST). Consistent with the 
Committee Views included in the FY96 NASA Authorization, the 
primary duty since its inception has been, and continues to be, 
to regulate and license commercial launches and launch site 
operators. OCST should be a single source, or ``one stop 
shopping place'' for the commercial launch industry to obtain 
the necessary licensing to undertake operations. Promotion and 
advocacy are of secondary importance. By limiting the Office's 
policy-making functions to only those within its regulatory 
responsibilities, OCST will be able to concentrate on 
developing critical safety and insurance regulations, and 
licensing and certification procedures.
    To date, no launch site regulations have been issued by 
OCST despite the fact that 3 of 5 spaceports are within 12 
months of the commencement of operations.
    Accordingly, the Committee will study the possibility of 
allowing some states the option of licensing their launch site 
operators. This option would be considered only for those 
states that have a regulatory framework previously established 
and would be considered only on an interim basis until OCST has 
provided sufficient licensing and regulatory framework in 
cooperation with the individual spaceports and applicable state 
governments. This would also be considered only in the context 
of sufficient standardization and compatibility among state and 
federal regulations for spaceports.
    The Committee directs the Office of Commercial Space 
Transportation to allocate resources according to its primary 
mission, that of regulation and licensing, and to cooperate 
fully as the Committee investigates a range of options to 
facilitate the operation of commercial spaceports. The 
balancing of resources should take into account any travel by 
the Associate Administrator or other OCST staff and an 
assessment of the relationship of such travel to the primary 
responsibility of OCST.
    The Committee also views with concern possible personnel 
and mission changes in the U.S. Air Force safety-related 
organizations and how those changes could affect support of 
commercial launch activities. The Committee, therefore, directs 
OCST to work with the U.S. Air Force to determine its ability 
to adequately support safety-related operations during 
commercial launch preparation and operations.
    The Committee believes that a revised federal regulatory 
regime for commercial launch activities may be required, in 
particular, one that recognizes the regulatory empowerment that 
state governments have provided to their respective agencies. 
Such revisions should be considered jointly by OCST, other 
relevant federal agencies including NASA and DoD, and relevant 
state governments.
    It is the recommendation of the Committee that following 
the transfer of OCST from the Office of the Secretary to the 
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the Office of Commercial 
Space Transportation continue to be recognized as an 
independent division of the FAA with the same level of 
authority as the six other divisions. In addition, OCST should 
be allowed to operate autonomously in both its budget and 
personnel matters and that the Director of OCST should report 
directly to the FAA Administrator or his deputy.

SECTION 217. OFFICE OF SPACE COMMERCE

Sectional Analysis and Recommendations

    The entire request of $500,000 are authorized for the 
Department of Commerce Office of Space Commerce.

Program Description

    The Office of Space Commerce assists the Secretary of 
Commerce in efforts to promote the commercial development of 
space through policy development, export licensing, and 
commercial remote sensing satellite regulation.

Chapter 2--Restructuring the National Aeronautics and Space 
Administration

SECTION 221. FINDINGS

Sectional analysis

    Section 221 finds that restructuring NASA is essential to 
accomplishing space missions while balancing the federal 
budget; restructuring requires objective financial judgment; 
and, a formal economic review of NASA's missions and the 
federal assets that support them is required in order to plan 
and implement needed restructuring.

SECTION 222. RESTRUCTURING REPORTS

Sectional Analysis

    Section 222 requires the Administrator to transmit a report 
to Congress by July 31, 1996, on its restructuring activities 
by fiscal year. By September 30, 1996, the President shall 
propose all enabling legislation required to carry out actions 
described in the Administrator's report.

Committee Views

    The Committee has not taken the step of authorizing an 
annual restructuring program the way it would authorize a major 
development program, although in form and substance such an 
authorization may prove necessary in the future. In lieu of 
specific direction at this time, the Committee requests an 
implementation report identifying all actions taken and planned 
to be taken to restructure the agency, and the net savings to 
be realized from these activities by fiscal year.
    Simply stated, NASA's restructuring promises must be 
bankable in order for the agency to plan, organize, and survive 
in an era of declining discretionary outlays. The Committee 
notes with deep regret that NASA has initiated a Reduction in 
Force (RIF) without proper consultation with Congress and 
without demonstrating the fiscal requirement. The Committee has 
relied on the agency's Zero Base Review (ZBR) to produce 
sufficient restructuring savings to avoid draconian measures, 
and questions whether the NASA Headquarters RIF is an admission 
that ZBR savings are inadequate or are not meeting their 
intended savings schedule.

Chapter 3--Limitations and Special Authority

SECTION 231. USE OF FUNDS FOR CONSTRUCTION

    This section authorizes the use of funds appropriated for 
program purposes other than construction of facilities and 
personnel and travel-related costs in the Human Space Flight 
and Mission Support accounts, for the construction of new 
facilities or repair of existing facilities at any location. 
The authorization is subject to a limitation that funds may not 
be expended for projects exceeding $500,000 until 30 days have 
passed following a report to the House Committee on Science and 
to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of 
the Senate. This section would also provide for vesting of 
legal title in the United States when funds are used under this 
section for grants to academic institutions for additional 
research facilities.
    The Committee wishes to emphasize that the sole purpose of 
consolidating in one section the various provisions in previous 
authorization acts and bills concerning use of funds for 
construction of facilities purposes is to streamline and 
simplify the applicable legal authorities. This change from 
past practice should in no way be viewed as a dilution of the 
agency's authority to manage the construction of facilities 
program, or to realign the respective authorities and 
responsibilities of NASA Headquarters in relation to the 
Centers. With respect to the latter, the Committee expects the 
agency to establish the necessary internal procedures to ensure 
that construction of facilities decisions continue to be made 
in an orderly and fully justified manner.

SECTION 232. AVAILABILITY OF APPROPRIATED AMOUNTS

    Section 232 provides for funds authorized for Human Space 
Flight; Science, Aeronautics, and Technology; Mission Support; 
and, Inspector General to remain available until expended.

SECTION 233. REPROGRAMMING FOR CONSTRUCTION OF FACILITIES

    Section 233 establishes authority for the Administrator to 
vary upward the amount of funds authorized for specific 
construction of facilities projects, provided that the total 
authorization for construction of facilities is not increased 
as a result of such reprogramming actions. This section also 
authorizes the Administrator to use up to $10,000,000 of 
amounts authorized in this bill for construction of facilities 
for projects that result from new and unforeseen developments 
in the national civil space program, subject to notification to 
the House and Senate authorizing committees.

SECTION 234. CONSIDERATION BY COMMITTEES

    Section 234 establishes a requirement that the 
Administrator report in advance to the respective House and 
Senate authorizing committees the use of appropriated funds for 
a program where the Congress did not provide funding as 
requested; the amount of funds proposed to be used exceeds the 
amount authorized for the program under subtitle B, chapter 1 
of this bill; or the program was not presented to the Congress 
in the President's budget request. This section also obliges 
NASA to keep the authorizing committees fully apprised of 
agency activities and responsibilities within the jurisdiction 
of those committees, including the provision of information 
requested by either committee that relates thereto.

SECTION 235. LIMITATION ON OBLIGATION OF UNAUTHORIZED 
APPROPRIATIONS

    Section 235 requires the Administrator to submit a report 
to the Congress and to the Comptroller General on FY97 
appropriations for programs not authorized under subtitle B, 
chapter 1 of this bill or that exceed authorized amounts for 
specific programs. The report is to be submitted within 30 days 
following enactment of an appropriations act for FY97. Section 
235 also requires the Administrator to publish a Federal 
Register notice seeking public comment on programs for which 
funds are appropriated but which were not authorized in this 
bill, and limits the obligation of such funds until 30 days 
following close of the comment period.

SECTION 236. USE OF FUNDS FOR SCIENTIFIC CONSULTATIONS OR 
EXTRAORDINARY EXPENSES

    Section 236 authorizes the Administrator to use funds 
appropriated for Science, Aeronautics, and Technology 
activities, in an amount not exceeding $30,000, for scientific 
consultations or extraordinary expenses.

Subtitle C--International Space Station

SECTION 241. FINDINGS

    The Congress finds that: it is in the national interest of 
the United States for NASA to develop, assemble, and operate 
the International Space Station; that the International Space 
Station has been successfully restructured and redesigned, and 
NASA has achieved program management, control, and stability 
while consolidating contract responsibility; that private 
industry involvement and participation during assembly and 
operational phases of the International Space Station will 
lower costs and increase benefits to the international 
partners; further changes in design or scope of the 
International Space Station will discourage commercial 
involvement, increase costs, and weaken the relationship with 
the international partners that may be necessary for future 
space projects; total program costs for development, assembly, 
and initial operations have been identified and capped to 
ensure financial discipline and enforce schedule milestones; 
mission planning and engineering functions of the National 
Space Transportation Systems (Space Shuttle) program should be 
coordinated with the Space Station Program Office in order to 
contain costs; the International Space Station is a necessary 
part of an adequately funded civil space program which balances 
human space flight with science, aeronautics, and technology; 
the International Space Station should encourage new and 
expanded opportunities to meet educational goals, particularly 
in our young people, and in general should be an inspiration to 
society; and when completed the International Space Station 
will be the largest, most capable microgravity research 
facility ever developed, it will provide a lasting framework 
for conducting large-scale science programs with international 
partners, and it is the next step in the human exploration of 
space.

SECTION 242. COMMERCIALIZATION OF SPACE STATION

    The Committee believes NASA should consider commercializing 
the various components, i.e. operational tasks, resupply, and 
research, of the space station. It is vital to the future of 
expanding human civilization into space that the first steps be 
taken using free market principles.

SECTION 243. SENSE OF CONGRESS

    H.R. 1601, the International Space Station Authorization 
Act of 1995, notes the positive reform of using the ``cost 
incentive fee'' single prime contract for the International 
Space Station has been beneficial. For the future, this type of 
reform in NASA's reinvention process is encouraged by Congress 
to be used throughout the Nation's civil space program.

SECTION 244. SPACE STATION ACCOUNTING REPORT

    Section 244, Space Station Accounting Report, requires that 
all funds transferred by NASA to Russia be accounted for from 
the point of arrival in Russia through conversion to 
disbursement.

Committee View for Subtitle C

    The provisions contained in the bill pertaining to the 
International Space Station (ISS) are derived from the findings 
and miscellaneous provisions of H.R. 1601, the International 
Space Station Authorization Act of 1995 (H. Rept. 104-210). 
While the Committee is not providing a full-program 
authorization of the ISS at this time, rationale for full-
program authority, as provided in Section 241, Findings, 
remains valid today.
    The Committee is, however, cognizant of the current 
discussions taking place between the Russian Space Agency (RSA) 
and NASA, and between the Government of Russia and the 
Executive Branch, aimed at assuring that Russian hardware 
contributions to the ISS are delivered to orbit on time. While 
this provision does not address internal Russian funding of 
Russian contributions, such a requirement would deter the use 
of U.S. funds as short-term loans in lieu of Russian government 
funds for Russian ISS contributions.
    The Russian government has argued that providing an 
accounting of U.S. funds should not be of concern to the 
program or Congress. To the contrary, the Committee believes 
that it has a strong interest in knowing whether the individual 
firms or persons responsible for fulfillment of the $400 
million contract are, in fact, being paid for their efforts. In 
light of the tight schedule established for future docking 
missions and other preparatory work for the International Space 
Station, the Committee believes establishing a clear 
relationship between the work performed under the contract and 
payment to the responsible entities will help to assure the 
timely completion of contract tasks.
    The Committee continues to be concerned with the 
International Space Station's use and operational costs. This 
concern stems from the lack of an economic framework, agreed to 
by the partners, which defines how station usage and operations 
costs will be calculated and apportioned. The embodiment of 
this agreement is the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), which 
must be understood by the international partner governments 
before signing the Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA). The IGA 
provides the foundation on which transactions can be made 
between partners in supplying and using the ISS. Consistent 
with this concern, the Committee reiterates its support for 
commercial services in and access to the ISS. Accordingly, a 
market study is required to identify commercial mechanisms and 
opportunities which could be pursued on an economic, versus 
political, basis.
    The Committee believes that commercial users and service 
providers will play a risk-mitigating and cost saving role 
throughout the life of the ISS, and urges NASA to regard this 
as an opportunity to counter-balance the tight fiscal 
constraints under which the ISS will have to operate.

Subtitle D-- Miscellaneous Provisions

SECTION 251. COMMERCIAL SPACE LAUNCH AMENDMENTS

Sectional Analysis and Recommendation

    This section amends Chapter 701 of title 49, United States 
Code, entitled ``Commercial Space Launch Activities,'' which is 
a recodification of the Commercial Space Launch Act of 1984. 
The purpose of the amendments is to establish a statutory 
framework for the licensing of commercial reentry activities by 
the Secretary of Transportation, clarify certain provision in 
Chapter 701, and provide for criteria for accepting a license 
application.
    The Commercial Space Launch Act is further amended to 
expand the definition of ``launch services'' to those 
activities directly related to the preparation of a launch site 
or payload facility. Under Section 70105, the Secretary of 
Transportation is directed to notify the authorizing House and 
Senate Committees within seven days after a license has not 
been issued within the deadline. The Secretary may establish 
procedures for certification of the safety of a launch or 
reentry vehicle. The Secretary is also given the authority to 
develop regulations establishing criteria for accepting an 
application for a license within the 60 days after receipt of 
such application. The Secretary is directed to establish 
criteria and procedures for determining the priority of 
competing requests from the private sector and State 
governments for property and services under section 70111. The 
term ``license'' is amended to ``launch reentry or site 
operator license'' under section 70112 on liability insurance.

Program Description

    The Department of Transportation, through its Office of 
Commercial Space Transportation, is responsible for 
implementing Chapter 701 which authorizes the Secretary of 
Transportation to license and regulate the non-governmental 
space launch and reentry of a vehicle and operation of a launch 
or reentry site. In addition, by virtue of Executive Order 
12465, the Department has lead agency responsibilities within 
the Executive Branch to encourage, facilitate and coordinate 
development of commercial expendable launch vehicle operations 
by private U.S. enterprises.

Committee Views

    When the Commercial Space Launch Act was passed in 1984 
(P.L. 98-575) and when it was amended in 1988 (P.L. 100-657), 
Congress did not address the full range of space transportation 
activities that the private sector could undertake on a 
commercial basis. Specifically, commercial space activities 
involving reentry vehicles that are returned to Earth from 
Earth orbit were not encompassed, and were not intended to be 
encompassed, by the statute. Market demand to support 
commercial reentry ventures has yet to emerge. However, the 
private sector is beginning to demonstrate technical capability 
to undertake such activities if a suitable profit making 
opportunity were presented. In recognition of these 
developments, the Committee wishes to establish the appropriate 
legal framework to ensure public safety is protected while 
minimizing regulatory burden, delay or uncertainty that could 
inhibit commercial exploitation of reentry capabilities. In 
addition to establishing a regulatory regime for commercial 
reentries, the Committee intends these amendments to address 
certain issues that have arisen regarding the definition of 
``launch,'' the extent to which activities before and after 
launch may be licensed or regulated, and applicability of the 
third party liability provisions of sections 70112 and 70113 of 
Chapter 701.
    In establishing the legal framework for reentry, the 
Committee's approach is to treat reentry of a reentry vehicle 
the same as launch of a launch vehicle. Reentries described in 
section 70104(a) must be licensed, just as launches meeting 
these same criteria must be licensed. In addition, amendments 
to other sections of Chapter 701 grant to the Secretary the 
same authority and responsibility with respect to the licensing 
and regulation of the reentry of reentry vehicles as existing 
law provides to the Secretary with respect to the launch of 
vehicles.
    An amendment to section 70102 also adds the phrase ``from 
Earth'' to the existing definition of ``launch'' in order to 
make clear the original intent of the Commercial Space Launch 
Act that the launch of a launch vehicle is an event that takes 
place from Earth, not from Earth orbit or otherwise from or in 
outer space. Although the definition of launch in the original 
Act lacks this explicit specification, the Act was otherwise 
quite clear that a launch for purposes of the license 
requirement takes place from a ``launch site,'' which is 
defined in terms of a location ``on Earth.'' Moreover, the 
legislative history of the Commercial Space Launch Act 
demonstrates that only launches from Earth were envisioned.
    The amendment to section 70102 was originally prompted by a 
concern that the Department of Transportation was advocating 
the position that a reentry is subject to a launch license 
requirement on the grounds that reentry entailed the placing of 
a launch vehicle in a suborbital trajectory ``from Earth 
orbit.'' Although the Department has since abandoned that 
position, the committee wishes by this amendment to register 
its emphatic rejection of any interpretation of ``launch'' that 
would include space transportation activities that do not begin 
from Earth; such as reentry, the transfer of a satellite 
between one Earth orbit and another, or any other on-orbit 
operation after a launch is completed and before reentry is 
initiated.
    The Committee intends that for purposes of the license 
requirement, reentry begins when the vehicle is prepared 
specifically for reentry. By way of definition, the Committee 
intends the term to apply to that phase of the overall space 
mission during which the reentry is intentionally initiated. 
Although this may vary slightly from system to system, as a 
general matter the Committee expects reentry to begin when the 
vehicle's attitude is oriented for propulsion firing to place 
the vehicle on its reentry trajectory.
    The Committee acknowledges that in order to issue a license 
the Department must be satisfied that an applicant has 
demonstrated capability to carry out a reentry safely and 
without jeopardy to critical national interests. The Committee 
also appreciates that, to evaluate capability, the Department 
may need to examine certain of the applicant's proposed 
procedures and activities that would precede initiation of 
reentry. However, the Committee wishes to make clear that these 
pre-reentry procedures or activities are not events requiring a 
license, nor otherwise subject to regulation. Rather, they 
would represent aspects of an application that the Department 
would have to measure against standards and criteria that the 
Department has established are necessary to evaluate capability 
to conduct the reentry. These standards and criteria may be 
generally applicable to all applicants or specific to a 
particular proposal. The Committee urges the Department to take 
the steps necessary to ensure that they are clearly articulated 
and understandable to license applicants.
    These same principles should apply to the licensing of a 
launch. There has been much discussion about what activities, 
should be encompassed by the term ``launch'' for purposes of 
the license requirement. It is the Committee's view that there 
may be activities that precede flight that (1) are closely 
proximate in time to ignition or lift-off, (2) entail critical 
steps preparatory to initiating flight, (3) are unique to space 
launch, and (4) are inherently so hazardous as to warrant the 
Department's regulatory oversight under Chapter 701, For 
instance, once a launch vehicle is fueled and armed in 
preparation for a launch, whether from the ground or the air, 
the risk of an inadvertent ignition may be sufficiently high to 
justify an interpretation of launch that would encompass this 
pre-flight phase of the launch campaign.
    The Committee recognizes that, given the very different 
preparatory process associated with individual launch vehicle 
systems, it may be difficult to pinpoint the same commencement 
of launch for all proposals. However, the Committee views with 
concern the Department's attempt to address this situation by 
using a license to indiscriminately cover all activities of a 
licensee at a launch facility before, during, and after a 
launch. The Committee believes that the Department can identify 
when a launch begins both for well-established launch systems 
as well as emerging systems. This would limit applicability of 
the Department's license requirement for purposes of obtaining 
a license and implementing the insurance and risk allocation 
provisions in Chapter 701.
    The original Act intended that a launch ends, as far as the 
launch vehicle's payload is concerned, once the launch vehicle 
places the payload in Earth orbit or in the planned trajectory 
in outer space. The Committee wishes to make clear that the 
Secretary has no authority to license or regulate activities 
that take place between the end of the launch phase and the 
beginning of the reentry phase, such as maneuvers between two 
Earth orbits or other non-reentry operations in Earth orbit; or 
after the end of a launch phase in the case of missions where 
the payload is not a reentry vehicle.
    Sections 70112 and 70113, establishing an allocation of 
risk regime, are also amended to cover reentry in the same way 
that launches are covered. The Committee notes that these 
provisions apply to losses sustained as a result of licensed 
activities, (i.e., launches and reentries) not events or 
activities before launch, between launch and reentry, or after 
reentry. Once a launch or a reentry is completed no protection 
against third party liability is intended to be provided under 
Chapter 701 unless there is a clear causal nexus between the 
loss and the behavior of the launch or reentry vehicle. For 
instance, if, subsequent to a launch vehicle's successful 
deployment of a payload that is not a reentry vehicle, the 
payload returns to Earth and causes third party loss, the loss 
is not intended to be covered by sections 70112 and 70113. As 
another example, if during an airborne launch, the aircraft 
suffers an accident after the vehicle has separated from the 
aircraft and taken off, and the accident is not attributable to 
the launch vehicle, then this event is also not intended to be 
covered by sections 70112 and 70113.
    To clarify applicability of sections 70112 and 70113 to 
licensed activities, the Committee recommends that the 
Secretary initiate a rule-making action to address both launch 
and reentry insurance and allocation of risk requirements as 
soon as reasonably practicable following enactment of this 
bill.
    Two new sections were added to Chapter 701, Sections 70120 
and 70121. Section 70120 requires the Secretary of 
Transporation within six months after the date of enactment, to 
issue regulations to give industry guidelines and procedures 
related to insurance, licenses and government indemnification. 
Section 70121 requires the Secretary of Transportation to 
submit an annual report on the activities undertaken under 
Chapter 701 and the performance of OCST.

Additional amendments authorizing criteria for license 
application acceptance

    Section 251 also amends Chapter 701 to authorize the 
Secretary to issue regulations establishing criteria for 
acceptance of a license application. The acceptance or 
rejection must be made within 60 days of receipt of the 
application. The purpose of this amendment is to (1)limit the 
undue expenditure of Office resources on determining whether an 
application is viable, and (2)to provide the applicant with 
timely notice of whether the application will be accepted.

SECTION 252. REQUIREMENT FOR INDEPENDENT COST ANALYSIS

    Section 252 requires the NASA Chief Financial Officer to 
conduct independent cost analyses of projects estimated to cost 
in excess of $75,000,000 in total project costs, and to report 
the results of the analyses to the Congress. The cost analysis 
is to occur before the project enters Phase C. The Committee 
views this provision as critical to its ongoing oversight and 
authorization responsibilities, as well as Congressional 
support for current and future NASA programs.

SECTION 253. OFFICE OF SPACE COMMERCE

    Within the Department of Commerce, there shall be 
established an Office of Space Commerce, with primary 
responsibilities to include: the promotion of private sector 
investment in space activities; assisting the United States 
commercial providers in their efforts to do business with the 
United States Federal Government; ensuring that the United 
States Federal Government not compete with the private sector 
in the provision of space hardware and services otherwise 
available from the private sector; promoting the export of 
space-related goods and services; representing the Department 
of Commerce in the development of United States' policies in 
negotiations with foreign governments to ensure fair and equal 
trade; seeking the removal of legal, policy, and institutional 
impediments to space policy; and licensing private remote 
sensing space systems and supporting the private sector's role 
in the commercial development of Landsat remote sensing data 
distribution.

SECTION 254. NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ACT OF 1958 
AMENDMENTS

Automotive Research

    Section 102 of the National Aeronautics and Space Act of 
1958 is amended to delete subsection (f), which relates to 
automotive research. With a declining budget profile for the 
next five years, the Committee recommends that NASA concentrate 
its resources on basic aeronautics and space research.

Reports to the Congress

    Section 254 amends the National Aeronautics and Space Act 
of 1958 to conform to Executive Branch practice the statutory 
requirement for the President to submit a report on 
governmental aeronautics and space activities and 
accomplishments, and to allow adequate time to prepare the 
report. Accordingly, the President is required to submit to 
Congress the annual aeronautics and space report in May, rather 
than January; and to address in the report activities carried 
out by government agencies on a fiscal, rather than calendar, 
year basis.

Disclosure of technical data

    Section 254 also amends the National Aeronautics and Space 
Act of 1958 by the addition of provisions that authorize the 
Administrator at his discretion or at the request of a private 
sector entity, to withhold from public disclosure technical 
data generated in the performance of experimental, development, 
or research activities funded jointly by NASA and the private 
sector that would enhance U.S. aerospace industry 
competitiveness.
    Under existing authority (42 U.S.C. 22454(b)), NASA is 
authorized to withhold from public disclosure for a period not 
to exceed five years, technical data that (1) results from 
activities conducted under an agreement entered into under 
section 203(c)(5) and (6) of the National Aeronautics and Space 
Act of 1958, and (2) would be exempt from disclosure as a trade 
secret or commercial or financial information privileged or 
confidential under the Freedom of Information Act if it were 
obtained from a non-governmental participant in the activities. 
However, this authority does not necessarily apply to the 
product of jointly-funded research and development initiatives.
    The absence of appropriate protection for commercially-
sensitive data can be an obstacle to industry involvement and 
investment in cooperative projects with NASA. Private sector 
participation and cost-sharing in NASA projects could be 
encouraged by allowing temporary protection for certain kinds 
of commercially sensitive data that may emerge from cooperative 
initiatives. At the same time, the Committee supports 
fundamental principles of open access to federal government 
information that underlie the Freedom of Information Act.
    The amendment set forth in Section 254 seeks to balance 
these competing interests. Subject to issuance of regulations 
implementing this provision, the Administrator is authorized to 
afford limited and temporary protection for up to five years of 
technical data generated in the course of joint NASA-private 
sector research activities and programs as long as such 
activities include cost-sharing by the industry partners. 
``Technical data'' is defined as any recorded information, 
including computer software that is, or may be, directly 
applicable to the design, engineering, development, production, 
manufacture, or operation of products or processes that may 
have significant value in maintaining leadership or 
competitiveness in civil and governmental aeronautical and 
space activities by the United States industrial base. 
Regulations required to be issued are to include guidance for 
evaluating data from cooperative projects to determine whether 
it is encompassed by the definition of ``technical data;'' 
specification of the period(s) of nondisclosure for different 
types of technical data, including a requirement that the full 
five-year nondisclosure period is available only if the private 
sector share of funding is at least 50%; and identification of 
those experimental, developmental, or research activities that 
could generate technical data protected under this amendment. 
The Committee believes that NASA should study whether the 
regulations should provide for a sliding scale that would 
provide longer periods of protection for larger amounts of 
cost-sharing by industry. Cost-sharing means the expenditure by 
industry of non-federal, private funds directly on the joint 
research activities.

SECTION 255. PROCUREMENT

    This section establishes a program of expedited technology 
procurement to demonstrate how innovative technology concepts 
generated by the private sector can quickly be brought to bear 
upon NASA space missions.
    Subsection (a) creates a procurement demonstration program 
within the Office of Space Access and Technology with a sunset 
provision of ten years. At least one percent of the amounts 
authorized for the Office of Space Access and Technology shall 
be used for innovative technology procurement of space 
hardware, technology or services from the private sector. The 
purpose of this initiative is not to create additional 
requirements for the agency. Instead, the Administrator is 
expected to conduct this pilot program in the context of normal 
procurement activities for which NASA has already identified a 
mission requirement. Several programs, such as the Explorer 
program in space sciences and the New Millennium program, have 
a technology demonstration timeline and flight schedule that 
would seem to accommodate this section.
    The Administrator is given special authority to hire, for 
limited term appointments, persons outside of NASA with 
expertise in relevant innovative technology concepts. In the 
past, NASA has been unreceptive to new solutions or ideas that 
came from outside the agency. This subsection is designed to 
generate creative solutions from the private sector which shall 
be applied to the missions of NASA.
    Subsection (b) calls for a technology procurement 
initiative wherein the Administrator is required to certify 
that no functional equivalent of space hardware, technology, or 
service exists in the commercial sector or other, non-NASA 
federal agency before NASA can proceed with any procurement. 
The Administrator is required to comment in the Commerce 
Business Daily. This subsection is intended to ensure that NASA 
pursues ``off-the-shelf'' technology available from the private 
sector or another non-NASA federal agency before soliciting a 
more expensive one-of-a-kind procurement.

SECTION 256. ADDITIONAL NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE 
ADMINISTRATION FACILITIES

    This section requires the Administrator to notify Congress, 
prior to construction or lease of new facilities, that the 
Administrator reviewed existing NASA or other federally-owned 
facilities and found no such facilities appropriate for the 
intended use.

SECTION 257. PURCHASE OF SPACE SCIENCE DATA

    This section requires NASA, to the maximum extent possible, 
to purchase space science data from the private sector, where 
cost effective, and to accomplish these procurements through a 
competitive bidding process. Reasonable performance 
specifications, rather than design, or construction 
specifications, shall be used to the maximum extent feasible.
    The purpose of this section is to encourage the 
Administrator of NASA to acquire space science data 
commercially. For those data sets with both scientific merit 
and commercial appeal, NASA can spur commercial enterprises 
while acquiring the data faster and cheaper.

SECTION 258. PLAN FOR MISSION TO PLANET EARTH

    The Administrator shall, within six months after the date 
of enactment of this Act, transmit to Congress a report on 
Mission to Planet Earth including the following: (1) an 
analysis of Earth observation systems of other countries to 
include current and historical data sets; (2) an analysis of 
how Department of Defense airborne and space sensor systems 
could be used in MTPE; (3) a plan for infusing advanced 
technology into the MTPE program including milestones and an 
identification of available resources; (4) a plan to solicit 
proposals from the private sector on how to innovatively 
accomplish the most critical research on global climate change; 
(5) an integrated plan for research in the Scientific and MTPE 
enterprises in NASA; (6) a plan for developing metrics and 
milestones to quantify the performance of MTPE; and, (7) a plan 
for the role and structure of EOSDIS.

SECTION 259. ACQUISITION OF EARTH REMOTE SENSING DATA

    The Office of Management and Budget added $50,000,000 to 
NASA's FY97 request for Mission to Planet Earth for the purpose 
of purchasing earth remote sensing data from the private 
sector. The Committee commends OMB and NASA for this effort, 
which is consistent with the Committee's recommendations for 
FY96 and should help reduce MTPE costs. To ensure that data 
purchases are leveraged for the greatest scientific return, the 
Committee directs that NASA conduct a study of mechanisms by 
which the agency can leverage the multi-billion Geographic 
Information Systems/commercial remote sensing industry against 
MTPE science goals.
    The aforementioned study should: (1) describe how NASA can 
evaluate and foster commercial data sources, archiving 
services, applications, and distribution for Mission to Planet 
Earth data; (2) identify means by which NASA can develop 
specific data applications which foster the use of commercial 
data for Mission to Planet Earth; (3) identify mechanisms by 
which NASA can demonstrate the performance of commercial 
solutions to Mission to Planet Earth requirements; (4) provide 
recommendations to Congress on the fundamental scientific 
research and technology development initiatives needed to meet 
Mission to Planet Earth data requirements not met by the U.S. 
private sector; (5) identify means of facilitating feedback 
from NASA to the private sector on opportunities for enhanced 
provision of commercial services that meet Mission to Planet 
Earth requirements; and (6) identify existing policy, 
regulatory, and/or legislative barriers to implementing an 
effective partnership between the private and public sectors in 
meeting Mission to Planet Earth data requirements. This study 
should go into greater detail on commercial solutions for 
Mission to Planet Earth data requirements than the overall 
review of Mission to Planet Earth required in Section 258.
    The Committee notes that NASA's Commercial Remote Sensing 
Program within the Office of Space Access and Technology has 
the most experience in working with the private sector in 
acquiring and applying commercially-generated data and directs 
the NASA Administrator to conduct this $50,000,00 pilot program 
under the management of the Commercial Remote Sensing Program, 
based at Stennis Space Center.

SECTION 260. SHUTTLE PRIVATIZATION

Sectional Analysis and Recommendation

    NASA is currently conducting negotiations for an orderly 
transition from the federal operation, or federal management of 
contracted operation, of space transportation systems to the 
federal purchase of commercial space transportation services. 
As part of these preparations, the Administrator shall plan for 
the potential privatization of the Space Shuttle program after 
the year 2012. Nothing shall preclude NASA from studying, 
designing, developing, or funding upgrades or modifications 
essential to the safe and economical operation of the Space 
Shuttle fleet.
    The Administrator shall conduct a feasibility study of 
implementing the recommendations of the Independent Shuttle 
Management Review Team that NASA transition toward the 
privatization of the space shuttle. The study shall address the 
major policy issues that must be addressed before the shuttle 
program can be privatized which include: whether the federal 
government or the contractor should own the orbiter fleet and 
the associated ground facilities; indemnification by the 
federal government for third party liability; prioritization of 
missions, whether payloads other than NASA payloads should 
allowed to be launched; whether commercial payloads should be 
allowed to be launched; prioritization of federal and no-
federal payloads; whether the public interest requires that 
certain shuttle functions continue to be performed by the 
federal government; and, how much cost savings, if any, will be 
generated by privatization.

Committee View

    In order to realize cost savings in the shuttle program, 
the Committee directs the NASA Administrator to continue to 
move forward with the negotiations with United Space Alliance 
for a single prime contract. Further, the Committee directs 
that the Administrator give priority to continued safe 
operation of space transportation systems.
    The Committee is interested in receiving expert input on 
potential privatization from United Space Alliance. 
Privatization is the next logical step beyond consolidation of 
existing contracts and should be carried out in a manner that 
provides for a safe and efficient transition to private 
enterprise.

SECTION 261. LAUNCH VOUCHER DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM AMENDMENTS

Sectional Analysis

    Launch Voucher Demonstration Program Amendments, Section 
504 of the fiscal year 1993 National Aeronautics and Space 
Administration Act (P.L. 102-588) is amended by striking out 
outdated references to dates and offices.

SECTION 262. PRIVATIZATION OF MICROGRAVITY PARABOLIC FLIGHT 
OPERATIONS

    The Committee directs the privatization of all parabolic 
microgravity flight aircraft operations conducted by or for 
NASA. The Administration is required to issue a request for 
proposals to provide services which meet all or part of the 
microgravity flight needs of NASA Within six months after the 
issuance of the request for proposals, the Administrator shall, 
where cost-effective , award one or more contracts. The 
Committee's intent in adopting this course of action is to 
accelerate the development of a new commercial space-related 
industry and save scarce federal resources. The Committee 
believes that such action is consistent with the desire 
Congress and the NASA Administrator have expressed to spin off 
NASA activities that can be performed by the private sector at 
a lower cost.
    The Committee's intention in privatizing microgravity 
flights is to change NASA from a provider of services to the 
commercial sector into a consumer of services provided by the 
private sector, which presumably will also earn revenue and 
cover overhead expenses from private-sector consumers of such 
services. Prior to discontinuing its own microgravity parabolic 
flights, as required by this section, NASA should report to the 
House Committee on Science and the Senate Committee on 
Commerce, Science, and Transportation any shortfalls in the 
private sector's ability to meet NASA needs, any steps NASA can 
take to help the private sector rectify those shortcomings, and 
the expected budgetary impact of privatizing microgravity 
flights.
    The Administrator may continue to operate the agency's 
parabolic flight aircraft for up to three months following the 
award of a contract in order to retain continuity. However, 
should the agency continue operations past this period, written 
justification must be received by the Committee prior to the 
end of the three months. Further, six months after the 
termination of NASA parabolic flight operations, the 
Administrator shall report to Congress on the cost 
effectiveness of the privatization of this operation.

SECTION 263. UNITARY WIND TUNNEL PLAN ACT OF 1949 AMENDMENTS

Sectional Analysis

    This section reflects the fact that the Unitary Wind Tunnel 
Act of 1949, as amended in 1958 does not include provisions for 
hypersonic facilities. It is further amended to include 
research and engineering centers along with laboratories for 
construction or expansion of wind tunnel facilities covered 
under the Act.

Committee View

    The Committee directs the timely completion of the National 
Facilities Study into the development of advanced aeronautic 
facilities. The Committee also recognizes that NASA and its 
industry partners are aggressively pursuing alternative plans 
which consider fewer new facilities, the utilization of 
existing infrastructure for development of new facilities, and 
increased cost-sharing for their construction. Unfortunately, 
the President's budget does not contain a request for funds for 
new facilities. Before the Committee can favorably consider the 
authorization of funds for new facilities, industry must 
prioritize its long-term research needs with those of NASA, the 
Department of Defense, and other federal agencies, within 
realistic budgetary constraints.

SECTION 264. USE OF ABANDONED AND UNDERUTILIZED BUILDINGS, 
GROUNDS, AND FACILITIES

    In meeting the needs for additional facilities, the 
Administrator, whenever feasible, shall select abandoned and 
underutilized buildings, grounds, and facilities in depressed 
communities that can be converted to NASA facilities at a 
reasonable cost, as determined by the Administrator.

Section 265. COST EFFECTIVENESS CALCULATIONS

    In the past, NASA has compared the programmatic costs of 
doing work in-house with the cost it expects the private sector 
to incur in performing the same activity as a contractor when 
deciding whether it was more effective to perform work inside 
the agency or through contractors outside the agency. In some 
cases, this practice is necessary for estimating how realistic 
contractor bids are when deciding to award a hardware 
procurement contract. However, in cases where the agency is 
procuring space services, such as buying earth remote sensing 
or space science data, such comparisons could artificially 
inflate the cost to the government of acquiring the service, 
since commercial providers of services presumably cover some of 
their overhead costs through business with the private sector 
and the government will only incur the marginal cost of the 
service procured. Therefore, this provision will require the 
government to compare the cost of doing missions itself with 
the cost it is likely to pay as a result of the decision to 
procure services. When procuring services, the government 
should have little interest in the service provider's actual 
total cost, since the government will be entering a market in 
which the price charged to the government should only require 
the service provider to recover some portion of his costs. In 
order to move the government in the direction of acting as a 
commercial buyer, which will save taxpayer dollars, this 
provision directs the government only to examine the price of 
the service procured when comparing the cost of doing work 
internally with the cost of doing work externally.
    The Committee supports the rapid integration of full-cost 
accounting for agency programs in order to provide a fair 
comparison of the costs of doing work internally with the costs 
of procuring a service commercially. Furthermore, full-cost 
accounting by NASA would be an aid in implementing section 265, 
which directs NASA to compare its costs against a commercial 
provider's price when considering out-sourcing work.

SECTION 266. PROCUREMENT OMBUDSMAN

    NASA indicates that it is committed to working with the 
private sector to create commercial space infrastructure 
through cooperative agreements, innovative procurement actions, 
and elimination of duplication of private sector activities. 
Unfortunately, implementing these ideas in practice has proven 
more difficult than creating them in theory. When such 
practices break down, private sector organizations 
(universities, non-profits, and businesses) often must appeal 
directly to the Administrator, Congress, or the White House to 
resolve disputes and improve practices. This ad hoc approach is 
not very efficient, but could be resolved by a procurement 
ombudsman whose role is to serve as a middleman for the agency 
to ensure that it does not inadvertently harm the ability of 
the private sector to finance space infrastructure at private 
expense.

SECTION 267. AUTHORITY TO REDUCE OR SUSPEND CONTRACT PAYMENTS 
BASED ON SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE OF FRAUD

    This section amends 10 USC 2307(h)(8) which deals with 
actions that certain federal agencies can take in the case of 
fraud by a contractor. Currently this section applies to DoD, 
the Department of the Army, the Department of the Navy, and the 
Department of the Air Force. The section allows these entities 
to suspend or reduce contract payments when there is 
substantial evidence that the request of a contractor for 
advance, partial, or progress payment under a contract awarded 
by that agency is based on fraud. This amendment would add NASA 
to the list of agencies that can use this authority.
Title III--United States Fire Administration

    UNITED STATES FIRE ADMINISTRATION FY 1997 BUDGET REQUEST SUMMARY    
                        [In millions of dollars]                        
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        FY 1996     FY 1997     FY 1997 
            ACCOUNT TITLE              Estimate     Request      Auth.  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
United States Fire Administration...     28.491       27.56       27.56 
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sectional Analysis

Section 301, Short Title

    Cites the Act as the ``Fire Administration Authorization 
Act of 1996.''

Section 302, Authorization of Appropriations

    Authorizes a total of $27,560,000 for fiscal year 1997 for 
the programs and activities of the Federal Fire Prevention and 
Control Act of 1974. These programs and activities include 
public education on fire prevention and control; the collection 
and analysis of data relating to fire; research and development 
in fire suppression; the promotion of firefighter health and 
safety; and the administration of the National Fire Academy in 
Emmitsburg, Maryland.

Section 303, Fire Safety Systems in Army Housing

    Section 31 (c)(1)(A) of the Federal Fire Prevention and 
Control Act of 1974 requires the installation of hard-wired 
smoke detectors in all multifamily housing owned or operated by 
the federal government. The Act requires that the conversion to 
hard-wired smoke detectors be completed by October 25, 1995. 
This section amends the 1992 Act to extend the deadline until 
October 25, 1998, for housing controlled by the Department of 
the Army.

Section 304, Successor Fire Safety Standards

    Amends section 29 of the Federal Fire Prevention and 
Control Act of 1974 to update National Fire Protection 
Standards which are no longer current or have been given new 
designations.

Section 305, Termination or Privatization of Functions

    Requires that the Administrator inform the Congress 60 days 
in advance of an effort to terminate or privatize any USFA 
activities or programs.

Section 306, Report on Budgetary Reduction

    Requires that the Administrator provide Congress with a 
detailed report, three months after enactment of the Act, on 
what, if any, programs will be reduced or eliminated in order 
to meet the final appropriation levels.

Committee Views

    During the Basic Research Subcommittee's March 16, 1995 
hearing on the United States Fire Administration's budget 
request, Administrator Brown testified that the USFA was in the 
process of privatizing the Harvard Fellowship Program and the 
Open Learning Program. While these are good training programs 
for the fire service, in these times of decreasing federal 
budgets, programs and activities that can be performed by the 
private sector should be privatized. The Committee supports and 
encourages these privatization efforts by the Administrator.
    Also during the hearing, the Administrator was asked about 
the possibility of privatizing the residential sprinkler 
program. A Subcommittee Member asked specifically if the raw 
testing and product development could be taken over by a 
private entity. She responded that the sprinkler program would 
be examined with those questions in mind.
    The Committee believes that one of the best fire protection 
technologies for the private home is a sprinkler system; 
however, the federal role in the residential sprinkler program 
should end once the technical matters are resolved. It becomes 
the job of the private sector to market sprinkler systems and 
state and local governments to establish and enforce building 
codes. The Committee strongly believes that establishing rules 
and regulations for the implementation of home sprinkler 
systems is a state or local responsibility.

Army Housing

    Early in 1995, the Department of the Army met with 
Committee staff to update their status with the implementation 
of the Fire Administration Authorization Act of 1992, Public 
Law 102-522. This Act established a requirement to replace 
battery operated smoke detectors with hard-wired smoke 
detectors in all federally owned or controlled multi-family 
housing by October 25, 1995. The Army explained that they will 
have approximately 8,500 dwellings of over 96,000 that will not 
be in compliance by the deadline. They subsequently wrote the 
Committee Chairman requesting that an extension be granted 
until October 25, 1998 to fully comply with the law (see 
below).
    The Army has assured the Committee that the additional time 
needed will not place military personnel and their families at 
risk. At the present time, all Army family housing dwelling 
units in the United States have at least one hard-wired smoke 
detector as well as battery operated smoke detectors on each 
floor.
    The Committee appreciates the efforts of the Army to ensure 
that all family housing is safe for military personnel and 
their families, but urges the Army to work diligently to finish 
the installation of hard-wired smoke detectors as soon as 
possible.

Joint Training

    The Oklahoma City bombing incident pointed out the 
importance of fire service management training that includes 
law enforcement and emergency technicians. The incident 
commander was the fire chief and the law enforcement, emergency 
professionals and others reported to him. While every effort 
will be made to prevent additional bombings from occurring in 
the United States, large fires, explosions and natural 
disasters will require that same type of incident management. 
The Committee is aware that a limited amount of this incident 
command management training is currently available at USFA, and 
directs the USFA to increase joint training efforts in order to 
meet such challenges in the future. Moreover, the Committee 
urges the USFA to examine the possibility of decreasing funding 
for lower priority projects in order to accomplish this 
objective.

Merging FEMA Training

    Throughout the United States, emergency and fire services 
are being combined under the management of the fire service. 
More often than not, this is done for reasons of economy and 
efficiency. Within the USFA there is the National Fire Academy 
(NFA), and separately and additionally within FEMA there exists 
a training division with emphasis on emergency management. The 
Committee understands that there is some coordination and 
cooperation between the two training divisions. However, as at 
the state and local level, the American people are demanding a 
reduction in the size of government and elimination of 
redundancy. To that end, it makes sense to again study the 
possibility of combining these two training programs.
    The Committee directs the USFA to prepare a report on 
combining the fire and emergency management programs. The 
report should contain the strengths and weaknesses of each 
policy option presented. The report is to be presented to 
Congress along with the USFA's fiscal year 1998 budget request.

Fire Service Training

    The USFA has an outstanding record of training managers in 
the fire service community. This is a Congressionally mandated 
role for the USFA, and should be conducted so as to not 
duplicate or overlap with the training of state and local 
governments or the private sector. If fire budgets of state or 
local governments are reduced however, it is especially 
important that the USFA training reach all levels of the urban 
and rural fire service community. In order to accomplish this 
task, the Committee urges the USFA to develop more distance 
learning technologies that would reach fire stations 
nationwide. The Committee urges the USFA to direct more 
management training at the mid-level fire chief. Such training 
is lacking throughout the United States.

Title IV--National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

    The following table provides a summary of the amounts 
requested (using the President's March 1996, request) and the 
levels authorized for appropriation by the bill (in the column 
labeled ``FY 1997 Mark''). Also included are current year 
estimates (in the column labeled FY 1996 Conference'') as well 
as comparisons of the Committee recommendation with both 
current year estimates and the 1997 request.

             NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION            
                         [DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS]                         
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Mark Compared  
                                                              With      
                      FY                FY 1997   FY  ------------------
   Account Title     1995     FY 1996            1997  (+ or -)  (+ or -
                    Actual  Conference  Request  Mark   FY 1996   )  FY 
                                                                   1997 
                                                       Estimate  Request
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NATIONAL OCEAN                                                          
 SERVICE:                                                               
Mapping, charting,                                                      
 and geodesy        52,816  56,667      58,916   56,6                   
                                                 63      -4      -2,253 
Observation and                                                         
 assessment         64,659  59,249      65,874   46,0                   
                                                 75    -13,174   -19,799
Ocean and coastal                                                       
 management*        66,811  59,385      64,716   10,9                   
                                                 27    -48,458   -53,789
                   -----------------------------------------------------
Total, National                                                         
 Ocean Service      184,28                                              
                      6     175,301     189,506  113,                   
                                                 665   -61,636   -75,841
                                                                        
OCEANIC AND                                                             
 ATMOSPHERIC                                                            
 RESEARCH:                                                              
Climate and air                                                         
 quality research   105,04                                              
                      2     101,772     122,681  99,2                   
                                                 72    -2,500    -23,409
Atmospheric                                                             
 programs           46,946  43,446      43,766   43,1                   
                                                 82    -264      -584   
Ocean and Great                                                         
 Lakes programs     88,591  80,726      66,101   68,1                   
                                                 08    -12,618   2,007  
                   -----------------------------------------------------
Total, Oceanic and                                                      
 Atmospheric                                                            
 Research           240,57                                              
                      9     225,944     232,548  210,                   
                                                 562   -15,382   -21,986
                                                                        
NATIONAL WEATHER                                                        
 SERVICE:                                                               
Operations and                                                          
 research           513,26                                              
                      9     473,758     471,672  445,                   
                                                 668   -28,090   -26,004
Systems                                                                 
 acquisition        145,42                                              
                      9     132,287     198,994  180,                   
                                                 201   47,914    -18,793
                   -----------------------------------------------------
Total, National                                                         
 Weather Service    658,69                                              
                      8     606,045     670,666  625,                   
                                                 869   19,824    -44,797
                                                                        
NATIONAL                                                                
 ENVIRONMENTAL                                                          
 SATELLITE, DATA                                                        
 AND INFORMATION                                                        
 SERVICE (NESDIS)                                                       
Satellite                                                               
 observing systems  351,74                                              
                      1     430,371     486,933  419,                   
                                                 094   -11,277   -67,839
Environmental data                                                      
 management                                                             
 systems            35,665  41,165      44,898   41,1                   
                                                 65       0      -3,733 
                   -----------------------------------------------------
Total, NESDIS       387,40                                              
                      6     471,536     531,831  460,                   
                                                 259   -11,277   -71,572
                                                                        
PROGRAM SUPPORT:                                                        
Administration and                                                      
 services           74,697  62,206      64,694   60,7                   
                                                 06    -1,500    -3,988 
Marine services     62,011  61,100      56,292   56,2                   
                                                 92    -4,808      0    
Aircraft services   10,453  9,153       10,182   9,15                   
                                                  3       O      -1,029 
                   -----------------------------------------------------
Total, program                                                          
 support            147,16                                              
                      1     132,459     131,168  126,                   
                                                 151   -6,308    -5,017 
                                                                        
NATIONAL MARINE                                                         
 FISHERIES SERVICE                                                      
 (NMFS)*                                                                
Total, NMFS         321,65                                              
                      0     281,642     305,640  240,                   
                                                 000   -41,642   -65,640
General reduction                                                       
 to operations,                                                         
 research and                                                           
 facilities           0         0         0      -11,                   
                                                 147   -11,147   -10,000
                   -----------------------------------------------------
Total, Operations,                                                      
 Research and                                                           
 Facilities         1,939,                                              
                    780     1,892,927   2,061,3                         
                                         59      1,76                   
                                                 5,35                   
                                                  9    -127,568  -296,00
                                                                   0    
Construction        79,883  50,000      37,366   29,5                   
                                                 70    -20,430   -7,796 
NOAA fleet                                                              
 modernization      22,936  8,000       12,000    0    -8,000    -12,000
Other               2,199   2,477         3       0    -2,477     -3    
TOTAL, NOAA         2,044,                                              
                    798     1,953,404   2,110,7                         
                                         28      1,79                   
                                                 4,92                   
                                                  9    -158,475  -315,79
                                                                   9    
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Not in the bill or Committee jurisdiction.                            

Sectional Analysis

Sec. 401. Short Title

    Entitles the title the ``National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
Administration Authorization Act of 1996.''

Sec. 402. Definitions

    Section 2 defines: (1) ``Act of 1890'' as the Act entitled 
``An Act to increase the efficiency and reduce the expenses of 
the Signal Corps of the Army, and to transfer the Weather 
Bureau to the Department of Agriculture''; (2) ``Act of 1947'' 
as the Act entitled ``An Act to define the functions and duties 
of the Coast and Geodetic Survey, and for other purposes''; (3) 
``Act of 1970'' as the Act entitled ``An Act to clarify the 
status and benefits of commissioned officers of the National 
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and for other 
purposes''; (4) ``Administrator'' as the Administrator of the 
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; and (5) 
``Secretary'' as the Secretary of Commerce.

SUBTITLE A.--ATMOSPHERIC, WEATHER, AND SATELLITE PROGRAMS

Sec. 411. National Weather Service

    (a) Authorizes $445,668,000 for fiscal year 1997 for 
operations and research activities of the National Weather 
Service.
    (b) (1)Authorizes $64,991,000 for fiscal year 1997 for 
acquisition of major public warning and forecast systems. None 
of the funds authorized under this subsection can be used for 
the purposes for which funds are authorized under subsection 
(e). None of the funds authorized under this subsection shall 
be used for the purposes for which funds are authorized under 
section 102 (b) of the NOAA Authorization Act of 1992 (Public 
Law 102-567), which authorizes NEXRAD. None of the funds 
authorized for NEXRAD will be expended for a particular NEXRAD 
installation unless: (A) it is identified as a National Weather 
Service NEXRAD installation in the National Implementation Plan 
for modernization of National Weather Service required under 
section 703 of the NOAA Authorization Act of 1992 (Public Law 
102-567); or (B) it is to be used only for spare parts, not as 
an installation at a particular site. (2) Of the amount 
authorized for the National Weather Service, $42,935,000 shall 
be for NEXRAD program management, operations, and maintenance.
    (c) Further clarifies that no funds may be obligated for 
NEXRAD installations not identified in the National 
Implementation Plan for 1996, unless the Secretary certifies 
that such NEXRAD installations can be acquired within the 
authorization for NEXRAD contained in section 102(b) of the 
NOAA Authorization Act of 1992.
    (d) Authorizes $10,056,000 of the sums authorized in 
subsection (b)(1) in fiscal year 1997 for (1) the Automated 
Surface Observing System; and (2) the Automated and Remote 
Automated Meteorological Observing System.
    (e) Authorizes an aggregate of $271,166,000 for all fiscal 
years beginning

after September 30, 1996, to remain available until expended to 
complete the acquisition and deployment of the Advanced Weather 
Interactive Processing System (AWIPS) and NOAA Port and 
associated activities, including program management and 
operations and maintenance through September 30, 1999. No funds 
are authorized to be appropriated unless within 60 days after 
submission of the President's budget request the Secretary 
certifies to Congress that (1) the systems meet the technical 
performance specifications in the system contract as in effect 
on August 11, 1995; (2) the systems can be fully deployed, 
sited, and operational without requiring further appropriations 
beyond amounts authorized; (3) the Secretary does not see any 
delays in the deployment and operations schedule; or the 
Secretary must submit to Congress a report which describes the 
circumstances, the remedial actions undertaken or to be 
undertaken, the effects of such circumstances on the systems 
deployment and operations schedule and systems coverage, and a 
justification for proceeding with the program.
    (f) Authorizes $11,000,000 for the planning, design, and 
land acquisition related to the construction of Weather 
Forecasting Offices.
    (g) Repeals certification requirements under sections 706 
and 707 of the Weather Service Modernization Act (15 U.S.C. 313 
note) for closure of Weather Service offices and conforms the 
Act accordingly.

Sec. 412. Atmospheric Research

    (a) Authorizes $99,272,000 for Climate and Air Quality 
Research, including interannual and seasonal climate research 
and long-term climate and air quality research;
    (b) Authorizes $43,182,000 for Atmospheric Programs, 
including research for developing improved prediction 
capabilities for atmospheric processes, as well as solar-
terrestrial research and services.

Sec. 413. National Environmental Satellite, Data, and 
Information Service

    (a) Authorizes $308,473,000 for Satellite Observing Systems 
including spacecraft procurement, launch, and associated ground 
station systems involving polar orbiting and geostationary 
environmental satellites (GOES), as well as the operation of 
such satellites. None of these funds will be used for GOES I-M, 
authorized under section 105(d) of the NOAA Authorization Act 
of 1992.
    (b) Authorizes $147,664,000 of the sums authorized in 
subsection (a) for the procurement and launch of, and 
supporting ground systems for, Polar Orbiting Environmental 
Satellites (POES) K, L, M, N, and N1.
    (c) Authorizes $70,757,000 of the sums authorized in 
subsection (a) for GOES NEXT to procure up to three additional 
Geostationary Operational Environmental NEXT Satellites 
instruments, and supporting ground systems.
    (d) Authorizes $39,500,000 for the procurement of the 
National Polar Orbiting Operational Environmental Satellite 
System and the procurement of the launching and supporting 
ground systems of such satellites.
    (e) Authorizes $44,898,000 for Environmental Data and 
Information Services including climate data services, 
geophysical data services, and environmental assessment and 
information services.

SUBTITLE B.--MARINE RESEARCH

Sec. 421. National Ocean Service

    (a) Authorizes $36,500,000 for Mapping and Charting 
activities under the Act of 1947.
    (b) Authorizes $20,163,000 for Geodesy activities under the 
Act of 1947.
    (c) (1) Authorizes $11,000,000 for Observation and 
Prediction activities under the Act of 1947; (2) authorizes 
$3,000,000 for Ocean and Earth Science activities.
    (d) (1) Authorizes $2,674,000 to support Estuarine and 
Coastal Assessment activities under the Act of 1947; (2) 
authorizes $21,925,000 for the National Status and Trends, the 
Strategic Environmental Assessment, and the Hazardous Materials 
Response Programs; and (3) authorizes $1,200,000 for the Damage 
Assessment Program.

Sec. 422. Ocean and Great Lakes Research

    (a) Authorizes $14,808,000 for Marine Prediction Research 
activities under the Act of 1947, the Act of 1890, and any 
other law involving those activities.
    (b) Amends Section 212(a) of the National Sea Grant College 
Program Act

(33 U.S.C. 1131(a)) to read as follows:
    ``(a) GRANTS AND CONTRACTS; FELLOWSHIPS.--There are 
authorized to be appropriated to carry out sections 205 and 
208, $34,500,000 for fiscal year 1997.''.
    (c) Authorizes $17,300,000 for the Coastal Ocean Program.

SUBTITLE C.--PROGRAM SUPPORT

Sec. 431. Program Support

    (a) Authorizes $20,000,000 for Executive and Administrative 
activities under the Act of 1970 and any other law involving 
those activities.
    (b) Authorizes $33,000,000 for Central Administrative 
Support activities under the Act of 1970 and any other law 
involving those activities.
    (c) Authorizes $7,706,000 for retired pay of retired 
commissioned officers of NOAA under the Act of 1970.
    (d) (1) Gives the Secretary the authority to contract out 
for the use of vessels to acquire data as necessary. The 
Secretary shall enter into these contracts unless the cost of 
the contract is more than the cost for NOAA to perform the 
service itself, the contract is for more than seven years or 
the data is acquired through a vessel agreement pursuant to 
paragraph (4).
    (2) The Secretary may not enter into any contract for the 
construction, lease-purchase, upgrade, or service life 
extension of any vessel.
    (3) (A) The Secretary is subject to limitations when 
acquiring data under multiyear contracts. (B) The Secretary may 
not enter into a contract pursuant to this paragraph unless the 
Secretary finds that there is a reasonable expectation that 
throughout the contemplated contract period the Secretary will 
request from Congress funding for the contract at the level 
required to avoid contract termination. (C) The Secretary may 
not enter into a contract pursuant to this paragraph unless the 
contract includes: (i) a provision obligating the U.S. to make 
payments for any fiscal year subject to appropriations provided 
in advance for those payments; (ii) a provision that specifies 
the term of effectiveness of the contract; (iii) and 
appropriate provisions in case of any termination of the 
contract that the U.S. shall be liable for the lesser of an 
amount specified in the contract for such a termination or 
amounts that were appropriated before the date of the 
termination for the performance of the contract or for 
procurement of the type of acquisition covered by the contract 
and are unobligated on the date of the termination.
    (4) The Secretary shall use excess capacity of University 
National Oceanographic Laboratory System vessels where 
appropriate.
    (5) Authorizes $56,292,000 for Marine Services activities.
    (e) Authorizes $9,153,000 for Aircraft Service activities 
(including aircraft operations, maintenance, and support) under 
the Act of 1970 and any other law involving those activities.
    (f) Authorizes $7,546,000 for facilities repairs and 
renovations.

SUBTITLE D.--STREAMLINING OF OPERATIONS

Sec. 441. Programs

    (a) The following programs and accounts are terminated:
        (1) The National Undersea Research Program;
        (2) The Fleet Modernization, Shipbuilding, and 
        Construction Account;
        (3) The Charleston, South Carolina, Special Management 
        Plan;
        (4) Chesapeake Bay Observation Buoys;
        (5) Federal/State Weather Modernization Grants;
        (6) The Southeast Storm Research Account;
        (7) National Institute for Environmental Renewal;
        (8) The Lake Champlain Study;
        (9) The Maine Marine Research Center;
        (10) The South Carolina Cooperative Geodetic Survey 
        Account;
        (11) Pacific Island Technical Assistance;
        (12) VENTS program;
        (13) National Weather Service non-Federal, non-wildfire 
        Fire Weather Service;
        (14) National Weather Service Regional Climate Centers;
        (15) National Weather Service Samoa Weather Forecast 
        Office Repair and Upgrade Account;
        (16) Dissemination of Weather Charts (Marine Facsimile 
        Service);
        (17) The Southeast United States Caribbean Fisheries 
        Oceanographic Coordinated Investigations Program;
        (18) National Coastal Research and Development 
        Institute Account; and,
        (19) Global Learning and Observations to Benefit the 
        Environment program.

    (b) The Secretary, no later than 60 days after the date of 
this Act's enactment, will submit a report to Congress 
certifying that all programs listed in subsection (a) will be 
terminated by September 30, 1996.
    (c) (1) Repeals the Sea Grant Knauss Fellowship and 
International Doctoral Fellowship Programs (Section 208(b) of 
the National Sea Grant College Program Act (33 U.S.C. 1127(b)) 
and Section 3 of the Sea Grant Program Improvement Act of 1976 
(33 U.S. C. 1124a)). (2) Conforms the National Sea Grant 
College Program Act to changes made in (c).
    (d) Repeals the NOAA Fleet Modernization Act (33 U.S.C. 851 
note).

Sec. 442. Limitation on Appropriations

    (a) Authorizes no more than $1,765,359,000 to be 
appropriated to the Secretary to carry out all activities under 
NOAA's Operations, Research, and Facilities account.
    (b) Authorizes no more than $20,000,000 of the sums 
appropriated to the Operations, Research, and Facilities 
account for travel and related expenses for NOAA personnel.

Sec. 443. Termination of the Corps of Commissioned Officers

    (a) No commissioned officers are authorized for any fiscal 
year after fiscal year 1996, notwithstanding section 8 of the 
Act of June 3, 1948 (33 U.S.C. 853g).
    (b) Commissioned officers separated from NOAA's active list 
shall be eligible only for severance pay, in accordance with 
the terms and conditions of section 5595 of title 5, United 
States Code.
    (c)(1) Allows commissioned officers subject to subsection 
(a) to transfer to the armed services subject to the approval 
of the Secretary of Defense.
    (2) Allows commissioned officers subject to subsection (a) 
to transfer to the U.S. Coast Guard subject to the approval of 
the Secretary of Transportation.
    (3) Allows commissioned officers subject to subsection (a) 
to be employed by NOAA as a member of the civil service subject 
to the approval of the Administrator of NOAA. However, no 
additional NOAA positions beyond those already in existence may 
be created pursuant to this paragraph.
    (4) Before December 1, 1996, the Administrator must submit 
to Congress a report listing all officers employed by the NOAA 
under paragraph (3), a description of their responsibilities as 
a member of the NOAA Corps, and a description of their 
responsibilities as civil service employees of NOAA.
    (d)(1) Repeals the following provisions of law:
    (A) The Coast and Geodetic Survey Commissioned Officers' 
Act of 1948.
    (B) The Act of February 16, 1929.
    (C) The Act of January 19, 1942.
    (D) Section 9 of Public Law 87-649.
    (E) The Act of May 22, 1917.
    (F) The Act of December 3, 1942.
    (G) Sections 1 through 5 of Public Law 91-621.
    (H) The Act of August 10, 1956.
    (I) The Act of May 18, 1920.
    (J) The Act of July 22, 1947.
    (K) The Act of August 3, 1956.
    (L) All other Acts inconsistent with this subsection.

Following the repeal of provisions under this paragraph, all 
retirement benefits for the NOAA Corps which are in existence 
on September 30, 1996, shall continue to apply to eligible NOAA 
Corps officers and retirees.
    (2) The effective date of the repeals under paragraph (1) 
shall be October 1, 1996.
    (e) As of September 30, 1996, the Office of the NOAA Corps 
of Operations and Commissioned Personnel Center will be 
abolished.

SUBTITLE E.--MISCELLANEOUS

Sec. 451. Weather Data Buoys

    (a) Prohibits unauthorized persons from interfering with 
any National Data Buoy Center weather data buoys.
    (b) Authorizes the Administrator to assess a penalty of not 
more than $10,000 for each violation of this section.
    (c) Authorizes the Administrator to offer and pay rewards 
for information regarding violations of this section.

Sec. 452. Duties of the National Weather Service

    (a) Provides that the Secretary of Commerce, in order to 
protect life and property and enhance the national economy, 
through the National Weather Service, shall be responsible for 
forecasts and shall serve as the sole official source of 
weather warnings; the issue of storm warnings; the collection, 
exchange, and distribution of meteorological, hydrological, 
climatic, and oceanographic data and information; and the 
preparation of hydrometeorological guidance and core forecast 
information.
    (b) Stipulates that the National Weather Service will not 
compete with the private sector when a service is provided or 
can be provided by commercial enterprise unless the Secretary 
finds that the private sector is unwilling or unable to provide 
the service, and the service provides vital weather warnings 
and forecasts for the protection of lives and property of the 
general public.
    (c) Amends the Act of 1890 accordingly.
    (d) Requires that the Secretary submit a report to Congress 
no later than 60 days after the enactment of this Act detailing 
all National Weather Service activities which do not conform to 
the requirements of this section and outlining a timetable for 
their termination.

Sec. 453. National Oceanographic Partnership Program

    (a)(1) Creates a National Oceanographic Partnership Program 
by amending Subtitle C of title 10 of the U.S. Code. (2) Amends 
the subtitle C of title 10, U.S. Code accordingly.
    (b) Not later than December 1, 1996, the Secretary of the 
Navy shall make

appointments required by section 7902(b) of title 10, U.S. 
Code.

    (c) Not later than January 1, 1997, the National Ocean 
Research Leadership Council shall make appointments required by 
section 7904 of title 10, U.S. Code.
    (d) The National Ocean Research Leadership Council shall 
submit to Congress the first annual report no later than March 
1, 1997. The report should include information about the terms 
of office, procedures, and responsibilities of the Ocean 
Research Advisory Panel established by the Council.
    (e) No funds are authorized for the National Oceanographic 
Partnership Program.

Committee Views

    Title IV is consistent with the funding levels required to 
balance the budget by the year 2002. In order to balance the 
federal budget by the year 2002, significant reductions to 
NOAA's budget are necessary. The Committee, therefore, supports 
streamlining NOAA's operations, reducing NOAA's overhead costs 
and eliminating NOAA's low priority programs which do not 
support its principal mission.

Subtitle A, B, C.--AUTHORIZATIONS OF APPROPRIATIONS

NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE

    The Committee has authorized an increase of $19,824,000 for 
the National Weather Service over its FY1996 funding level.
    The Committee supports continuation of the National Weather 
Service's modernization efforts. The Committee believes this 
funding level is sufficient to ensure that modernization 
continues on schedule and expects the National Weather Service 
to make modernization its top priority.
    The Committee has reduced the National Weather Service's 
Operations and Research account by $28 million from the 
Administration's request. The National Weather Service is 
expected to meet these reductions by reducing staff and 
overhead, closing unneeded weather service offices, and 
terminating services the private sector is willing and able to 
provide. The Committee supports the continuation of the 
National Weather Service's modernization efforts and does not 
expect these reductions to delay the Service's modernization 
schedule.
    The Committee emphasizes that completion of modernization 
should be the National Weather Service's top priority. The 
Committee notes that since 1990 the number of National Weather 
Service full time equivalents (FTEs) has increased by 66 
percent--from roughly 3,300 to 5,500. Although these increases 
may have been justified during the modernization process, as 
modernization is completed the Committee expects large savings 
from significant reductions in staff. These savings will not 
occur unless modernization is completed on schedule. The 
Committee notes that the construction of the Weather Forecast 
Offices account has been authorized to the levels requested by 
the Administration and expects these levels to be sufficient to 
meet the Service's current modernization schedule.
    The Committee supports the elimination of the certification 
process required under Sections 706 and 707 of the Weather 
Service Modernization Act (15 U.S.C. 313 note) for closure of 
weather service offices. The Committee rejected an amendment in 
the Full Committee to alter this provision in the bill. The 
Committee notes that NOAA has calculated the savings from 
elimination of the certification process at $7.4 million in 
FY1997 and $35.1 million over five years. The Committee 
believes that the certification process is burdensome, costly, 
and that the $35.1 million could be better spent on weather 
service modernization.
    The Committee supports the National Weather Service's plan 
to downsize the number of its offices by more than half to 118 
modernized offices. This downsizing should occur as rapidly as 
is feasible without jeopardizing the lives and property of the 
communities whose offices must be closed. The Committee notes 
that this downsizing will significantly improve the National 
Weather Service's ability to issue severe weather warnings 
since the new modernized offices, although fewer in number, 
will be better equipped to forecast the weather.
    The Committee further notes that the bill does not 
authorize any additional funds for NEXRAD installations beyond 
those authorized in section 102(b) of the National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration Authorization Act of 1992, and, 
therefore, the cost of any additional NEXRAD installations 
recommended in a future National Implementation Plan would have 
to be borne within the existing authorization. The Committee 
does not support the obligation of funds for any NEXRAD 
installations unless:
    1) The NEXRAD is identified in the National Implementation 
Plan for 1996; or
    2) The NEXRAD is identified in a future National 
Implementation Plan and the Secretary certifies that the NEXRAD 
installations can be acquired within the authorization for 
NEXRAD contained in section 102(b) of the National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration Authorization Act of 1992.
    The Committee supports the Administration's request of 
$10,056,000 for fiscal year 1997 for the Automated Surface 
Observing System and the Automated and Remote Automated 
Meteorological Observing System.
    The Committee has fully authorized the acquisition and 
deployment of the Advanced Weather Interactive Processing 
System (AWIPS) and NOAA Port. The Committee believes the 
complete program authorization of $271,166,000 is sufficient to 
complete the acquisition and deployment of AWIPS and cover all 
associated activities including program management and 
operations and maintenance through the end of fiscal year 1999. 
This figure represents the unexpended balance from the National 
Weather Service's projected total cost for AWIPS of $525 
million.
    Of the total authorized, the Committee recommends an 
appropriations level of $105,000,000 for AWIPS in FY1997. This 
total is more than double the AWIPS appropriation from FY1996.
    The Committee supports the Administration's request of 
$11,000,000 for fiscal year 1996 for the planning, design, and 
land acquisition related to the construction of Weather 
Forecasting Offices.
    The Committee supports the Administration's request for 
NEXRAD systems acquisition of $53,145,000.


             NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION            
                         [DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS]                         
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Mark Compared  
                                                              With      
                      FY                FY 1997   FY  ------------------
   Account Title     1995     FY 1996            1997  (+ or -)  (+ or -
                    Actual  Conference  Request  Mark   FY 1996   )  FY 
                                                                   1997 
                                                       Estimate  Request
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NATIONAL WEATHER                                                        
 SERVICE                                                                
                                                                        
OPERATIONS AND                                                          
 RESEARCH:                                                              
                                                                        
  Local Warnings                                                        
   and Forecasts    321,67                                              
                      1     405,300     409,020  391,                   
                                                 950   -13,350   -17,070
  Modernization                                                         
   and                                                                  
   Restructuring                                                        
   Demonstration                                                        
   and                                                                  
   Implementation                                                       
   (MARDI)          115,94                                              
                      6         0         0       0       0        0    
  Radiosonde                                                            
   replacement      1,339       0       4,255    4,25                   
                                                  5    4,255       0    
  Susquehanna                                                           
   River Basin                                                          
   Flood System     1,250     669       669      669      0        0    
  Agricultural and                                                      
   Fruit Frost                                                          
   Program          2,316       0         0       0       0        0    
  Fire Weather                                                          
   Services         449         0         0       0       0        0    
  Aviation                                                              
   Forecasts        35,596  35,596      35,596   35,5                   
                                                 96       0        0    
  Regional Climate                                                      
   Centers          3,200   2,000         0       0    -2,000      0    
  De-certification/                                                     
   Privatization       na        na     -10,000  -17,                   
                                                 000             -7,000 
                                                                        
                   -----------------------------------------------------
                                                                        
  Subtotal, Local                                                       
   Warnings and                                                         
   Forecasts        481,76                                              
                      7     443,565     439,540  415,                   
                                                 470   -28,095   -24,070
  Central Forecast                                                      
   Guidance         29,015  28,193      29,543   28,1                   
                                                 98       5      -1,345 
  Atmospheric and                                                       
   Hydrological                                                         
   Research         2,487   2,000       2,589    2,00                   
                                                  0       0      -589   
                                                                        
                   -----------------------------------------------------
                                                                        
Total, Operations                                                       
 and Research       513,26                                              
                      9     473,758     471,672  445,                   
                                                 668   -28,090   -26,004
SYSTEMS                                                                 
 ACQUISITIONS:                                                          
  Public Warning                                                        
   and Forecast                                                         
   Systems:                                                             
  Next Generation                                                       
   Weather Radar                                                        
   (NEXRAD)         82,982  53,335      53,145   53,1                   
                                                 45    -190        0    
  Automated                                                             
   Surface                                                              
   Observing                                                            
   System (ASOS)    17,515  16,952      10,056   10,0                   
                                                 56    -6,896      0    
  Advanced Weather                                                      
   Interactive                                                          
   Processing                                                           
   System (AWIPS)/                                                      
   NOAA Port        34,947  50,000      119,800  105,                   
                                                 000   55,000    -14,800
  Computer                                                              
   Facility                                                             
   Upgrades         9,985   12,000      15,993   12,0                   
                                                 00       0      -3,993 
Total, Systems                                                          
 Acquisition        145,42                                              
                      9     132,287     198,994  180,                   
                                                 201   47,914    -18,793
                   -----------------------------------------------------
TOTAL, NATIONAL                                                         
 WEATHER SERVICE    658,69                                              
                      8     606,045     670,666  625,                   
                                                 869   19,824    -44,797
------------------------------------------------------------------------

OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC RESEARCH

    The Committee recommends a $15,382,000 decrease for Oceanic 
and Atmospheric Research from its FY1996 funding level.
    The Committee supports funding the Interannual and Seasonal 
Climate Research which includes climate change research at 
$65,500,000 for fiscal year 1997. This total represents level 
funding from FY1996. The Committee notes that the 
Administration's fiscal year 1997 budget request for global 
climate change research represents more than a 375 percent 
increase from fiscal year 1990. The Committee rejected an 
amendment to increase the funding for the Climate and Air 
Quality Research account to the level requested by the 
Administration by a vote of 25 to 15. The Committee believes 
that the levels included in the bill are sufficient to continue 
NOAA's climate research programs. In order to meet the 
reductions included in the bill, the Committee recommends the 
termination of the VENTS program and the Global Learning and 
Observations to Benefit the Environment program.
    The Committee recommends that NOAA maintain its successful 
collaboration with the extramural research community in 
implementing its climate research program. The Committee 
directs NOAA to allocate at least the same percentage of 
available resources to extramural research in fiscal year 1997 
as it did in fiscal year 1995. The Committee believes that, in 
order to maintain the highest scientific standards, NOAA's 
Office of Global Programs should continue to allocate all of 
its climate research funds through a competitive, peer-reviewed 
process.
    The Committee supports funding atmospheric research at 
$43,182,000 in fiscal year 1997. This level represents a 
decrease of $264,000 from current funding for atmospheric 
programs.

NATIONAL SEA GRANT COLLEGE PROGRAM

    The Committee believes that the National Sea Grant College 
Program's strongest component is the pursuit of scientific 
knowledge of the marine environment. The Committee supports 
making scientific research the primary focus of the National 
Sea Grant College Program. The Committee recommends maintaining 
funding for Sea Grant marine research while reducing funding 
for Sea Grant education, outreach and national program 
administration. By limiting Sea Grant funding to scientific 
research, the Committee has increased funding for Sea Grant 
science by roughly 30 percent.
    The Committee supports termination of both the Dean John A. 
Knauss Marine Policy Fellowship and the Sea Grant International 
Program.

Summary of OAR recommendations

    Details of the Committee's recommendations for OAR are 
outlined in the following table.

             NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION            
                         [DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS]                         
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Mark Compared  
                                                              With      
                      FY                FY 1997   FY  ------------------
   Account Title     1995     FY 1996            1997  (+ or -)  (+ or -
                    Actual  Conference  Request  Mark   FY 1996   )  FY 
                                                                   1997 
                                                       Estimate  Request
------------------------------------------------------------------------
OCEANIC AND                                                             
 ATMOSPHERIC                                                            
 RESEARCH (OAR)                                                         
CLIMATE AND AIR                                                         
 QUALITY RESEARCH:                                                      
  Interannual &                                                         
   Seasonal                                                             
   Climate                                                              
   Research/and                                                         
   related Global                                                       
   Climate Change   64,770  65,500      76,712   65,5                   
                                                 00       0      -11,212
  Long-Term                                                             
   Climate and Air                                                      
   Quality                                                              
   Research         27,772  27,272      29,402   27,2                   
                                                 72       0      -2,130 
  Vents               0     2,500         0       0    -2,500      0    
  High Performance                                                      
   Computing        5,500   6,500       9,567    6,50                   
                                                  0       0      -3,067 
  Globe             7,000       0       7,000     0       0      -7,000 
                   -----------------------------------------------------
Total, Climate and                                                      
 Air Quality                                                            
 Research           105,04                                              
                      2     101,772     122,681  99,2                   
                                                 72    -2,500    -23,409
                                                                        
ATMOSPHERIC                                                             
 PROGRAMS:                                                              
  Weather Research  37,113  33,613      33,905   33,6                   
                                                 13       0      -292   
  Wind Profiler     4,350   4,350       4,350    4,35                   
                                                  0       0        0    
                   -----------------------------------------------------
  Subtotal,                                                             
   Weather                                                              
   Research         41,463  37,963      38,255   37,9                   
                                                 63       0      -292   
  Solar-                                                                
   Terrestrial                                                          
   Services and                                                         
   Research         5,483   5,483       5,511    5,21                   
                                                  9    -264      -292   
                   -----------------------------------------------------
Total, Atmospheric                                                      
 Programs           46,946  43,446      43,766   43,1                   
                                                 82    -264      -584   
                                                                        
OCEAN AND GREAT                                                         
 LAKES PROGRAMS:                                                        
  Marine                                                                
   Prediction                                                           
   Research         15,175  15,026      14,808   14,8                   
                                                 08    -218        0    
  Southeast                                                             
   Fisheries                                                            
   Oceanographic                                                        
   Coordinated                                                          
   Investigations   450       400         0       0    -400        0    
  Lake Champlain                                                        
   Study            150         0         0       0       0        0    
  Pacific Island                                                        
   Technical                                                            
   Assistance       190         0         0       0       0        0    
  Vents             2,496       0       2,500     0       0      -2,500 
                   -----------------------------------------------------
Total, Marine                                                           
 Prediction                                                             
 Research           18,461  15,426      17,308   14,8                   
                                                 08    -618      -2,500 
                                                                        
SEA GRANT/COP:                                                          
  Sea Grant                                                             
   College Program  51,698  53,300      48,793   36,0                   
                                                 00    -17,300   -12,793
  Sea Grant-Oyster                                                      
   Disease          1,500       0         0       0       0        0    
  National Coastal                                                      
   R&D; Institute    1,000       0         0       0       0        0    
                   -----------------------------------------------------
  Subtotal, Sea                                                         
   Grant            54,198  53,300      48,793   36,0                   
                                                 00    -17,300   -12,793
  Subtotal,                                                             
   Coastal Ocean                                                        
   Program            O         0         0      17,3                   
                                                 00      NA       NA    
                   -----------------------------------------------------
Total, Sea Grant/                                                       
 COP                54,198  53,300      48,793   53,3                   
                                                 00       0      4,507  
                                                                        
UNDERSEA RESEARCH                                                       
 PROGRAM:                                                               
Total, Undersea                                                         
 Research Program   15,932  12,000        0       0    -12,000     0    
                   -----------------------------------------------------
Total, Ocean &                                                          
 Great Lakes                                                            
 Programs           88,591  80,726      66,101   68,1                   
                                                 08    -12,618   2,007  
                   -----------------------------------------------------
TOTAL, OCEANIC AND                                                      
 ATMOSPHERIC                                                            
 RESEARCH           240,57                                              
                      9     225,944     232,548  210,                   
                                                 562   -15,382   -21,986
------------------------------------------------------------------------

NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL SATELLITE, DATA, AND INFORMATION SERVICE

    The Committee recommends a decrease of $11,277,000 to the 
FY1996 appropriations level for the National Environmental 
Satellite, Data, and Information Service.
    The Committee continues to believe the current NESDIS 
budget is not sustainable and that the NESDIS budget over the 
next six years will have to decline. The Committee therefore 
does not support any NESDIS activities which could lead to 
significant cost increases in the future. Such activities 
include the possibility of flying a three GOES satellite 
configuration in space.
    The Committee recommends level funding for the National 
Polar Orbiting Operational Satellite System (NPOESS). The 
NPOESS program has been delayed, and a substantial reduction 
from the Administration's request of $78 million is clearly 
warranted. The Committee believes that the $39,500,000 
authorization provided in the bill is sufficient for the 
program in FY1997. The Committee, however, has yet to receive 
adequate justification for even this level of funding from 
NOAA. Unless this situation is remedied, the Committee may 
reevaluate the need to spend almost $40 million on NPOESS.
    The Committee continues to support funding three, not four, 
new GOES I-M series ``clones.'' The bill authorizes $70,757,000 
for fiscal year 1997 to initiate construction of these 
satellites.

Summary of NESDIS recommendations

    Details of the Committee's recommendations for NESDIS are 
outlined in the following table.

             NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION            
                         [DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS]                         
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Mark Compared  
                                                              With      
                      FY                FY 1997   FY  ------------------
   Account Title     1995     FY 1996            1997  (+ or -)  (+ or -
                    Actual  Conference  Request  Mark   FY 1996   )  FY 
                                                                   1997 
                                                       Estimate  Request
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NATIONAL                                                                
 ENVIRONMENTAL                                                          
 SATELLITE, DATA                                                        
 AND INFORMATION                                                        
 SERVICE (NESDIS)                                                       
SATELLITE                                                               
 OBSERVING                                                              
 SYSTEMS:                                                               
  Polar Spacecraft                                                      
   and Launching    146,22                                              
                      8     174,765     147,644  147,                   
                                                 664   -27,101    20    
  Polar                                                                 
   Convergence/                                                         
   Joint Program                                                        
   Office           16,000  39,500      78,200   39,5                   
                                                 00       0      -38,700
  Geostationary                                                         
   Spacecraft and                                                       
   Launching        132,24                                              
                      2     153,106     205,922  181,                   
                                                 378   28,272    -24,544
  Ocean Remote                                                          
   Sensing          6,000   4,000       1,552    1,55                   
                                                  2    -2,448      0    
  Environmental                                                         
   Observing                                                            
   Services         51,271  49,000      53,615   49,0                   
                                                 00       0      -4,615 
  LandSat                                                               
   Operations         0     10,000        0       0    -10,000     0    
                   -----------------------------------------------------
  Total, Satellite                                                      
   Observing                                                            
   Systems          351,74                                              
                      1     430,371     486,933  419,                   
                                                 094   -11,277   -67,839
                                                                        
ENVIRONMENTAL DATA                                                      
 MANAGEMENT                                                             
 SYSTEMS:                                                               
  Data and                                                              
   Information                                                          
   Services         24,365  29,865      30,098   29,8                   
                                                 65       0      -233   
  Environmental                                                         
   Services Data                                                        
   and Information                                                      
   Management                                                           
   (ESDIM)          11,300  11,300      14,800   11,3                   
                                                 00       0      -3,500 
                   -----------------------------------------------------
  Total,                                                                
   Environmental                                                        
   Data Management                                                      
   Systems          35,665  41,165      44,898   41,1                   
                                                 65       0      -3,733 
                   -----------------------------------------------------
TOTAL, NESDIS       387,40                                              
                      6     471,536     531,831  460,                   
                                                 259   -11,277   -71,572
------------------------------------------------------------------------

PROGRAM SUPPORT

    The Committee has reduced the Program Support accounts to 
reflect the reduced level of effort associated with reductions 
to other NOAA accounts. The Committee expects NOAA to 
streamline its administrative activities and reduce overhead 
and staff to meet these new funding levels.
    The Marine Services account has historically been used to 
fund personnel to pilot NOAA's fleet. The Committee supports 
termination of the NOAA fleet at the earliest feasible date and 
the use of the Marine Services account for contracting for data 
and days-at-sea.

Summary of Program Support recommendations

    Details of the Committee's recommendations for Program 
Support are outlined in the following table.

             NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION            
                         [DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS]                         
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Mark Compared  
                                                              With      
                      FY                FY 1997   FY  ------------------
   Account Title     1995     FY 1996            1997  (+ or -)  (+ or -
                    Actual  Conference  Request  Mark   FY 1996   )  FY 
                                                                   1997 
                                                       Estimate  Request
------------------------------------------------------------------------
PROGRAM SUPPORT:                                                        
ADMINISTRATION AND                                                      
 SERVICES:                                                              
Executive                                                               
 direction and                                                          
 administration     27,288  21,500      21,009   20,0                   
                                                 00    -1,500    -1,009 
Central                                                                 
 administrative                                                         
 support            39,703  33,000      35,573   33,0                   
                                                 00       0      -2,573 
Retired pay                                                             
 commissioned                                                           
 officers           7,706   7,706       8,112    7,70                   
                                                  6       0      -406   
                   -----------------------------------------------------
Total,                                                                  
 administration                                                         
 and services       74,697  62,206      64,694   60,7                   
                                                 06    -1,500    -3,988 
MARINE SERVICES     62,011  61,100      56,292   56,2                   
                                                 92    -4,808      0    
AIRCRAFT SERVICES:                                                      
Aircraft services   9,153   9,153       10,182   9,15                   
                                                  3       0      -1,029 
Critical safety                                                         
 and                                                                    
 instrumentation    1,300       0         0       0       0        0    
Total, aircraft                                                         
 services           10,453  9,153       10,182   9,15                   
                                                  3       0      -1,029 
                   -----------------------------------------------------
TOTAL, PROGRAM                                                          
 SUPPORT            147,16                                              
                      1     132,459     131,168  126,                   
                                                 151   -6,308    -5,017 
------------------------------------------------------------------------

NON-ORF Accounts

    The Committee recommends the following specific changes to 
the fiscal year 1996 request for Non-ORF accounts:
    The Committee believes NOAA does not need its own fleet, 
and that the non-profit and the private sectors are capable of 
supplying NOAA with the data and/or days-at-sea its missions 
require.
    The NOAA fleet is aging and already requires substantial 
repair. The Committee notes that a new NOAA fleet would cost 
over $1 billion. Such an expenditure is inconsistent with 
efforts to balance the budget by 2002. In light of this fact, 
the Committee believes that the only cost-effective alternative 
available to NOAA is the use of the University-National 
Oceanographic Laboratory System (UNOLS) and private vessels. 
The Committee sees no reason to extend the life of the NOAA 
fleet by continuing to build, retrofit, and conduct major 
repairs on NOAA vessels. The Committee therefore supports a 
moratorium on the construction and repairs-to-extend (RTEs) of 
NOAA vessels. The Committee further supports retiring the rest 
of the NOAA fleet at the earliest possible date.
    The Committee recommends that the Secretary of Commerce, in 
consultation with the Inspector General, develop a plan to 
dispose of the assets of the NOAA fleet at the earliest date 
practicable and in a manner that maximizes return to the United 
States Treasury. The Secretary may consider the benefits of 
donating vessels to existing UNOLS institutions if the 
institutions can meet NOAA's research needs in a more cost-
effective manner than the current NOAA-owned and operated 
fleet.

Summary of Non-ORF recommendations

    Details of the Committee's recommendations for Non-ORF 
accounts are outlined in the following table.

             NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION            
                         [DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS]                         
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Mark Compared  
                                                              With      
                      FY                FY 1997   FY  ------------------
   Account Title     1995     FY 1996            1997  (+ or -)  (+ or -
                    Actual  Conference  Request  Mark   FY 1996   )  FY 
                                                                   1997 
                                                       Estimate  Request
------------------------------------------------------------------------
  NON-ORF                                                               
   ACCOUNTS:                                                            
CONSTRUCTION:                                                           
NWS modernization                                                       
 and WFO                                                                
 maintenance        20,226  20,300      11,000   11,0                   
                                                 00    -9,300      0    
Facilities Repairs                                                      
 and Renovations    5,003   7,000       7,546    7,54                   
                                                  6     546        0    
New Construction    48,675  10,700      7,796     0    -10,700   -7,796 
Environmental                                                           
 compliance*        5,979   12,000      11,024   11,0                   
                                                 24    -976        0    
                   -----------------------------------------------------
Total Construction  79,883  50,000      37,366   29,5                   
                                                 70    -20,430   -7,796 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Not in bill or Committee jurisdiction.                                 

SUBTITLE D.--STREAMLINING OF OPERATIONS TERMINATIONS

    The Committee supports terminating the following programs 
and accounts:
    (1) The National Undersea Research Program.
    The Committee notes that the Administration did not request 
funding for this program and considers it a low priority for 
NOAA. The Committee supports the Administration's position.
    (2) The Fleet Modernization, Shipbuilding, and Construction 
Account.
    As noted above, the Committee supports termination of the 
NOAA fleet modernization effort.
    (3) The Charleston, South Carolina, Special Management 
Plan.
    The Committee does not support funding this program.
    (4) Chesapeake Bay Observation Buoys.
     The Committee does not support funding this program.
    (5) Federal/State Weather Modernization Grants.
    The Committee does not support funding this program.
    (6) The Southeast Storm Research Account.
    The Committee does not support funding this program.
    (7) National Institute for Environmental Renewal.
    The Committee does not support funding this program.
    (8) The Lake Champlain Study.
    The Committee does not support funding this program.
    (9) The Maine Marine Research Center.
    The Committee does not support funding this program.
    (10) The South Carolina Cooperative Geodetic Survey 
Account.
    The Committee does not support funding this program.
    (11) Pacific Island Technical Assistance.
    The Committee does not support funding this program.
    (12) The VENTS program.
    The Committee does not support funding this program.
    (13) National Weather Service non-Federal, non-wildfire 
Fire Weather Service.
    In keeping with the Committee's support for eliminating all 
specialized National Weather Service services which the private 
sector is willing and able to conduct, the Committee supports 
the Administration's proposal to terminate this program.
    (14) National Weather Service Regional Climate Centers.
    The Committee supports the Administration's proposal to 
terminate this program.
    (15) National Weather Service Samoa Weather Forecast Office 
Repair and Upgrade Account.
    The Committee does not support funding this program.
    (16) Dissemination of Weather Charts (Marine Facsimile 
Service).
    In keeping with the Committee's support for eliminating all 
specialized National Weather Service services which the private 
sector is willing and able to conduct, the Committee supports 
the Administration's proposal to terminate this program.
    (17) The Southeast United States Caribbean Fisheries 
Oceanographic Coordinated Investigations Program.
    The Committee does not support funding this program.
    (18) National Coastal Research and Development Institute 
Account.
    The Committee does not support funding this program.
    (19) The Global Learning and Education to Benefit the 
Environment program (GLOBE).
    The Committee feels GLOBE is not a priority for NOAA and 
should not be funded in NOAA's budget.

LIMITATION ON APPROPRIATIONS

    The Committee recommends a general reduction to NOAA's 
travel budget of $11,147,000. The Committee supports reducing 
NOAA's total travel budget for FY 1997 to $20,000,000.
    The Committee recommends a ceiling on the NOAA Operations, 
Research, and Facilities (ORF) account of $1,765,359,000 for 
fiscal year 1997. This total is in keeping with the necessary 
reductions in order to achieve a balanced budget by the year 
2002.

REDUCTION IN THE COMMISSIONED OFFICER CORPS

    The Committee supports elimination of the NOAA Corps. The 
Committee supports eliminating the Corps after FY1996. The 
Committee also recommends that the Secretary not grant 
severance pay to any Corps officers who are rehired as civilian 
employees by NOAA. The Committee believes NOAA should only re-
hire NOAA Corps officers if they are the best qualified 
applicants for the job.

SUBTITLE E.--MISCELLANEOUS

DUTIES OF THE NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE

    The Committee supports privatizing National Weather Service 
specialized weather services. The Committee recommends that the 
National Weather Service cease to provide services which the 
private sector is willing and able to provide. The Committee 
also recommends that the Secretary of Commerce develop criteria 
for determining which services should be privatized.
    The Committee notes that the National Weather Service has a 
good working relationship with the commercial weather service 
sector. The Committee supports the continuation of this close 
working relationship. The Committee recommends that the 
National Weather Service continue its practice of collecting, 
exchanging and distributing weather data and information in 
real time and in a non-discriminatory manner.
    The Committee notes that the National Weather Service is 
the sole official source of weather warnings. The Committee 
supports the National Weather Service's role in providing 
severe weather warnings. The Committee further notes, however, 
that this designation should in no way preclude private weather 
forecasters from issuing weather forecasts.

National Oceanographic Partnership Program

    The Committee supports the increase of defense-related 
assets including data and technology to improve the state of 
U.S. oceanographic research. Further, the Committee supports 
increased cooperation and coordination among academia, the 
Federal Government, both defense and non-defense related 
agencies, and private industry in their respective efforts to 
study and understand the ocean environment.

REPORTS TO CONGRESS

    Under section 441 (b), the Secretary, no later than 60 days 
after the date of this Act's enactment, will submit a report to 
Congress certifying that all programs listed in subsection (a) 
of section 441, Program Terminations, will be terminated by 
September 30, 1996.
    Under section 443 (c)(4), the Administrator shall, before 
December 1, 1996, transmit to Congress a report listing all 
NOAA Corps Officers retained by NOAA as civilian employees, 
along with a description of their responsibilities as both NOAA 
Corps Officers and in their new civilian capacity.
    Under Section 452 (d), the Secretary is required to submit 
a report to Congress no later than 60 days after the enactment 
of this Act detailing all National Weather Service activities 
which do not conform to the requirements of section 452, Duties 
of the National Weather Service, and outline a timetable for 
their termination.
    Under Section 453(a), the National Ocean Research 
Leadership Council shall submit a report to Congress by March 1 
of each year outlining the following:
    (1) a description of the program activities of the previous 
fiscal year;
    (2) an outline of the programs activities during the 
current fiscal year;
    (3) a summary of projects continued from past fiscal years;
    (4) a description of the role of the program with any 
federal interagency coordinating entities; and
    (5) a review of the budgetary requirements for the program 
in the next fiscal year.
    Under Section 453(a), the Ocean Research Partnership 
Coordinating Group shall submit to Congress by February 1 of 
each year a report on the National Oceanographic Partnership 
Program.
    Under section 453 (d), the National Ocean Research 
Leadership Council shall submit to Congress the first annual 
report no later than March 1, 1997. The report should include 
information about the terms of office, procedures, and 
responsibilities of the Ocean Research Advisory Panel 
established by the Council.

Title V--Environmental Protection Agency

    The Committee supports the following funding levels for the 
programs and activities of EPA's Office of Research and 
Development:

                    Proposed Authorization Figures for the EPA Science and Technology Account                   
                                             [Dollars in Thousands]                                             
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Estimated                    Mark V              
                 Account Title                      FY1996       FY1996    FY1997  FY1997   FY1997     Mark V   
                                                Authorization     App.    Request   Mark   Request   FY1996 App.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, AIR RESEARCH                             96,300.9       95,000.0   88,163.                               
                                                                            2      75,519                       
                                                                                    .9     -12,643    -19,480.1 
                                                                                                                
  Air Quality Research                          93,915.2       75,000.0   69,723.                               
                                                                            5      74,119                       
                                                                                    .9     4,396         -880.1 
    Criteria Air                                57,145.1                  26,782.                               
                                                                            2      41,000                       
                                                                                    .0     14,218               
    Air Toxics                                  6,319.60                  9,102.0  12,000                       
                                                                                    .0     2,898                
    Indoor Air                                       0                    3,664.2    0     -3,664               
    Infrastructure                              26,803.8                  30,175.                               
                                                                            1      21,119                       
                                                                                    .9     -9,055               
                                                                                                                
  Global Climate Change                         2,385.7        20,000.0   18,439.                               
                                                                            7      1,400.                       
                                                                                     0     -17,040    -18,600.0 
    Stratospheric Ozone                                                                                         
    Depletion                                   2,385.7                   1,256.5  1,400.                       
                                                                                     0     144                  
    Climate Change Action Plan                     0.0                    6,200.0  0.0     -6,200               
    Climate C. Research/Infrastruct.                 0                    10,983.                               
                                                                            2      0.0     -10,983              
                                                                                                                
WATER QUALITY RESEARCH                          21,243.1       20,000.0   26,293.                               
                                                                            8      26,294                       
                                                                                    .0       0          6,294.0 
  Ecosystem Protection                          9,188.9                   12,007.                               
                                                                            7      12,007                       
                                                                                    .7       0                  
  Infrastructure                                12,054.2                  14,286.                               
                                                                            1      14,286                       
                                                                                    .1       0                  
                                                                                                                
DRINKING WATER RESEARCH                         20,652.4       20,000.0   26,593.                               
                                                                            7      26,593                       
                                                                                    .7       0          6,593.7 
  Drinking Water                                10,376.5                  12,156.                               
                                                                            6      13,361                       
                                                                                    .6     1,205                
  Infrastructure                                10,275.9                  14,437.                               
                                                                            1      13,232                       
                                                                                    .1     -1,205               
                                                                                                                
PESTICIDE RESEARCH                              13,345.2       12,000.0   20,632.                               
                                                                            0      20,632                       
                                                                                    .0       0          8,632.0 
  Ecosystem Protection                             0.0                    4,232.9  4,232.                       
                                                                                     9       0                  
  Human Health Protection                       5,531.1                   6,270.8  6,887.                       
                                                                                     3     617                  
  Special Envir. Problems                       1,243.3                   0.0      0.0       0                  
  Infrastructure                                6,152.4                   10,128.                               
                                                                            3      9,511.                       
                                                                                     8     -617                 
                                                                                                                
TOXIC SUBSTANCES RESEARCH                       11,053.9       14,000.0   12,341.                               
                                                                            5      12,341                       
                                                                                    .5       0         -1,658.5 
  Ecosystem Protection                           974.4                    2,982.8  2,982.                       
                                                                                     8       0                  
  Human Health Project                          2,941.2                   2,279.7  2,400.                       
                                                                                     0     120                  
  Special Envir. Problems                       1,113.0                   220.9    220.9   220.9              0 
  Infrastructure                                6,025.3                   6,858.1  6,738.                       
                                                                                     1     -120                 
                                                                                                                
HAZARDOUS WASTE RESEARCH                        21,020.2       2O,000.0   10,343.                               
                                                                            9      12,000                       
                                                                                    .0     1,656       -8,000.0 
  Waste/Site/Risk                               1,430.8                   1,498.7  3,154.                       
                                                                                     8     1,656                
  Waste Management                              8,868.1                   3,718.1  3,718.                       
                                                                                     1       0                  
  New Technology                                 678.8                    173.1    173.1     0                  
  Infrastructure                                10,042.5                  4,954.0  4,954.                       
                                                                                     0       0                  
                                                                                                                
Total, MULTIMEDIA                               240,943.2      265,000.0  300,837                               
                                                                           .0      256,34                       
                                                                                   6.5     -44,491     -8,653.5 
                                                                                                                
  Multimedia Research                           158,656.8      210,000.0  211,786                               
                                                                           .2      174,06                       
                                                                                   0.1     -37,726    -35,939.9 
  Ecosystem Protection                          47,351.7                  58,887.                               
                                                                            2      58,887                       
                                                                                    .2       0                  
  New Technologies                              12,610.0                  40,741.                               
                                                                            3      13,121                       
                                                                                    .9     -27,619              
  Human Health Project                          21,983.0                  16,065.                               
                                                                            4      17,000                       
                                                                                    .0     935                  
  Special Environmental Prob.                   1,706.8                   7,137.1  8,000.                       
                                                                                     0     863                  
  Infrastructure                                75005.3                   88,955.                               
                                                                            2      77,051                       
                                                                                    .0     -11,904              
                                                                                                                
  Headquarters Infrastructure                   9,254.8        7,000.0    10,837.                               
                                                                            2      9,254.                       
                                                                                     8     -1,582       2,254.8 
  Lab and Field Expenses                        73,031.6       48,000.0   78,213.                               
                                                                            6      73,031                       
                                                                                    .6     -5,182      25,031.6 
                                                                                                                
MISSION & POLICY MANAGEMENT                     6,399.3        7,500.0    8,184.7  6,399.                       
                                                                                     0     -1,786      -1,101.0 
  Infrastructure                                6,399.3                   8,184.7  6,399.                       
                                                                                     0     -1,786               
                                                                                                                
Environmental Research Labs                           na       51,000.0   85,358.                               
                                                                            2      51,000                       
                                                                                    .0     -34,358          0.0 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY*                    430,958.2      504,500.0  578,748                               
                                                                           .0      487,12                       
                                                                                   6.6     -91,621    -17,373.4 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LUST                                             769.4         650.0      681.0    769.0    88            119.0 
  Waste Management                               589.5                    500.0    601.2   101                  
  New Technologies                                12.1                    0.0      0.0       0                  
  Infrastructure                                 167.8                    181.3    167.8   -14                  
                                                                                                                
OIL SPILL RESEARCH                              2,076.9        1,500.0    1,031.0  2,076.                       
                                                                                     9     1,046          576.9 
  Waste Management                                    na                  900.1    1,850.                       
                                                                                     0     950                  
  Infrastructure                                      na                  131.0    226.9    96                  
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Excluding Superfund which will be authorized as part of Superfund Reauthorization.                            

Sectional Analysis

Sec. 501. Short Title

    Cites the Act as the ``Environmental Research, Development, 
and Demonstration Authorization Act of 1996''.

Sec. 502. Definitions

    Defines: (1) ``Administrator'' as the Administrator of the 
Environmental Protection Agency; (2) ``Agency'' as the 
Environmental Protection Agency; and, (3) ``Assistant 
Administrator'' as the Assistant Administrator for Research and 
Development of the Agency.

Sec. 503. Authorization of Appropriations

    (a) Authorizes $487,126,000 for Science and Technology 
activities, including program management and support, in the 
areas specified in subsection (b).
    (b) Of the sum authorized in subsection (a) there are 
authorized to be appropriated the following:
    (1) $74,119,900 for air related research;
    (2) $1,400,000 for global change research;
    (3) $26,294,00 for water quality related research;
    (4) $26,593,000 for drinking water related research;
    (5) $12,341,500 for toxic substances related research;
    (6) $73,031,600 for lab and field expenses;
    (7) $9,254,800 for headquarters expenses of the Office of 
Research and Development;
    (8) $174,060,100 for multimedia related research expenses 
of which $5,000,000 shall be for graduate student fellowships;
    (9) $6,399,000 for program management expenses;
    (10) $20,632,000 for pesticide related research;
    (11) $12,000,000 for research related to hazardous waste; 
and
    (12) $51,000,000 for environmental research laboratories.
    (c) Additionally authorizes:
    (1) $2,076,900 for oil pollution related research; and
    (2) $769,000 for research related to leaking underground 
storage tanks.
    (d) No funds are authorized to be appropriated for:
    (1) The Environmental Technology Initiative;
    (2) The Climate Change Action Plan;
    (3) Indoor Air Research;
    (4) North Dakota Center for Air Toxic Metals Research;
    (5) Drinking water research conducted by the American Water 
Works Association Research Foundation, other than amounts 
awarded through a competitive process;
    (6) The Water Environmental Research Foundation;
    (7) The National Urban Air Toxics Research Center;
    (8) The Gulf Coast Hazardous Substances Research Center;
    (9) Urban waste management research at the University of 
New Orleans, other than amounts awarded through a competitive 
process;
    (10) The Resources and Agricultural Policy Systems Program 
at Iowa State University; or
    (11) The Oil Spill Remediation Research Center.

Sec. 504. Scientific Research Review

    (a) The Assistant Administrator for Office of Research and 
Development shall be assigned the duties of:
    (1) developing a strategic plan for scientific and 
technical activities throughout the Agency;
    (2) integrating that strategic plan into ongoing Agency 
planning activities; and
    (3) reviewing all Agency research to ensure the research 
(A) is of high quality, and (B) is not duplicative of any other 
research being conducted by the Agency.
    (b) Requires the Assistant Administrator to submit an 
annual report to the Administrator of EPA and to Congress 
detailing:
    (1) all Agency research the Assistant Administrator finds 
is not of sufficiently high quality, and
    (2) all Agency research the Assistant Administrator finds 
duplicates other Agency research.

Sec. 505. Graduate Student Fellowships

    Directs the Administrator of the EPA to ensure that any 
fellowship award to a student selected after the enactment date 
of this Act is used only to support research that would further 
the missions of the Office of Research and Development in 
fields in which there exists, or is projected to exist, a 
shortage of scientists.

Sec. 506. Science Advisory Board

    (a) Requires the Science Advisory Board (SAB) to submit to 
Congress and to the Administrator a report on the Board's views 
on proposed research programs as described in the President's 
budget for research, development and demonstration activities 
of the EPA.
    (b) Requires the SAB to select and conduct evaluations of 
planned research,

development, and demonstration activities of the EPA. The areas 
of selection should be selected by the SAB in consultation with 
the Administrator of the Office of Research and Development, 
other Agency programs, and appropriate committees of Congress. 
A report of these evaluations should be submitted to the 
Administrator and such committees. The Administrator shall 
respond to the report within 60 days after it has been 
submitted.
    (c) Requires the SAB to annually review research activities 
of the EPA and include results in the report required by 
subsection (a).
    (d) Requires the Administrator to submit to Congress any 
report required to be submitted to the Administrator by the 
SAB. Such submissions shall be made no later than 60 days after 
the Administrator receives the report.

Committee Views

SECTION 503--AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS

    The Committee supports an overall funding level of 
$487,162,600 for the Science and Technology Appropriations 
account. This level is in keeping with the levels necessary to 
balance the budget by the year 2002.
    The Committee supports funding for the Office of Research 
and Development's scientific research. The reductions taken 
from the Office of Research and Development's FY 1997 request, 
as outlined in the chart above, fall in large part on the 
office's infrastructure. The Committee feels that the Office of 
Research and Development should be able to maintain the same 
ratio of research funding to infrastructure funding as it 
maintained in FY 1995. The Committee further supports funding 
research related to EPA's regulatory mission, and will not 
support research in areas EPA does not regulate now nor is 
likely to regulate in the future.

Air-Related Research

    The Committee has increased criteria air pollution research 
funding by $14,218,000 from the requested level. This increase 
is intended to allow EPA to improve the level of science used 
to support its promulgation of regulations under the Clean Air 
Act Amendments of 1990. Specifically, the Committee notes that 
significant gaps appear to exist in the science behind 
implementation of the current national air quality standard for 
ozone and particulate matter (PM 10).
    For particulate matter, the Committee notes that EPA is 
facing a 1997 deadline for promulgation of an ambient standard. 
The Committee is concerned that the current level of scientific 
knowledge on PM10 is insufficient to support a standard which 
is likely to have significant costs to the economy. The 
Committee encourages the Office of Research and Development to 
increase its research efforts in this area.
    The Committee does not support EPA's research on indoor 
air. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration 
regulates indoor air in the workplace; and its research arm, 
the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health of the 
Center for Disease Control, should be the lead agency for 
conducting research on indoor air.

Global Change Research

    The Committee finds that the Office of Research and 
Development's Global Climate Change research is of low 
priority. Further, the research does not support the Office of 
Research and Development's primary mission which is to provide 
the scientific underpinning for EPA regulation. The Committee 
recommends terminating the Office of Research and Development's 
Global Climate Change Program, but not its research on 
stratospheric ozone.

Multi-Media Research

    The Committee is concerned with the continuation of the 
FY1996 shift from category-specific research funding to multi-
media. Although most research topics incorporate some cross-
media components, too much of the Office of Research and 
Development's funding is housed in the multi-media account.
    The Committee continues to recommend termination of the 
Environmental Technology Initiative (ETI). ETI is an ill-
defined Administration initiative. The program appears to be 
either an attempt at environmental industrial policy or an 
over-priced effort to reform EPA's regulatory policies to 
eliminate barriers to green technologies. While the Committee 
supports the latter in concept, it notes that such an effort 
should not require tens of millions of dollars. Further, many 
of the current barriers to improve environmental technologies 
are legislative, and will have to be removed by Congress.
    As for industrial policy, the Committee rejects the premise 
that the Office of Research and Development should expend its 
scarce research funding on subsidizing the commercialization of 
environmental technology.
    The Committee supports funding environmental fellowships at 
$5,000,000 for FY 1997. The fellowships must support research 
directly related to the Office of Research and Development's 
mission. The Committee believes that environmental education, 
while important, is not the Office of Research and 
Development's mission. The Committee's support of continued 
funding for the Office of Research and Development's fellowship 
program is conditioned on the Office of Research and 
Development demonstrating a direct link between the Office of 
Research and Development research and research conducted 
through the fellowship program.

Limitations on Appropriations

    The Committee does not support funding the Environmental 
Technology Initiative; Office of Research and Development 
activities associated with the Climate Change Action Plan; 
indoor air research; or Congressional earmarks including the 
following: North Dakota Center for Air Toxic Metals Research; 
drinking water research conducted by the American Water Works 
Association Research Foundation; the Water Environmental 
Research Foundation; the National Urban Air Toxics Research 
Center; the Gulf Coast Hazardous Substances Research Center; 
urban waste management research at the University of New 
Orleans; the Resources and Agricultural Policy Systems Program 
at Iowa State University; and the Oil Spill Remediation 
Research Center.

SECTION 504--SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH REVIEW

    The Committee is concerned about the quality of research 
used by EPA in its regulatory rulemaking. The Committee 
supports efforts to ensure the quality of research within the 
Agency by centralizing the responsibility for the quality of 
all Agency research with the Assistant Administrator for the 
Office of Research and Development.

SECTION 505--GRADUATE STUDENT FELLOWSHIPS

    The Committee believes that any fellowship award by the 
Office of Research and Development should be used only to 
support research that would further the missions of the Office 
of Research and Development.

SECTION 506--SCIENCE ADVISORY REVIEW

    The Committee is concerned that the traditional Science 
Advisory Board review of EPA's budget request has not been 
conducted for the past two fiscal years. Section 506 requires 
the SAB to conduct and submit such a report annually.

REPORTS TO CONGRESS

    The Assistant Administrator shall transmit annually to the 
Administrator and to the Committee on Science of the House of 
Representatives and the Committee on Environment and Public 
Works of the Senate a report detailing:
    1) all Agency research the Assistant Administrator finds of 
insufficient quality; and
    2) all Agency research the Assistant Administrator finds 
duplicates other Agency research.
    The Science Advisory Board is required to submit to 
Congress and to the Administrator a report on the Board's views 
on proposed research programs as described in the President's 
budget for research, development and demonstration activities 
of the EPA. Further, the SAB is required to select and conduct 
evaluations of planned research development and demonstration 
activities of the EPA. The areas of selection should be 
selected by the SAB in consultation with the Administrator of 
the Office of Research and Development, other Agency programs, 
and appropriate committees of Congress. A report of these 
evaluations should be submitted to the Administrator and such 
committees. The Administrator shall respond to the report 
within 60 days after it has been submitted. The SAB also must 
submit an annual review of research activities of the EPA and 
include results in the report. The Administrator must also 
submit to Congress any report required to be submitted to the 
Administrator by the SAB. Such submissions shall be made no 
later than 60 days after the Administrator receives the report.

Title VI--National Institute of Standards and Technology

             NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY             
        SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL RESEARCH SERVICES & CONSTRUCTION       
                 FISCAL YEAR 1997 PROPOSED AUTHORIZATION                
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                   FY96 Estimate*      FY97 Request      FY97 Proposed  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Electronics &                                                           
 electrical                                                             
 engineering                             $38,114,000      $38,407,000 1 
Manufacturing                                                           
 engineering                              18,747,000         18,747,000 
Chemical                                                                
 science &                                                              
 technology                               31,939,000       33,939,000 2 
Physics                                   28,048,000         28,048,000 
Materials                                                               
 science &                                                              
 engineering                              51,026,000       54,589,000 3 
Building & fire                                                         
 research                                 13,085,000         13,085,000 
Computer                                                                
 science &                                                              
 applied                                                                
 mathematics                              43,076,000         43,076,000 
Technology                                                              
 assistance                               14,950,000       18,950,000 4 
National                                                                
 Quality                                                                
 Program                                   2,987,000          2,987,000 
Research                                                                
 support                                                                
 activities                               28,772,000         28,772,000 
                                                                        
STRS                                                                    
 Appropriations      259,000,000*        270,744,000        280,600,000 
Construction of                                                         
 Research                                                               
 Facilities           60,000,000*        105,240,000        105,240,000 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* As funded in the FY96 Commerce Appropriations bill, which was vetoed  
  by the President                                                      
                                                                        
1 Exceeds the President's request by authorizing unfunded FY96 requested
  increase to develop and deliver new measurement tools and services to 
  the semiconductor device, equipment, and materials industries, as     
  called for in the National Technology Roadmap for Semiconductors.     
2 Exceeds the President's request by authorizing unfunded FY96 requested
  increase to develop biotechnology measurement and data tools needed by
  United States industry to accelerate commercialization of bioproducts 
  through improved product design, process optimization, and quality    
  assurance.                                                            
3 Exceeds the President's request by authorizing unfunded FY96 requested
  increase to permit work with industry to accelerate the               
  commercialization of advanced materials through projects that         
  emphasize the measurement science/characterization elements of        
  synthesis and processing and the process integration of relevant      
  materials.                                                            
4 Exceeds the President's request by authorizing unfunded FY96 requested
  increase to provide a new generation of physical standards,           
  measurements, test methods, and reference data needed by emerging     
  instrumentation industries, focusing on metrology. This increase would
  also provide funds to implement the requirements of the National      
  Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-113)  
  to make NIST the lead governmental coordinating agency on standards   
  and conformity assessment.                                            

Section 601. Authorization of Appropriations for fiscal year 
1997

Sectional Analysis

    Subsection 1 provides a Fiscal Year 1997 authorization of 
funds for the National Institute of Standards and Technology 
Scientific and Technical Research and Services (STRS). It 
apportions the authorized total among the following 10 
accounts: (1) Electronics and Electrical Engineering; (2) 
Manufacturing Engineering; (3) Chemical Science and Technology; 
(4) Physics; (5) Material Science and Engineering; (6) Building 
and Fire Research; (7) Computer Science and Applied 
Mathematics; (8) Technical Assistance; (9) Research Support; 
and (10) the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Program.
    Subsection 2 authorizes $105.240 million for the NIST 
Research Facilities Construction Program.

Committee Views

    The Committee recommends an authorization level of $280.6 
million for Fiscal Year 1997, an increase of $21.6 million--or 
8 percent--from the Fiscal Year 1996 estimate of $259.0 million 
for the National Institute of Standards and Technology's 
Scientific and Technical Research and Services. The President 
requested $270.744 million for Fiscal Year 1997, an increase of 
$11.744 million--or 5 percent--over the Fiscal Year 1996 
estimate of $259.0 million. The House-passed Concurrent 
Resolution on the Budget for Fiscal Year 1996 (H.Con.Res. 67) 
recommended $280.6 million in Fiscal Year 1997 funding for the 
NIST STRS account.
    For the National Institute of Standards and Technology's 
Construction of Research Facilities (CRF), the President 
requested $105.240 million for Fiscal Year 1997, an increase of 
$45.24 million--or 75 percent--over the Fiscal Year 1996 
estimate of $60.0 million. The CRF account, however, received a 
rescission of $75.0 million in the Fiscal Year 1996 Omnibus 
Appropriations Conference Report (Public Law 104-1xx).
    The Committee recommends an authorization level of $105.240 
million for Fiscal Year 1997, which fully meets the President's 
request. The House-passed Concurrent Resolution on the Budget 
for Fiscal Year 1996 (H.Con.Res. 67) recommended $69.0 million 
for the NIST Construction of Research Facilities.
    Included within the STRS account, the Committee approved an 
authorization of $2.987 million for the Malcolm Baldrige 
National Quality Program, originally provided for in Section 17 
of the Stevenson-Wydler Innovation Act of 1980 [15 U.S.C. 
3711(a)].
    Overall, the President's requested authorizations were 
fully adopted in all ten program areas within STRS. The STRS 
account funds principally the core, ``mission-related'' 
activities of the NIST laboratories. The Committee has 
indicated strong support in the past for these activities and 
continues to do so in its Fiscal Year 1997 proposed 
authorization.
    The Committee, however, believes very strongly that the 
work done at the NIST laboratories must be funded at levels 
which will permit the NIST laboratories to continue performing 
their critical national mission. Since NIST is integral to 
United States competitiveness in the global marketplace through 
its interaction with industry and by development and 
application of technology, measurements, and standards, the 
Committee has not only matched, but exceeded, the President's 
funding request for the STRS account.
    The $9.856 million authorized above the President's request 
would fund certain projects which the Committee authorized, but 
which Congress was not able to fully fund in fiscal year 1996.
    The Committee understands that while there may be some 
overlap in certain accounts within the President's Fiscal Year 
1997 request and the unfunded Fiscal Year 1996 requested 
increases, it is important, nevertheless, to authorize, to the 
extent practicable, these important activities which represent 
the core NIST mission. These increases above the President's 
request fall in four STRS accounts. They are: Electronics and 
Electrical Engineering; Chemical Science and Technology; 
Materials Science and Engineering; and Technology Assistance.
    The Electronics and Electrical Engineering account in the 
bill exceeds the President's request by authorizing an 
additional $293,000 of an unfunded Fiscal Year 1996 requested 
increase to develop and deliver new measurement tools and 
services to the semiconductor device, equipment, and materials 
industries, as called for in the National Technology Roadmap 
for Semiconductors.
    The Chemical Science and Technology account exceeds the 
President's request by authorizing an additional $2.0 million 
of an unfunded Fiscal Year 1996 requested increase to develop 
biotechnology measurement and data tools needed by United 
States industry to accelerate commercialization of bioproducts 
through improved product design, process optimization, and 
quality assurance.
    The Materials Science and Engineering account exceeds the 
President's request by authorizing an additional $3.563 million 
of an unfunded Fiscal Year 1996 requested increase to permit 
work with industry to accelerate the commercialization of 
advanced materials through projects that emphasize the 
measurement science/characterization elements of synthesis and 
processing, and the process integration of relevant materials.
    The Technology Assistance account exceeds the President's 
request by authorizing an additional $4.0 million of an 
unfunded Fiscal Year 1996 requested increase to provide a new 
generation of physical standards, measurements, test methods, 
and reference data needed by emerging instrumentation 
industries, focusing on metrology. This increase would also 
provide funds to implement the requirements of the National 
Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (Public Law 
104-113) to make NIST the lead governmental coordinating agency 
on standards and conformity assessment.
    Section 12 of Public Law 104-113 gives NIST new 
responsibilities to develop a strategic plan to evaluate state 
and local standard development and conformity assessment 
activities, and to take the lead in developing consensus at the 
federal, state and local levels, in the interest of eliminating 
unnecessary duplication and burden on industry. The Committee 
affirms that our ability to adapt the standards development 
process to the needs of a rapidly changing marketplace will 
play an important role in maintaining our nation's future 
competitiveness.
    The collective impact of the changes made by P.L. 104-113 
is to grant NIST a clear statutory mandate to act as the lead 
agency for ensuring federal use of standards developed by 
private consensus standards organizations to meet regulatory 
and procurement needs, and to guide the states toward a 
national, rationalized system of conformity assessment and 
certification. NIST is required to report to Congress on its 
progress and the feasibility of such actions by June 7, 1996.
    The Committee also supports the need for renovation and 
modernization of NIST facilities. The Committee understands the 
importance for state-of-the-art measurement and calibration 
laboratories to modernize NIST facilities; otherwise, NIST can 
not adequately fulfill its mission into the future.
    NIST's current specialized research buildings are lacking 
in environmental controls needed for world-class measurement 
research in support of United States industry, and suffer from 
a variety of safety and systems capacity problems. The 
Committee is aware of the independent study conducted for NIST 
in Fiscal Year 1991 which found that the overwhelming majority 
of NIST's facilities will fail to meet program needs within 
this decade unless steps are taken now to design, construct, 
and renovate the needed facilities.
    The authorized Fiscal Year 1997 funding of $105.240 million 
will permit NIST to address the technical obsolescence of its 
facilities. The authorized funding keeps NIST on its timetable 
for occupancy of the new Advanced Chemical Sciences Laboratory 
(ACSL) by the summer of 1998 and the commencement of the first 
phase of construction for the Advanced Metrology Laboratory 
(AML).

Title VII--Federal Aviation Administration

 FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION RESEARCH, ENGINEERING, AND DEVELOPMENT 
                   (RE&D;) FY97 PROPOSED AUTHORIZATION                   
                        [In millions of dollars]                        
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                        FY96                             FY97 Proposed  
                    Appropriated     FY97 PB Request     Authorization  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sys Dev/                                                                
 Infrastructure            10.000             16.822             10.000 
Capacity/ATM                                                            
 technology                37.200             40.570             39.911 
Comm/Nav/                                                               
 Surveillance              23.000             20.371             20.371 
Weather                     6.493              6.411              6.411 
Airport                                                                 
 Technology                 6.000              6.000              6.000 
Air Safety                                                              
 Technology                37.978             38.999             37.978 
System Security            36.045             36.045             36.045 
Human Factors/                                                          
 Aviation                                                               
 Medicine                  23.682             23.682             23.682 
Environment/                                                            
 Energy                     3.800              3.800              3.800 
Innovative/                                                             
 Cooperative                                                            
 Research                   1.500              3.000              1.500 
                                                                        
                          185.698            195.700            185.698 
------------------------------------------------------------------------

 Sectional Analysis

Section 701. Short Title

    Cites this title as the ``FAA Research, Engineering, and 
Development Management Reform Act of 1996.''

Section 702. Findings

    Sets forth Committee findings regarding the FAA's chronic 
delays in fielding new products and services, including long-
standing internal management, organizational and cultural 
impediments to improving the acquisition processes.

Section 703. Definitions

    Defines acquisition management terms used in Section 704 of 
Title VII.

Section 704. Management Principles

    Guiding principles which serve as a legislative foundation 
for the FAA to transform broadly stated requirements into 
affordable, operationally effective and suitable products and 
services to meet the needs of users of the National Airspace 
System. These include full life-cycle involvement by the FAA's 
acquisition and operational workforce; early and continuous 
involvement of operators and users, advisory committees, and 
industry vendors and experts in establishing and stabilizing 
sound, realistic operational requirements; assignment of key 
acquisition officials based on demonstrated leadership, 
professionalism, and proven acquisition management competencies 
consistent with their positional responsibility and authority, 
among others.

Section 705. Document of April 1, 1996

    This section implements the FAA's new acquisition 
management system, which , according to the FAA, is intended to 
address many of the problem areas identified in the past 
reviews of FAA performance.

Section 706. Authorization of Appropriations

    Authorizes appropriations for FY1997 of $185.698 million 
for Federal Aviation Administration RE&D; activities and such 
sums a may be necessary for research, engineering, development 
activities described in the President's fiscal year budget 
request to the Congress under the category ``Engineering, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation'' of the Facilities and 
Equipment account.

Section 707. Research Priorities

    Requires the FAA administrator to consider the advice and 
recommendations of the FAA RE&D; advisory committee in 
establishing research and development priorities.

Section 708. Budget designation for FAA Research and 
Development Activities

    Requires that future FAA budgets include in a single budget 
category all research and development activities that would be 
classified as basic research, applied research, or 
developmental under the guidelines established by OMB in Budget 
Circular A-11.

Section 709. Research Advisory Committee

    Requires the FAA RE&D; advisory committee to annually review 
the FAA's research and development funding allocations among 
major activity areas and then report to the FAA administrator 
on whether such allocations will meet the needs and objectives 
for the FAA, as defined by the advisory committee.

Section 710. National Aviation Research Plan

    Revises the requirements for the National Aviation Research 
Plan by changing the period covered by the plan from 15 to 5 
years, by streamlining the categories of information to be 
included in the plan, and by requiring the plan to document 
FAA's response to the recommendations of the RE&D; advisory 
committee.

Committee Views

    Over the past decade, FAA programs to modernize the 
National Airspace System (NAS) have experienced significant 
problems in terms of costs, schedules, and performance. During 
three previous hearings, the Committee received testimony from 
the FAA, OTA, GAO, NASA, NOAA, NTSB, advisory groups, trade 
associations, and contractors about FAA's legendary problems in 
fielding new products and services. Although the FAA and others 
have blamed these perennial problems on procurement rules, 
government regulations, and personnel hiring and firing 
practices, significant evidence points to more fundamental 
organizational, management and cultural issues within the FAA 
itself.

Management Reforms

    Based on extensive investigation and witness testimony, the 
Committee finds the following factors significantly 
contributing to FAA's chronic delays in fielding new systems:

 Long-standing, internal management, organizational, 
        and cultural impediments to improving its acquisition 
        processes. In the past, a lack of strong, stable, and 
        enlightened leadership--due in part to frequent 
        turnover of FAA administrators--has done little to 
        correct these legendary, dysfunctional problems.
  A ``stove pipe'' organization comprised of 
        bureaucratic, functional fiefdoms. Continuous 
        infighting and lack of coordination between the 
        technology developers and operational sections have 
        become status quo. Consequently, research and 
        development programs have been mostly technology-driven 
        and technology decisions have not always meshed with 
        operational requirements. Systems have reached the 
        advanced stages of development only to be found 
        unusable or not what was needed. Conversely, totally 
        unrealistic and unwarranted `operational requirements' 
        have led to cost overruns, schedule delays, and program 
        termination.
 A profound lack of acquisition management competencies 
        by research and development official. Significant 
        weaknesses exist in program, financial, contract, and 
        production management; systems engineering; human 
        factors; developmental and operational test and 
        evaluation; and logistics. Non-existent or inadequate 
        formal education, training, and certification of FAA 
        managers has contributed to these shortcomings.
 Incoherent, non-holistic acquisition strategies. Major 
        shortcomings in: long-range, top-down, forward-looking 
        mission needs analysis; establishing and validating 
        sound, realistic operational requirements; early 
        identification of cost-drivers and major tradeoffs 
        through rigorous cost-benefit analysis; and 
        consideration of non-material, non-developmental items, 
        commercial-off-the-items, evolutionary acquisitions, or 
        pre-planned product improvement. These and other 
        problems have led to unbalanced designs and unstable 
        cost, schedule, and performance baselines.
 Lack of contemporary management techniques and 
        industry ``best practices''. Lack of awareness, and 
        employment of advanced management techniques such as 
        life-cycle analysis, ``design-to-cost'', technical 
        performance measurements, and cost/schedule control 
        systems has led to risk management more akin to ``fire 
        fighting'' than ``fire prevention.'' Poor contractor 
        performance has gone undetected until billions of 
        dollars have been expended and projects were in dire 
        straits.

    Based on these findings and the FAA's previous track record 
in fielding new systems, the Committee concluded that major 
improvements in modernizing the nation's air traffic system 
will require fundamental changes in FAA's acquisition 
management.
    The 104th Congress took unprecedented steps to help the FAA 
put its procurement and personnel houses in order. The FY96 
Department of Transportation Appropriations Act (PL104-50) 
directed the FAA to develop and implement new acquisition and 
personnel management systems, and specifically excluded the 
agency from eight major provisions of acquisition law and 
essentially all government employment practices. On April 1, 
1996, the FAA began phasing in its new acquisition management 
system which is intended to address many of the problems 
currently plaguing FAA's acquisition processes.
    Unfortunately, in the past, self-governing FAA research and 
development programs have not been particularly efficient and 
effective. The Committee concludes the FAA needs a disciplined 
acquisition management system based upon strong leadership and 
the following guiding concepts:

 Full integration of three decision-support processes: 
        establishing and validating requirements; full life-
        cycle acquisition management; and planning, 
        programming, and budgeting.
 Full life-cycle involvement by the FAA's acquisition 
        and operational workforce.
 Early and continuous involvement of operators and 
        users, advisory committees, and industry vendors and 
        experts in establishing and stabilizing sound, 
        realistic operational requirements.
 Assignment of key acquisition officials based on 
        demonstrated leadership, professionalism, and proven 
        acquisition management competencies consistent with 
        their positional responsibility and authority.
 Full life-cycle, event-driven acquisition strategies 
        which:
  --explicitly link major program decisions and contractual 
        commitments to demonstrated accomplishments in RE&D;
  --balance system design requirements and constraints based on 
        cost-benefit sensitivity analysis;
  --consider maximum practicable use of non-material, non-
        developmental, or commercial solutions prior to 
        embarking on protracted, FAA-unique RE&D; and
  --consider evolutionary acquisition and pre-planned product 
        improvement to mitigate risks and expeditiously field 
        products and services.
 Use of contemporary management techniques and industry 
        best practices to determine: where the program is 
        versus where it should be; where the program is going 
        and what the plans are to get there; what the risks are 
        and how they will be mitigated, and whether the 
        proposed approach is affordable.

    While the Committee finds the FAA's new acquisition 
management system is generally consistent with these concepts, 
implementation has been a problem in the past. These concepts, 
formalized as ``Management Principles'' in Section 705, are not 
intended to micro-manage FAA research and develop activities. 
They do, however, provide the legislative foundation and broad 
guidance for transforming broadly stated requirements into 
affordable, operationally effective, and suitable products and 
services to meet the needs of users of the National Airspace 
System' principles the FAA could have sorely used in the past.
Consolidation of FAA R&D; Activities in a Single Budget Account

    FAA's R&D; activities are funded from two major budget 
categories: the Research, Engineering, and Development (RE&D;) 
account and ``Engineering, Development, Test and Evaluation'' 
of the Facilities and Equipment (F&E;) account. Projects funded 
under ``Engineering, Development, Test, and Evaluation'' of the 
F&E; account fall within the category of research and 
development (R&D;) as defined by the Office of Management and 
Budget (OMB). OMB Circular A-11, Budget Formulation / 
Submission Processes, which provides guidelines to the federal 
agencies used in reporting data on R&D; budgets, specifies that 
R&D; budgets should be divided into the categories of basic 
research, applied research, and development, where development 
is defined as ``systematic use of the knowledge gained from 
research for the production of useful materials, devices, 
systems, or methods, including the design and development of 
prototypes and processes.''
    As FAA indicated in testimony to the Subcommittee on 
Technology on April 18, 1996, projects included in 
``Engineering, Development, Test, and Evaluation'' of the F&E; 
account are principally associated with full scale development 
of new technologies, which in accordance with the OMB 
guidelines fall into the budget category of R&D.;
    The Committee believes that maintaining separate R&D; 
accounts makes it considerably more difficult for the Congress 
to track overall FAA R&D; investment and to assess the 
priorities among areas of R&D.; The current arrangement is 
confusing and lacks consistency. For example, the Committee 
notes the finding of the 1994 report of the Office of 
Technology Assessment, ``Federal Research and Technology for 
Aviation,'' that aviation weather research, involving algorithm 
development for numerical weather prediction and development of 
sensors and software for detection of weather hazards, were 
funded under ``Engineering, Development, Test, and Evaluation'' 
of the F&E; account, rather than in the RE&D; account, where more 
fundamental research is normally found.
    The Committee expects future budget submissions from the 
FAA to include in a single account, which may include whatever 
internal subdivisions the agency determines to be appropriate, 
all activities that would be classified as R&D; under the 
guidelines of OMB Circular A-11. The Committee expects FAA to 
develop guidelines appropriate for delineating the differences 
in characteristics among activities supported in any 
subdivisions of the R&D; account which FAA may establish.

FAA Research Advisory Committee

    The FAA research advisory committee, which was established 
by statute on the initiation of this Committee, is composed of 
aviation experts from industry, other R&D; agencies, and 
academia. The Committee intended the advisory committee to 
provide advice to FAA on the goals, relevance and quality of 
the R&D; program, but it is not evident that the advisory 
committee has had much influence in the priority setting 
process for FAA's R&D; activities.
    The Committee has attempted to strengthen the influence of 
the FAA research advisory committee, first, by requiring it to 
review and provide recommendations to FAA on the agency's R&D; 
budget allocations, and then, by requiring FAA to consider 
those recommendations in establishing the priorities in its 
annual R&D; budget request. In addition, FAA must now report to 
Congress on its response to the advisory committee's 
recommendations as part of the annual National Aviation 
Research Plan.

National Aviation Research Plan

    The Committee is disappointed that the National Aviation 
Research Plan has not been a useful document for informing 
Congress of the goals and priorities for the aviation research 
program of the federal government. The Committee recognizes 
that a significant part of aviation R&D; is carried out by 
agencies other than FAA, which is why the Plan required 
descriptions of coordinated and complimentary activities 
carried out by other agencies. The Committee views the purpose 
of the Plan as providing a single concise statement of the 
goals and near term objectives of the overall federal aviation 
R&D; program, as well as a summary of FAA*s R&D; activities, 
plans, and accomplishments.
    The Committee reminds FAA that the statute which 
establishes the plan, 49 U.S.C. 44501, states that ``the plan 
shall be submitted not later than the date of submission of the 
President's budget to Congress.'' The Committee is displeased 
that FAA has not met this requirement for the past two years at 
least. The Committee regrets that the current plan is past due 
and was not available for review by the Committee in preparing 
the authorization language in this bill. The Committee expects 
the Plan to be available in time to be considered during the 
usual budget authorization process. The very late arrival of 
the Plan has rendered it nearly useless for this purpose.
    In the interests of making the Plan a more useful document, 
the Committee has modified the period it covers and has 
streamlined the contents. The Committee intends that FAA place 
the emphasis in the Plan on describing the overall national 
aviation R&D; goals and priorities; the FAA's resource 
allocations, including allocations among long-term research, 
near-term research, and development, for the current and 
succeeding four years; and the connection between FAA's R&D; 
activities and the related activities of other R&D; agencies. 
The Committee does not expect the Plan to consist of a 
compilation of lengthy descriptions of every project currently 
funded.
    The Committee emphasizes that FAA is now required to 
highlight in the Plan the R&D; activities that address specific 
recommendations of the FAA research advisory committee, as well 
as explain the reasons for not accepting the recommendations of 
the advisory committee.

Authorization of Appropriations

    For FY97, the President requested $195.7 million for FAA 
RE&D; programs. Acquisition reform, based upon these guiding 
principles, offers the promise of increased efficiencies and 
less waste. Accordingly, total FAA RE&D; budget authority should 
not be increased above the FY96 appropriation of $185.698 
million until significant improvements in FAA's acquisition 
management are apparent and efficiencies can be more readily 
assessed. However, ``Capacity/Air Traffic Management 
Technology'' was adjusted upward slightly from the FY96 
appropriation. For FY97, the President's budget requested 
$2.629 million less for ``Communications/Navigation/
Surveillance'' and $0.082 million less for ``Weather'' than was 
appropriated for FY96. These two amounts, totaling $2.711, were 
used to increase FY 97 budget authority for ``Capacity/Air 
Traffic Management'' activity from the FY96 appropriated amount 
of $37,200 million to $39.912 million. This budget category, 
which funds research and development for the ``free flight'' 
concept, was cited as the top priority by the FAA's RE&D; 
advisory committee.

Title VIII--National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program

  NATIONAL EARTHQUAKE HAZARDS REDUCTION PROGRAM FY 1997 BUDGET REQUEST  
                                 SUMMARY                                
                        [In millions of dollars]                        
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        FY 1996     FY 1997     FY 1997 
            ACCOUNT TITLE              Estimate     Request      Auth.  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Emergency Management Agency.      19.93      18.825      18.825 
United States Geological Survey.....      46.13       46.13       46.13 
National Science Foundation.........       27.1        28.4        28.4 
National Institute of Standards and                                     
 Technology.........................      1.932       1.932       1.932 
                                                                        
TOTAL...............................     95.092      95.287      95.287 
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sectional Analysis

Section 801, Authorization of Appropriations

    Authorizes a total of $95,285,000 in FY 1997, the 
Administration's request, for the programs and activities of 
the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 to be 
allocated to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), 
the United States Geological Survey (USGS), the National 
Science Foundation (NSF), and the National Institutes of 
Science and Technology (NIST).
    NSF and NIST are authorized $28,400,000 and $1,932,000, 
respectively, from sums already authorized in previous titles.
    Title VIII authorizes $18,825,000 for FEMA's NEHRP 
activities and $46,130,000 for USGS's NEHRP activities.

Committee Views

    The Committee acknowledges that the National Earthquake 
Hazards Reduction Program is, for the most part, a very 
effective research program which can be credited with 
increasing our knowledge of seismic risk, enhancing our 
understanding of how structures fare during earthquakes, and 
contributing to the knowledge that enabled the design and 
construction of new buildings that are more likely to withstand 
the pressures of an earthquake. In addition, the program has 
helped to educate and prepare communities that are in 
earthquake prone areas.
    The potential for a devastating earthquake hitting a major 
metropolitan area of the United States and inflicting 
catastrophic losses to life and property is still very real. 
Much more can be learned through NEHRP research to help us 
understand earthquakes and their effects. These realities 
necessitate that we continue to fund this earthquake research 
program in an effort to further reduce the inherent dangers as 
much as possible.

Title IX--Miscellaneous:

Section 901. Prohibition of Lobbying Activities

Sectional Analysis

    Prohibits the use of funds authorized by this Act for any 
activity whose purpose is to influence legislation pending 
before the Congress. Does not prevent employees of the 
departments and agencies from communicating with Members of 
Congress to conduct public business.

Committee View

    The Committee is committed to ensuring that awards for 
research and education are used solely for those purposes. 
Funds should not be used for any purpose, other than that 
specified in the award. The Committee, however, does not 
exclude appropriate communications between the executive branch 
and the Congress.

Section 902. Limitation on Appropriations

Sectional Analysis

    Disallows authorization of funds which are not specifically 
authorized to be appropriated by this Act for FY 1997, or by an 
Act of Congress in succeeding fiscal years.

Committee View

    This section emphasizes the Committee's position that the 
only funds authorized to be appropriated for the agencies 
covered under this legislation are made available through this 
Act. It is the Committee's intent that annual authorizations 
are required for appropriations to be authorized. Organic act 
authority is enabling of agency missions and programmatic 
activity, but not sufficient to authorize actual funding.

Section 903. Eligibility for Awards

Sectional Analysis

    Requires the head of each federal agency for which funds 
are authorized under this Act to exclude, for a period of five 
years, any person who received funds for a project not subject 
to a competitive, merit-based review process after fiscal year 
1996. This section is not applicable to awards to persons who 
are members of a class specified by law for which assistance is 
awarded according to formula provided by law.

Committee View

    The Committee has a long-standing position that awards 
should be based on a competitive merit-based process. Merit 
review allow taxpayers' dollars to be spent in the most cost-
effective manner. Although federal agencies may have concerns 
about specific award programs, the Committee believes that 
proper planning, clearly stated missions, and structuring 
programs to meet Committee intent is possible.

Additional Committee View Regarding Further Authorizations

    It is the intent of the Committee that nothing in this act 
shall preclude further authorization of appropriations for the 
civilian science activities of the federal government for 
fiscal year 1997; provided that authorization allocations 
contained in the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal 
year 1997 and approved by Congress, allow for such further 
authorizations.

                     VII. Committee Cost Estimates

    Clause 2(1)(3)(B) of rule XI of the House of 
Representatives requires each committee report that accompanies 
a measure providing new budget authority, new spending 
authority, or new credit authority or changing revenue or tax 
expenditure to contain a cost estimate, as required by section 
308(a)(1) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, as amended, 
and, when practicable with respect to estimates of new budget 
authority, a comparison of the total estimated funding relevant 
program (or programs) to the appropriate levels under current 
law.
    Clause 7(a) of rule XIII requires each committee report 
accompanying each bill or joint resolution of a public 
character to contain the committee's cost estimates, which 
include, where practicable, a comparison of the total estimated 
funding level for the relevant program (or programs) with the 
appropriate levels under current law.
    The Committee adopts as its own the cost estimate prepared 
by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office, pursuant to 
section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974.

            VIII. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimates

    [Text of the CBO estimate follows:]
    
    
                IX. Effects of Legislation on Inflation

    In accordance with Rule XI, Clause 2(1)(4), of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives, this legislation is assumed to 
have no inflationary effect on prices and costs in the 
operation of the national economy.

               X. Oversight Findings and Recommendations

    Clause 2(1)(3)(A) of rule XI requires each committee report 
to contain oversight findings and recommendations required 
pursuant to clause 2(b)(1) of rule X. The Committee has no 
oversight findings.

    XI. Oversight Findings and Recommendations by the Committee on 
                    Government Reform and Oversight

    Clause 2(1)(3)(D) of rule XI requires each committee report 
to contain a summary of the oversight findings and 
recommendations made by the House Government Reform and 
Oversight Committee pursuant to clause 4(c)(2) of rule X, 
whenever such findings have been timely submitted. The 
Committee on Science has received no such findings or 
recommendations from the Committee on Government Reform and 
Oversight.



       XII. Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported

    In compliance with clause 3 of rule XIII of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by 
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law 
proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new 
matter is printed in italics, existing law in which no change 
is proposed is shown in roman):

                NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION ACT OF 1950

          * * * * * * *

                      functions of the foundation

    Sec. 3. (a)  * * *
          * * * * * * *
    [(f) The Foundation shall render an annual report to the 
President for submission on or before the 15th day of April of 
each year to the Congress, summarizing the activities of the 
Foundation and making such recommendations as it may deem 
appropriate. Such report shall include information as to the 
acquisition and disposition by the Foundation of any patents 
and patent rights.]
    (f) The Foundation shall provide an annual report to the 
President which shall be submitted by the Director to the 
Congress at the time of the President's annual budget 
submission. The report shall--
            (1) contain a strategic plan, or an update to a 
        previous strategic plan, which--
                    (A) defines for a three-year period the 
                overall goals for the Foundation and specific 
                goals for each major activity of the 
                Foundation, including each scientific 
                directorate, the education directorate, and the 
                polar programs office; and
                    (B) describe how the identified goals 
                relate to national needs and will exploit new 
                opportunities in science and technology;
            (2) identify the criteria and describe the 
        procedures which the Foundation will use to assess 
        progress toward achieving the goals identified in 
        accordance with paragraph (1);
            (3) review the activities of the Foundation during 
        the preceding year which have contributed toward 
        achievement of goals identified in accordance with 
        paragraph (1) and summarize planned activities for the 
        coming three years in the context of the identified 
        goals, with particular emphasis on the Foundation's 
        planned contributions to major multi-agency research 
        and education initiatives;
            (4) contain such recommendations as the Foundation 
        considers appropriate; and
            (5) include information on the acquisition and 
        disposition by the Foundation of any patents and patent 
        rights.
          * * * * * * *
    [(g) In carrying out subsection (a)(4), the Foundation is 
authorized to foster and support access by the research and 
education communities to computer networks which may be used 
substantially for purposes in addition to research and 
education in the sciences and engineering, if the additional 
uses will tend to increase the overall capabilities of the 
networks to support such research and education activities.]

                         national science board

    Sec. 4. (a)  * * *
          * * * * * * *
    [(k)] (l) Members of the Board shall be required to file a 
financial disclosure report under title II of the Ethics in 
Government Act of 1978 (5 U.S.C. App. 92 Stat. 1836), except 
that such reports shall be held confidential and exempt from 
any law otherwise requiring their public disclosure.

                       director of the foundation

    Sec. 5. (a)  * * *
          * * * * * * *
    (e)(1)  * * *
    [(2) Any delegation of authority or imposition of 
conditions under the preceding sentence shall be effective only 
for such period of time, not exceeding two years, as the Board 
may specify, and shall be promptly published in the Federal 
Register and reported to the Committees on Labor and Human 
Resources and Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the 
Senate and the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology of 
the House of Representatives. On October 1 of each odd-numbered 
year the Board shall submit to the Congress a concise report 
which explains and justifies any actions taken by the Board 
under this subsection to delegate its authority or impose 
conditions within the preceding two years. The provisions of 
this subsection shall cease to be effective at the end of 
fiscal year 1989.]
    (2) Any delegation of authority or imposition of conditions 
under paragraph (1) shall be promptly published in the Federal 
Register and reported to the Committees on Labor and Human 
Resources and Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the 
Senate and the Committee on Science of the House of 
Representatives.
          * * * * * * *

                    divisions within the foundation

    Sec. 8. There shall be within the Foundation such Divisions 
as the Director, in consultation with the Board, may from time 
to time determine. The Director may appoint, in consultation 
with the Board, not more than 6 Assistant Directors to assist 
in managing the Divisions.
          * * * * * * *

                        miscellaneous provisions

    Sec. 14. (a)  * * *
          * * * * * * *
    (c) The members of the Board and the members of each 
special commission shall be entitled to receive compensation 
for each day engaged in the business of the Foundation, 
including traveltime, at a rate fixed by the Chairman but not 
exceeding the rate specified for the daily rate for GS-18 of 
the General Schedule under section 5332 of title 5, United 
States Code, and shall be allowed travel expenses as authorized 
by section 5703 of title 5, United States Code.
          * * * * * * *

                          security provisions

    Sec. 15. (a) The Foundation shall not support any research 
or development activity in the field of nuclear energy, nor 
shall it exercise any authoriity pursuant to section 11(e) in 
respect to that field, without first having obtained the 
concurrence of the [Atomic Energy Commission] Secretary of 
Energy that such activity will not adversely affect the common 
defense and security. To the extent that such activity involves 
restricted data as defined in the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 the 
provisions of that Act regarding the control of the 
dissemination of restricted data and the security clearance of 
those individuals to be given access to restricted data shall 
be applicable. Nothing in this Act shall supersede or modify 
any provision of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954.
          * * * * * * *
                              ----------                              


 SECTION 203 OF THE ACADEMIC RESEARCH FACILITIES MODERNIZATION ACT OF 
                                  1988

                        establishment of program

    Sec. 203. (a)  * * *
    (b)(1)  * * *
          * * * * * * *
    (3) The Director shall, in making awards under the Program, 
consider the extent to which that institution or consortium has 
received funds for the repair, renovation, construction, or 
replacement of academic facilities from any other Federal 
funding source within the 5-year period immediately preceding 
the application. [The Director shall give priority to 
institutions or consortia that have not received such funds in 
the preceding 5 years.] The Director shall give priority to 
institutions or consortia that have not received such funds in 
the preceding 5 years, except that this sentence shall not 
apply to previous funding received for the same multiyear 
project.
          * * * * * * *
                              ----------                              


  SECTION 6 OF THE NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION AUTHORIZATION ACT, 1976

    Sec. 6. (a) The National Science Foundation is authorized 
to establish the Alan T. Waterman Award for research or 
advanced study in the mathmatical, physical, medical, 
biological, engineering, behaviorial, [social,] social, or 
other sciences. The award authorized by this section shall 
consist of a suitable medal and a grant to support further 
research or study by the recipient. The National Science Board 
will periodically establish the amounts and terms of such 
grants under this section.
          * * * * * * *
                              ----------                              


  SECTION 117 OF THE NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION AUTHORIZATION ACT OF 
                                  1988

              presidential awards for teaching excellence

    Sec. 117. (a)(1)(A)  * * *
    (B) Each year the President is authorized to make no fewer 
than 108 awards under subparagraph (A). In selecting teachers 
for an award authorized by this subsection, the President shall 
select at least two teachers--
            (i)  * * *
          * * * * * * *
            [(v) from the United States Department of Defense 
        Dependents' School.]
            (v) from schools established outside the several 
        States and the District of Columbia by any agency of 
        the Federal Government for dependents of its employees.
    (3)(A) Funds to carry out this subsection for any fiscal 
year shall be made available from amounts appropriated pursuant 
to annual authorization of appropriations for the Foundation 
for [Science and Engineering Education] Education and Human 
Resources.
          * * * * * * *
                              ----------                              


 SECTION 822 OF THE NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL 1991

SEC. 822. [CRITICAL TECHNOLOGIES INSTITUTE] SCIENCE STUDIES INSTITUTE

  (a) Establishment.--There shall be established a federally 
funded research and development center to be known as the 
``[Critical Technologies Institute] Science Studies Institute'' 
(hereinafter in this section referred to as the ``Institute'').
  (b) Incorporation.--[As determined by the chairman of the 
committee referred to in subsection (c), the] The Institute 
shall be--
          (1) administered as a separate entity by an 
        organization currently managing another federally 
        funded research and development center; or
          (2) incorporated as a nonprofit membership 
        corporation.
    [(c) Operating Committee.--(1) The Institute shall have an 
Operating Committee composed of six members as follows:
            [(A) The Director of the Office of Science and 
        Technology Policy, who shall chair the committee.
            [(B) The Director of the National Institutes of 
        Health.
            [(C) The Under Secretary of Commerce for 
        Technology.
            [(D) The Director of the Advanced Research Projects 
        Agency.
            [(E) The Director of the National Science 
        Foundation.
            [(F) The Under Secretary of Energy having 
        responsibility for science and technology matters.
    [(2) The Operating Committee shall meet not less than four 
times each year.
  [(d)] (c) Duties.--The duties of the Institute shall include 
the following:
          (1) The assembly of timely and authoritative 
        information regarding significant developments and 
        trends in science and technology research and 
        development in the United States and abroad, [with 
        particular emphasis on information relating to the 
        technologies identified in the most recent biennial 
        report submitted to Congress by the President pursuant 
        to section 603(d) of the National Science and 
        Technology Policy, Organization, and Priorities Act of 
        1976 (42 U.S.C. 6683(d)).] and developing and 
        maintaining relevant informational and analytical 
        tools.
          (2) Analysis and interpretation of the information 
        referred to in paragraph (1) [to determine whether such 
        developments and trends are likely to affect United 
        States technology policies] with particular attention 
        to the scope and content of the Federal science and 
        technology research and develop portfolio as it affects 
        interagency and national issues.
          [(3) Initiation of studies and analyses (including 
        systems analyses and technology assessments) of 
        alternatives available for ensuring long-term 
        leadership by the United States in the development and 
        application of the technologies referred to in 
        paragraph (1), including appropriate roles for the 
        Federal Government, State governments, private 
        industry, and institutions of higher education in the 
        development and application of such technologies.]
          (3) Initiation of studies and analysis of 
        alternatives available for ensuring the long-term 
        strength of the United States in the development and 
        application of science and technology, including 
        appropriate roles for the Federal Government, State 
        governments, private industry, and institutions of 
        higher education in the development and application of 
        science and technology.
          (4) Provision, upon the request of the Director of 
        the Office of Science and Technology Policy, of 
        technical support and assistance--
                  (A) to the committees and panels of the 
                President's Council of Advisers on Science and 
                Technology that provide advice to the Executive 
                branch on science and technology policy; and
                  [(B) to the committees and panels of the 
                Federal Coordinating Council for Science, 
                Engineering, and Technology that are 
                responsible for planning and coordinating 
                activities of the Federal Government to advance 
                the development of critical technologies and 
                sustain and strengthen the technology base of 
                the United States.]
                    (B) to the interagency committees and 
                panels of the Federal Government concerned with 
                science and technology.
  [(e)] (d) Consultation on Institute Activities.--In carrying 
out the duties referred to in subsection [(d)] (c), personnel 
of the Institute shall--
          (1) consult widely with representatives from private 
        industry, institutions of higher education, and 
        nonprofit institutions; and
          (2) to the maximum extent practicable, incorporate 
        information and perspectives derived from such 
        consultations in carrying out such duties.
  [(f)] (e) Annual Reports.--The committee shall submit to the 
President an annual report on the activities of the committee 
under this section. Each report shall be in accordance with 
requirements prescribed by the President.
  [(g) Sponsorship.--(1) The Director of the National Science 
Foundation shall be the sponsor of the Institute.
  [(2) The Director of the National Science Foundation, in 
consultation with the chairman of the committee, shall enter 
into a sponsoring agreement with respect to the Institute. The 
sponsoring agreement shall require that the Institute carry out 
such functions as the chairman of the committee may specify 
consistent with the duties referred to in subsection (d). The 
sponsoring agreement shall be consistent with the general 
requirements prescribed for such a sponsoring agreement by the 
Administrator for Federal Procurement Policy.]
    (f) Sponsorship.--The Director of the Office of Science and 
Technology Policy shall be the sponsor of the Institute.
                              ----------                              


                      TITLE 49, UNITED STATES CODE

          * * * * * * *

                    SUBTITLE VII--AVIATION PROGRAMS

          * * * * * * *

                          SUBPART III--SAFETY

          * * * * * * *

            CHAPTER 445--FACILITIES, PERSONNEL, AND RESEARCH

          * * * * * * *

Sec. 44501. Plans and policy

    (a)  * * *
          * * * * * * *
    (c) National Aviation Research Plan.--(1)  * * *
    (2)(A) The plan shall describe, for a [15-year] 5-year 
period, the research, engineering, and development that the 
Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration considers 
necessary--
            (i)  * * *
          * * * * * * *
    [(B) The plan shall cover all research conducted under 
sections 40119, 44504, 44505, 44507, 44511-44513, and 44912 of 
this title and shall identify complementary and coordinated 
research efforts that the Administrator of the National 
Aeronautics and Space Administration conducts with amounts 
specifically appropriated to the Administration. For projects 
for which the Administrator of the Federal Aviation 
Administration anticipates requesting an appropriation, the 
plan shall include--
            [(i) for the first 2 years of the plan, detailed 
        annual estimates of the schedule, cost, and work-force 
        levels for each research project, including a 
        description of the scope and content of each major 
        contract, grant, or interagency agreement;
            [(ii) for the 3d, 4th, and 5th years of the plan, 
        estimates of the total cost of each major project and 
        any additional major research projects that may be 
        required to meet long-term objectives and that may have 
        significant impact on future appropriations 
        requirements;
            [(iii) for the 6th and subsequent years of the 
        plan, the long-term objectives the Administrator of the 
        Federal Aviation Administration considers necessary to 
        ensure that aviation safety will be given the highest 
        priority; and
            [(iv) details of a program to disseminate to the 
        private sector the results of aviation research 
        conducted by the Administrator of the Federal Aviation 
        Administration, including any new technologies 
        developed.]
    (B) The plan shall--
            (i) provide estimates by year of the schedule, 
        cost, and work force levels for each active and planned 
        major research and development project under sections 
        40119, 44504, 44505, 44507, 44509, 44511-44513, and 
        44912 of this title, including activities carried out 
        under cooperative agreements with other Federal 
        departments and agencies;
            (ii) specify the goals and the priorities for 
        allocation of resources among the major categories of 
        research and development activities, including the 
        rationale for the priorities identified;
            (iii) identify the allocation of resources among 
        long-term research, near-term research, and development 
        activities; and
            (iv) highlight the research and development 
        activities that address specific recommendations of the 
        research advisory committee established under section 
        44508 of this title, and document the recommendations 
        of the committee that are not accepted, specifying the 
        reasons for nonacceptance.
    (3) Subject to section 40119(b) of this title and 
regulations prescribed under section 40119(b), the 
Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration shall 
submit to the committees named in paragraph (1) of this 
subsection an annual report on the accomplishments of the 
research completed during the prior fiscal year, including a 
description of the dissemination to the private sector of 
research results and a description of any new technologies 
developed. The report shall be submitted with the plan required 
under paragraph (1) and be organized to allow comparison with 
the plan in effect for the prior fiscal year.
          * * * * * * *

Sec. 44508. Research advisory committee

    (a) Establishment and Duties.--(1) There is a research 
advisory committee in the Federal Aviation Administration. The 
committee shall--
            (A)  * * *
            (B) assist in ensuring that the research is 
        coordinated with similar research being conducted 
        outside the Administration; [and]
            (C) review the operations of the regional centers 
        of air transportation excellence established under 
        section 44513 of this title[.]; and
            (D) annually review the allocation made by the 
        Administrator of the amounts authorized by section 
        48102(a) of this title among the major categories of 
        research and development activities carried out by the 
        Administration and provide advice and recommendations 
        to the Administrator on whether such allocation is 
        appropriate to meet the needs and objectives identified 
        under subparagraph (A).
          * * * * * * *

                 SUBPART IV--ENFORCEMENT AND PENALTIES

          * * * * * * *

                           PART C--FINANCING

       CHAPTER 481--AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND AUTHORIZATIONS

          * * * * * * *

Sec. 48102. Research and development

    (a) Authorization of Appropriations.--Not more than the 
following amounts may be appropriated to the Secretary of 
Transportation out of the Airport and Airway Trust Fund 
established under section 9502 of the Internal Revenue Code of 
1986 (26 U.S.C. 9502) to carry out sections 44504, 44505, 
44507, 44509, and 44511-44513 of this title:
            (1) for fiscal year 1995--
                    (A)  * * *
          * * * * * * *
                    (J) $5,199,000 for innovative/cooperative 
                research projects and activities; [and]
            (2) for fiscal year 1996--
                    (A)  * * *
          * * * * * * *
                    (J) $5,459,000 for innovative/cooperative 
                research projects and activities[.]; and
            (3) for fiscal year 1997--
                    (A) $10,000,000 for system development and 
                infrastructure projects and activities;
                    (B) $39,911,000 for capacity and air 
                traffic management technology projects and 
                activities;
                    (C) $20,371,000 for communications, 
                navigation, and surveillance projects and 
                activities;
                    (D) $6,411,000 for weather projects and 
                activities;
                    (E) $6,000,000 for airport technology 
                projects and activities;
                    (F) $37,978,000 for aircraft safety 
                technology projects and activities;
                    (G) $36,045,000 for system security 
                technology projects and activities;
                    (H) $23,682,000 for human factors and 
                aviation medicine projects and activities;
                    (I) $3,800,000 for environment and energy 
                projects and activities;
                    (J) $1,500,000 for innovative/cooperative 
                research projects and activities; and
                    (K) such sums as may be necessary for other 
                research, engineering, and development 
                activities described in the President's fiscal 
                year 1997 budget request to the Congress under 
                the category ``Engineering, development, test, 
                and evaluation'' of Facilities and Equipment.
    (b) [Availability for Research.--(1)] Research 
Priorities.--(1) The Administrator shall consider the advice 
and recommendations of the research advisory committee 
established by section 44508 of this title in establishing 
priorities among major categories of research and development 
activities carried out by the Federal Aviation Administration.
    (2) At least 15 percent of the amount appropriated under 
subsection (a) of this section shall be for long-term research 
projects.
    [(2)] (3) At least 3 percent of the amount appropriated 
under subsection (a) of this section shall be available to the 
Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration to make 
grants under section 44511 of this title.
    [(c) Transfers Between Categories.--(1) Not more than 10 
percent of the net amount authorized for a category of projects 
and activities in a fiscal year under subsection (a) of this 
section may be transferred to or from that category in that 
fiscal year.
    [(2) The Secretary may transfer more than 10 percent of an 
authorized amount to or from a category only after--
            [(A) submitting a written explanation of the 
        proposed transfer to the Committees on Science, Space, 
        and Technology and Appropriations of the House of 
        Representatives and the Committees on Commerce, 
        Science, and Transportation and Appropriations of the 
        Senate; and
            [(B) 30 days have passed after the explanation is 
        submitted or each Committee notifies the Secretary in 
        writing that it does not object to the proposed 
        transfer.]
    (c) Designation of Activities.--(1) The amounts 
appropriated under subsection (a) are for the support of all 
research and development activities carried out by the Federal 
Aviation Administration that fall within the categories of 
basic research, applied research, and development, including 
the design and development of prototypes, in accordance with 
the classifications of the Office of Management and Budget 
Circular A-11 (Budget Formulation/Submission Process).
    (2) The President's annual budget request for the Federal 
Aviation Administration shall include all research and 
development activities within a single budget category. All of 
the activities carried out by the Administration within the 
categories of basic research, applied research, and 
development, as classified by the Office of Management and 
Budget Circular A-11, shall be placed in this single budget 
category.
          * * * * * * *

              SUBTITLE IX--COMMERCIAL SPACE TRANSPORTATION

          * * * * * * *

            CHAPTER 701--COMMERCIAL SPACE LAUNCH ACTIVITIES

Sec.
70101.  Findings and purposes.
70102.  Definitions.
70103.  General authority.
[70104.  Restrictions on launches and operations.]
70104.  Restrictions on launches, operations, and reentries.
     * * * * * * *
[70108.  Prohibition, suspension, and end of launches and operation of 
          launch sites.
[70109.  Preemption of scheduled launches.]
70108.  Prohibition, suspension, and end of launches, operation of 
          launch sites and reentry sites, and reentries.
70109.  Preemption of scheduled launches or reentries.
     * * * * * * *
70120. Regulations.
70121. Report to Congress.

Sec. 70101. Findings and purposes

    (a) Findings.--Congress finds that--
            (1)  * * *
          * * * * * * *
            (3) new and innovative equipment and services are 
        being sought, produced, and offered by entrepreneurs in 
        telecommunications, information services, microgravity 
        research, and remote sensing technologies;
            (4) the private sector in the United States has the 
        capability of developing and providing private 
        satellite launching, reentry, and associated services 
        that would complement the launching, reentry, and 
        associated services now available from the United 
        States Government;
            (5) the development of commercial launch vehicles, 
        reentry vehicles, and associated services would enable 
        the United States to retain its competitive position 
        internationally, contributing to the national interest 
        and economic well-being of the United States;
            (6) providing launch services and reentry services 
        by the private sector is consistent with the national 
        security and foreign policy interests of the United 
        States and would be facilitated by stable, minimal, and 
        appropriate regulatory guidelines that are fairly and 
        expeditiously applied;
            (7) the United States should encourage private 
        sector launches, reentries, and associated services 
        and, only to the extent necessary, regulate those 
        launches, reentries, and services to ensure compliance 
        with international obligations of the United States and 
        to protect the public health and safety, safety of 
        property, and national security and foreign policy 
        interests of the United States;
            (8) space transportation, including the 
        establishment and operation of launch sites, reentry 
        sites, and complementary facilities, the providing of 
        launch services and reentry services, the establishment 
        of support facilities, and the providing of support 
        services, is an important element of the transportation 
        system of the United States, and in connection with the 
        commerce of the United States there is a need to 
        develop a strong space transportation infrastructure 
        with significant private sector involvement; and
            (9) the participation of State governments in 
        encouraging and facilitating private sector involvement 
        in space-related activity, particularly through the 
        establishment of a space transportation-related 
        infrastructure, including launch sites, reentry sites, 
        complementary facilities, and launch site and reentry 
        site support facilities, is in the national interest 
        and is of significant public benefit.
    (b) Purposes.--The purposes of this chapter are--
            (1)  * * *
            (2) to encourage the United States private sector 
        to provide launch vehicles reentry vehicles, and 
        associated services by--
                    (A) simplifying and expediting the issuance 
                and transfer of commercial [launch] licenses; 
                and
                    (B) facilitating and encouraging the use of 
                Government-developed space technology;
            (3) to provide that the Secretary of Transportation 
        is to oversee and coordinate the conduct of commercial 
        launch and reentry operations, issue and transfer 
        commercial [launch] licenses authorizing those 
        operations, and protect the public health and safety, 
        safety of property, and national security and foreign 
        policy interests of the United States; and
            (4) to facilitate the strengthening and expansion 
        of the United States space transportation 
        infrastructure, including the enhancement of United 
        States launch sites and launch-site support facilities, 
        and development of reentry sites, with Government, 
        State, and private sector involvement, to support the 
        full range of United States space-related activities.

Sec. 70102. Definitions

    In this chapter--
            (1)  * * *
          * * * * * * *
            (3) ``launch'' means to place or try to place a 
        launch vehicle [and any payload] or reentry vehicle and 
        any payload from Earth--
                    (A)  * * *
          * * * * * * *
            (5) ``launch services'' means--
                    (A) activities directly related to the 
                preparation of a launch site or payload 
                facility for one or more launches;
                    [(A)] (B) activities involved in the 
                preparation of a launch vehicle and payload for 
                launch; and
                    [(B)] (C) the conduct of a launch.
          * * * * * * *
            (8) ``payload'' means an object that a person 
        undertakes to place in outer space by means of a launch 
        vehicle or reentry vehicle, including components of the 
        vehicle specifically designed or adapted for that 
        object.
            (9) ``person'' means an individual and an entity 
        organized or existing under the laws of a State or 
        country.
            (10) ``reenter'' and ``reentry'' mean to return or 
        attempt to return, purposefully, a reentry vehicle and 
        its payload, if any, from Earth orbit or from outer 
        space to Earth.
            (11) ``reentry services'' means--
                    (A) activities involved in the preparation 
                of a reentry vehicle and its payload, if any, 
                for reentry; and
                    (B) the conduct of a reentry.
            (12) ``reentry site'' means the location on Earth 
        to which a reentry vehicle is intended to return (as 
        defined in a license the Secretary issues or transfers 
        under this chapter).
            (13) ``reentry vehicle'' means a vehicle designed 
        to return from Earth orbit or outer space to Earth, or 
        a reusable launch vehicle designed to return from outer 
        space substantially intact.
            [(10)] (14) ``State'' means a State of the United 
        States, the District of Columbia, and a territory or 
        possession of the United States.
            [(11)] (15) ``third party'' means a person except--
                    (A) the United States Government or the 
                Government's contractors or subcontractors 
                involved in launch services or reentry 
                services;
                    (B) a licensee or transferee under this 
                chapter;
                    (C) a licensee's or transferee's 
                contractors, subcontractors, or customers 
                involved in launch services or reentry 
                services; or
                    (D) the customer's contractors or 
                subcontractors involved in launch services or 
                reentry services.
            [(12)] (16) ``United States'' means the States of 
        the United States, the District of Columbia, and the 
        territories and possessions of the United States.

Sec. 70103. General authority

    (a) General.--The Secretary of Transportation shall carry 
out this chapter.
    (b) Facilitating Commercial Launches and Reentries and 
State Sponsored Spaceports.--In carrying out this chapter, the 
Secretary shall--
            (1) encourage, facilitate, and promote commercial 
        space launches and reentries by the private sector and 
        State sponsored spaceports; and
            (2) take actions to facilitate private sector 
        involvement in commercial space transportation 
        activity, and to promote public-private partnerships 
        involving the United States Government, State 
        governments, and the private sector to build, expand, 
        modernize, or operate a space launch and reentry 
        infrastructure.
          * * * * * * *

[Sec. 70104. Restrictions on launches and operations]

Sec. 70104. Restrictions on launches, operations, and reentries

    (a) License Requirement.--A license issued or transferred 
under this chapter is required for the following:
            (1) for a person to launch a launch vehicle or to 
        operate a launch site or reentry site, or to reenter a 
        reentry vehicle, in the United States.
            (2) for a citizen of the United States (as defined 
        in section 70102(1)(A) or (B) of this title) to launch 
        a launch vehicle or to operate a launch site or reentry 
        site, or to reenter a reentry vehicle, outside the 
        United States.
            (3) for a citizen of the United States (as defined 
        in section 70102(1)(C) of this title) to launch a 
        launch vehicle or to operate a launch site or reentry 
        site, or to reenter a reentry vehicle, outside the 
        United States and outside the territory of a foreign 
        country unless there is an agreement between the United 
        States Government and the government of the foreign 
        country providing that the government of the foreign 
        country has jurisdiction over the launch or operation 
        or reentry.
            (4) for a citizen of the United States (as defined 
        in section 70102(1)(C) of this title) to launch a 
        launch vehicle or to operate a launch site or reentry 
        site, or to reenter a reentry vehicle, in the territory 
        of a foreign country if there is an agreement between 
        the United States Government and the government of the 
        foreign country providing that the United States 
        Government has jurisdiction over the launch or 
        operation or reentry.
    (b) Compliance With Payload Requirements.--The holder of a 
[launch] license under this chapter may launch or reenter a 
payload only if the payload complies with all requirements of 
the laws of the United States related to launching or 
reentering a payload.
    (c) [Preventing Launches.--] Preventing Launches and 
Reentries.--The Secretary of Transportation shall establish 
whether all required licenses, authorizations, and permits 
required for a payload have been obtained. If no license, 
authorization, or permit is required, the Secretary may prevent 
the launch or reentry if the Secretary decides the launch or 
reentry would jeopardize the public health and safety, safety 
of property, or national security or foreign policy interest of 
the United States.

Sec. 70105. License applications and requirements

    (a) Applications.--(1) A person may apply to the Secretary 
of Transportation for a license or transfer of a license under 
this chapter in the form and way the Secretary prescribes. 
Consistent with the public health and safety, safety of 
property, and national security and foreign policy interests of 
the United States, the Secretary, not later than 180 days after 
[receiving an application] accepting an application in 
accordance with criteria established pursuant to subsection 
(b)(2)(D), shall issue or transfer a license if the Secretary 
decides in writing that the applicant complies, and will 
continue to comply, with this chapter and regulations 
prescribed under this chapter. The Secretary shall inform the 
applicant of any pending issue and action required to resolve 
the issue if the Secretary has not made a decision not later 
than 120 days after [receiving an application] accepting an 
application in accordance with criteria established pursuant to 
subsection (b)(2)(D). 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 written notice not later than 7 days after any 
occurrence when a license is not issued within the deadline 
established by this subsection.
    (2) In carrying out paragraph (1), the Secretary may 
establish procedures for certification of the safety of a 
launch vehicle, reentry vehicle, or safety system, procedure, 
service, or personnel that may be used in conducting licensed 
commercial space launch or reentry activities.
    (b) Requirements.--(1) Except as provided in this 
subsection, all requirements of the laws of the United States 
applicable to the launch of a launch vehicle or the operation 
of a launch site or a reentry site, or the reentry of a reentry 
vehicle, are requirements for a license under this chapter.
    (2) The Secretary may prescribe--
            (A) any term necessary to ensure compliance with 
        this chapter, including on-site verification that a 
        launch [or operation], operation, or reentry complies 
        with representations stated in the application;
            (B) an additional requirement necessary to protect 
        the public health and safety, safety of property, 
        national security interests, and foreign policy 
        interests of the United States; [and]
            (C) by regulation that a requirement of a law of 
        the United States not be a requirement for a license if 
        the Secretary, after consulting with the head of the 
        appropriate executive agency, decides that the 
        requirement is not necessary to protect the public 
        health and safety, safety of property, and national 
        security and foreign policy interests of the United 
        States[.]; and
            (D) regulations establishing criteria for accepting 
        or rejecting an application for a license under this 
        chapter within 60 days after receipt of such 
        application.
    (3) The Secretary may waive a requirement, or the 
requirement to obtain a license, for an individual applicant if 
the Secretary decides that the waiver is in the public interest 
and will not jeopardize the public health and safety, safety of 
property, and national security and foreign policy interests of 
the United States.
          * * * * * * *

Sec. 70106. Monitoring activities

    (a) General Requirements.--A licensee under this chapter 
must allow the Secretary of Transportation to place an officer 
or employee of the United States Government or another 
individual as an observer at a launch site or reentry site the 
licensee uses, at a production facility or assembly site a 
contractor of the licensee uses to produce or assemble a launch 
vehicle or reentry vehicle, or at a site at which a payload is 
integrated with a launch vehicle or reentry vehicle. The 
observer will monitor the activity of the licensee or 
contractor at the time and to the extent the Secretary 
considers reasonable to ensure compliance with the license or 
to carry out the duties of the Secretary under section 70104(c) 
of this title. A licensee must cooperate with an observer 
carrying out this subsection.
          * * * * * * *

[Sec. 70108. Prohibition, suspension, and end of launches and operation 
                    of launch sites]

Sec. 70108. Prohibition, suspension, and end of launches, operation of 
                    launch sites and reentry sites, and reentries

    (a) General Authority.--The Secretary of Transportation may 
prohibit, suspend, or end immediately the launch of a launch 
vehicle or the operation of a launch site or reentry site, or 
reentry of a reentry vehicle, licensed under this chapter if 
the Secretary decides the launch or operation or reentry is 
detrimental to the public health and safety, the safety of 
property, or a national security or foreign policy interest of 
the United States.
          * * * * * * *

[Sec. 70109. Preemption of scheduled launches]

Sec. 70109. Preemption of scheduled launches or reentries

    (a) General.--With the cooperation of the Secretary of 
Defense and the Administrator of the National Aeronautics and 
Space Administration, the Secretary of Transportation shall act 
to ensure that a launch or reentry of a payload is not 
preempted from access to a United States Government launch 
site, reentry site, or launch property, except for imperative 
national need, when a launch date commitment or reentry date 
commitment from the Government has been obtained for a launch 
or reentry licensed under this chapter. A licensee or 
transferee preempted from access to a launch site, reentry 
site, or launch property does not have to pay the Government 
any amount for launch services, or services related to a 
reentry, attributable only to the scheduled launch or reentry 
prevented by the preemption.
          * * * * * * *
    (c) Reports.--In cooperation with the Secretary of 
Transportation, the Secretary of Defense or the Administrator, 
as appropriate, shall submit to Congress not later than 7 days 
after a decision to preempt under subsection (a) of this 
section, a report that includes an explanation of the 
circumstances justifying the decision and a schedule for 
ensuring the prompt launching or reentry of a preempted 
payload.

Sec. 70110. Administrative hearings and judicial review

    (a) Administrative Hearings.--The Secretary of 
Transportation shall provide an opportunity for a hearing on 
the record to--
            (1) an applicant under this chapter, for a decision 
        of the Secretary under section 70105(a) of this title 
        to issue or transfer a license with terms or deny the 
        issuance or transfer of a license;
            (2) an owner or operator of a payload under this 
        chapter, for a decision of the Secretary under section 
        70104(c) of this title to prevent the launch or reentry 
        of the payload; and
            (3) a licensee under this chapter, for a decision 
        of the Secretary under--
                    (A) section 70107 (b) or (c) of this title 
                to modify, suspend, or revoke a license; or
                    (B) section 70108(a) of this title to 
                prohibit, suspend, or end a launch or operation 
                of a launch site or reentry site, or reentry of 
                a reentry vehicle, licensed by the Secretary.
          * * * * * * *

Sec. 70111. Acquiring United States Government property and services

    (a) General Requirements and Considerations.--(1) The 
Secretary of Transportation shall facilitate and encourage the 
acquisition by the private sector and State governments of--
            (A) launch or reentry property of the United States 
        Government that is excess or otherwise is not needed 
        for public use; and
            (B) launch services and reentry services, including 
        utilities, of the Government otherwise not needed for 
        public use.
The Secretary shall establish criteria and procedures for 
determining the priority of competing requests from the private 
sector and State governments for property and services under 
this section.
    (2) In acting under paragraph (1) of this subsection, the 
Secretary shall consider the commercial availability on 
reasonable terms of substantially equivalent launch property or 
launch services or reentry services from a domestic source.
    (b) Price.--(1) In this subsection, ``direct costs'' means 
the [actual costs] additive costs only that--
            (A) can be associated unambiguously with a 
        commercial launch or reentry effort; and
            (B) the Government would not incur if there were no 
        commercial launch or reentry effort.
    (2) In consultation with the Secretary, the head of the 
executive agency providing the property or service under 
subsection (a) of this section shall establish the price for 
the property or service. The price for--
            (A) acquiring launch property by sale or 
        transaction instead of sale is the fair market value;
            (B) acquiring launch property (except by sale or 
        transaction instead of sale) is an amount equal to the 
        direct costs, including specific wear and tear and 
        property damage, the Government incurred because of 
        acquisition of the property; and
            (C) launch services or reentry services is an 
        amount equal to the direct costs, including the basic 
        pay of Government civilian and contractor personnel, 
        the Government incurred because of acquisition of the 
        services.
    (3) The Secretary shall ensure the establishment of uniform 
guidelines for, and consistent implementation of, this section 
by all Federal agencies.
          * * * * * * *
    (d) Collection by Other Governmental Heads.--The head of a 
department, agency, or instrumentality of the Government may 
collect a payment for an activity involved in producing a 
launch vehicle [or its payload for launch] or reentry vehicle, 
or the payload of either, for launch or reentry if the activity 
was agreed to by the owner or manufacturer of the launch 
vehicle, reentry vehicle, or payload.

Sec. 70112. Liability insurance and financial responsibility 
                    requirements

    (a) General Requirements.--(1) When a launch, reentry, or 
site operator license is issued or transferred under this 
chapter, the licensee or transferee shall obtain liability 
insurance or demonstrate financial responsibility in amounts to 
compensate for the maximum probable loss from claims by--
            (A)  * * *
          * * * * * * *
    (3) For the total claims related to one launch or reentry, 
a licensee or transferee is not required to obtain insurance or 
demonstrate financial responsibility of more than--
            (A)  * * *
          * * * * * * *
    (4) An insurance policy or demonstration of financial 
responsibility under this subsection shall protect the 
following, to the extent of their potential liability for 
involvement in launch services or reentry services, at no cost 
to the Government:
            (A)  * * *
          * * * * * * *
    (b) Reciprocal Waiver of Claims.--(1) A launch, reentry, or 
site operator license issued or transferred under this chapter 
shall contain a provision requiring the licensee or transferee 
to make a reciprocal waiver of claims with its contractors, 
subcontractors, and customers, and contractors and 
subcontractors of the customers, involved in launch services or 
reentry services under which each party to the waiver agrees to 
be responsible for property damage or loss it sustains, or for 
personal injury to, death of, or property damage or loss 
sustained by its own employees resulting from an activity 
carried out under the applicable license.
    (2) The Secretary of Transportation shall make, for the 
Government, executive agencies of the Government involved in 
launch services or reentry services, and contractors and 
subcontractors involved in launch services or reentry services, 
a reciprocal waiver of claims with the licensee or transferee, 
contractors, subcontractors, and customers of the licensee or 
transferee, and contractors and subcontractors of the 
customers, involved in launch services or reentry services 
under which each party to the waiver agrees to be responsible 
for property damage or loss it sustains, or for personal injury 
to, death of, or property damage or loss sustained by its own 
employees resulting from an activity carried out under the 
applicable license. The waiver applies only to the extent that 
claims are more than the amount of insurance or demonstration 
of financial responsibility required under subsection (a)(1)(B) 
of this section. After consulting with the Administrator and 
the Secretary of the Air Force, the Secretary of Transportation 
may waive, for the Government and a department, agency, and 
instrumentality of the Government, the right to recover damages 
for damage or loss to Government property to the extent 
insurance is not available because of a policy exclusion the 
Secretary of Transportation decides is usual for the type of 
insurance involved.
          * * * * * * *
    (d) Annual Report.--(1) Not later than November 15 of each 
year, the Secretary of Transportation shall submit to the 
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the 
Senate and the Committee on Science[, Space, and Technology] of 
the House of Representatives a report on current determinations 
made under subsection (c) of this section related to all issued 
licenses and the reasons for the determinations.
          * * * * * * *
    (e) Launches or Reentries Involving Government Facilities 
and Personnel.--The Secretary of Transportation shall establish 
requirements consistent with this chapter for proof of 
financial responsibility and other assurances necessary to 
protect the Government and its executive agencies and personnel 
from liability, death, bodily injury, or property damage or 
loss as a result of a launch or operation of a launch site or 
reentry site or a reentry involving a facility or personnel of 
the Government. The Secretary may not relieve the Government of 
liability under this subsection for death, bodily injury, or 
property damage or loss resulting from the willful misconduct 
of the Government or its agents.
    (f) Collection and Crediting Payments.--The head of a 
department, agency, or instrumentality of the Government shall 
collect a payment owed for damage or loss to Government 
property under its jurisdiction or control resulting from an 
activity carried out under a launch, reentry, or site operator 
license issued or transferred under this chapter. The payment 
shall be credited to the current applicable appropriation, 
fund, or account of the department, agency, or instrumentality.

Sec. 70113. Paying claims exceeding liability insurance and financial 
                    responsibility requirements

    (a) General Requirements.--(1) To the extent provided in 
advance in an appropriation law or to the extent additional 
legislative authority is enacted providing for paying claims in 
a compensation plan submitted under subsection (d) of this 
section, the Secretary of Transportation shall provide for the 
payment by the United States Government of a successful claim 
(including reasonable litigation or settlement expenses) of a 
third party against a licensee or transferee under this 
chapter, a contractor, subcontractor, or customer of the 
licensee or transferee, or a contractor or subcontractor of a 
customer, resulting from an activity carried out under the 
license issued or transferred under this chapter for death, 
bodily injury, or property damage or loss resulting from an 
activity carried out under the license. However, claims may be 
paid under this section only to the extent the total amount of 
successful claims related to one launch or reentry--
            (A) is more than the amount of insurance or 
        demonstration of financial responsibility required 
        under section 70112(a)(1)(A) of this title; and
            (B) is not more than $1,500,000,000 (plus 
        additional amounts necessary to reflect inflation 
        occurring after January 1, 1989) above that insurance 
        or financial responsibility amount.
          * * * * * * *
    (d) Surveys, Reports, and Compensation Plans.--(1) If as a 
result of an activity carried out under a license issued or 
transferred under this chapter the total of claims related to 
one launch or reentry is likely to be more than the amount of 
required insurance or demonstration of financial 
responsibility, the Secretary shall--
            (A) survey the causes and extent of damage; and
            (B) submit expeditiously to Congress a report on 
        the results of the survey.
    (2) Not later than 90 days after a court determination 
indicates that the liability for the total of claims related to 
one launch or reentry may be more than the required amount of 
insurance or demonstration of financial responsibility, the 
President, on the recommendation of the Secretary, shall submit 
to Congress a compensation plan that--
            (A)  * * *
          * * * * * * *

Sec. 70115. Enforcement and penalty

    (a)  * * *
    (b) General Authority.--(1) In carrying out this chapter, 
the Secretary of Transportation may--
            (A)  * * *
          * * * * * * *
            (D) under lawful process--
                    (i) enter at a reasonable time a launch 
                site, reentry site, production facility, 
                assembly site of a launch vehicle or reentry 
                vehicle, or site at which a payload is 
                integrated with a launch vehicle or reentry 
                vehicle to inspect an object to which this 
                chapter applies or a record or report the 
                Secretary requires be made or kept under this 
                chapter; and
          * * * * * * *

Sec. 70117. Relationship to other executive agencies, laws, and 
                    international obligations

    (a) Executive Agencies.--Except as provided in this 
chapter, a person is not required to obtain from an executive 
agency a license, approval, waiver, or exemption to launch a 
launch vehicle or operate a launch site or reentry site, or to 
reenter a reentry vehicle.
          * * * * * * *
    (d) Consultation.--The Secretary of Transportation is 
encouraged to consult with a State to simplify and expedite the 
approval of a space launch or reentry activity.
          * * * * * * *
    [(f) Launch Not an Export.--A launch vehicle or payload 
that is launched is not, because of the launch, an export for 
purposes of a law controlling exports.]
    (f) Launch Not an Export; Reentry Not an Import.--A launch 
vehicle, reentry vehicle, or payload that is launched or 
reentered is not, because of the launch or reentry, an export 
or import, respectively, for purposes of a law controlling 
exports or imports.
    (g) Nonapplication.--This chapter does not apply to--
            (1) a launch, [operation of a launch vehicle or 
        launch site,] reentry, operation of a launch vehicle or 
        reentry vehicle, or operation of a launch site or 
        reentry site, or other space activity the Government 
        carries out for the Government; or
            (2) planning or policies related to the launch, 
        reentry, operation, or activity.
          * * * * * * *

Sec. 70120. Regulations

    The Secretary of Transportation, within 6 months after the 
date of the enactment of this section, shall issue regulations 
to carry out this chapter that include--
            (1) guidelines for industry to obtain sufficient 
        insurance coverage for potential damages to third 
        parties;
            (2) procedures for requesting and obtaining 
        licenses to operate a commercial launch vehicle and 
        reentry vehicle;
            (3) procedures for requesting and obtaining 
        operator licenses for launch and reentry; and
            (4) procedures for the application of government 
        indemnification.

Sec. 70121. Report to Congress

    The Secretary of Transportation shall submit to Congress an 
annual report to accompany the President's budget request 
that--
            (1) describes all activities undertaken under this 
        chapter, including a description of the process for the 
        application for and approval of licenses under this 
        chapter and recommendations for legislation that may 
        further commercial launches and reentries; and
            (2) reviews the performance of the regulatory 
        activities and the effectiveness of the Office of 
        Commercial Space Transportation.
          * * * * * * *
                              ----------                              


               NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ACT OF 1958

      TITLE I--SHORT TITLE, DECLARATION OF POLICY, AND DEFINITIONS

          * * * * * * *

                   declaration of policy and purpose

    Sec. 102. (a)  * * *
          * * * * * * *
    [(f) The Congress declares that the general welfare of the 
United States requires that the unique competence in scientific 
and engineering systems of the National Aeronautics and Space 
Administration also be directed toward the development of 
advanced automobile propulsion systems. Such development shall 
be conducted so as to contribute to the achievement of the 
purposes set forth in section 302(b) of the Automotive 
Propulsion Research and Development Act of 1978.
    [(g)] (f) The Congress declares that the general welfare of 
the United States requires that the unique competence of the 
National Aeronautics and Space Administration in science and 
engineering systems be directed to assisting in bioengineering 
research, development, and demonstration programs designed to 
alleviate and minimize the effects of disability.
    [(h)] (g) It is the purpose of this Act to carry out and 
effectuate the policies declared in subsections (a), (b), (c), 
(d), (e), [(f), and (g)] and (f).
          * * * * * * *

      TITLE II--COORDINATION OF AERONAUTICAL AND SPACE ACTIVITIES

          * * * * * * *

                        reports to the congress

    Sec. 206. (a) The President shall transmit to the Congress 
in [January] May of each year a report, which shall include (1) 
a comprehensive description of the programed activities and the 
accomplishments of all agencies of the United States in the 
field of aeronautics and space activities during the preceding 
[calendar] fiscal year, and (2) an evaluation of such 
activities and accomplishments in terms of the attainment of, 
or the failure to attain, the objectives described in section 
102(c) of this Act.
          * * * * * * *

                        TITLE III--MISCELLANEOUS

          * * * * * * *
                         access to information
    Sec. 303. (a) Information obtained or developed by the 
Administrator in the performance of his functions under this 
Act shall be made available for public inspection, except (A) 
information authorized or required by Federal statute to be 
withheld, (B) information classified to protect the national 
security, and (C) information described in subsection (b) or 
(c): Provided, That nothing in this Act shall authorize the 
withholding of information by the Administrator from the duly 
authorized committees of the Congress.
          * * * * * * *
    (c)(1) The Administrator, at his discretion or at the 
request of a private sector entity, shall delay for a period of 
at least one day, but not to exceed 5 years, the unrestricted 
public disclosure of technical data in the possession of, or 
under the control of, the Administration that has been 
generated in the performance of experimental, developmental, or 
research activities or programs funded jointly by the 
Administration and such private sector entity.
    (2) Within 1 year after the date of the enactment of the 
National Aeronautics and Space Administration Authorization 
Act, Fiscal Year 1997, the Administrator shall issue 
regulations to carry out this subsection. Paragraph (1) shall 
not take effect until such regulations are issued.
    (3) Regulations issued pursuant to paragraph (2) shall 
include--
            (A) guidelines for a determination of whether data 
        is technical data within the meaning of this 
        subsection;
            (B) provisions to ensure that technical data is 
        available for dissemination within the United States to 
        United States persons and entities in furtherance of 
        the objective of maintaining leadership or 
        competitiveness in civil and governmental aeronautical 
        and space activities by the United States industrial 
        base; and
            (C) a specification of the period or periods for 
        which the delay in unrestricted public disclosure of 
        technical data is to apply to various categories of 
        such data, and the restrictions on disclosure of such 
        data during such period or periods, including a 
        requirement that the maximum 5-year protection under 
        this subsection shall not be provided unless at least 
        50 percent of the funding for the activities or 
        programs is provided by the private sector.
    (4) The Administrator shall annually report to the Congress 
all determinations made under paragraph (1).
    (5) For purposes of this subsection, the term ``technical 
data'' means any recorded information, including computer 
software, that is or may be directly applicable to the design, 
engineering, development, production, manufacture, or operation 
of products or processes that may have significant value in 
maintaining leadership or competitiveness in civil and 
governmental aeronautical and space activities by the United 
States industrial base.
          * * * * * * *
                              ----------                              


   SECTION 504 OF THE NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION 
                  AUTHORIZATION ACT, FISCAL YEAR 1993

SEC. 504. LAUNCH VOUCHER DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM.

    (a) Commercial Space Voucher Demonstration Program; 
Effective Period.--The Administrator shall establish a 
demonstration program to award vouchers for the payment of 
commercial launch services and payload integration services for 
the purpose of launching payloads funded by [the Office of 
Commercial Programs within] the National Aeronautics and Space 
Administration to become effective October 1, 1993. [Such 
program shall not be effective after September 30, 1995.]
          * * * * * * *
    [(c) Assumption of Certain Responsibilities.--In carrying 
out the demonstration program established under subsection (a), 
the Administrator, in awarding vouchers, is limited to the 
launch of payloads funded by the Office of Commercial Programs 
within the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
    [(d)] (c) Assistance.--The Administrator may provide 
voucher award recipients with such assistance, including 
contract formulation and technical support during the proposal 
evaluation, as may be necessary, to ensure the purchase of cost 
effective and reasonably reliable commercial launch services 
and payload integration services.
    [(e)] (d) Report.--The Administrator shall conduct an 
ongoing review of the program established under this section, 
and shall, not later than January 31, 1995, report to Congress 
the results of such a review, together with recommendations for 
further action relating to the program.
                              ----------                              


                  UNITARY WIND TUNNEL PLAN ACT OF 1949

                                TITLE I

    Sec. 101. The Administrator of the National Aeronautics and 
Space Administration (hereinafter referred to as the 
``Administrator'') and the Secretary of Defense are hereby 
authorized and directed jointly to develop a unitary plan for 
the construction of [transsonic and supersonic] transonic, 
supersonic, and hypersonic wind-tunnel facilities for the 
solution of research, development, and evaluation problems in 
aeronautics, including the construction of facilities at 
educational institutions within the continental Emits of the 
United States for training and research in aeronautics, and to 
revise the uncompleted portions of the unitary plan from time 
to time to accord with changes in national defense requirements 
and scientific and technical advances. The Administrator and 
the Secretaries of the Army, the Navy, and the Air Force are 
authorized to proceed with the construction and equipment of 
facilities in implementation of the unitary plan to the extent 
permitted by appropriations pursuant to existing authority and 
the authority contained in titles I and II of this Act. Any 
further implementation of the unitary plan shall be subject to 
such additional authorizations as may be approved by Congress.
          * * * * * * *
    Sec. 103. (a) The Administrator is hereby authorized to 
expand the facilities at his existing [laboratories] 
laboratories and centers by the construction of additional 
[supersonic] transonic, supersonic, and hypersonic wind 
tunnels, including buildings, equipment, and accessory 
construction, and by the acquisition of land and installation 
of utilities.
          * * * * * * *
    (c) The facilities authorized by this section shall be 
operated and staffed by the Administrator but shall be 
available primarily to industry for testing experimental models 
in connection with the development of aircraft and missiles. 
Such tests shall be scheduled and conducted in accordance with 
industry's requirements and allocation of [laboratory] facility 
time shall be made in accordance with the, public interest, 
with proper emphasis upon the requirements of each military 
service and due consideration of civilian needs.
          * * * * * * *
                              ----------                              


                      TITLE 10, UNITED STATES CODE

          * * * * * * *

                    Subtitle A--General Military Law

          * * * * * * *

               PART IV--SERVICE, SUPPLY, AND PROCUREMENT

          * * * * * * *

                   CHAPTER 137--PROCUREMENT GENERALLY

Sec. 2307. Contract financing

    (a)  * * *
          * * * * * * *
    (h) Action in Case of Fraud.--(1)  * * *
          * * * * * * *
    (8) This subsection applies to the agencies named in 
paragraphs (1), (2), (3), [and (4)] (4), and (6) of section 
2303(a) of this title.
          * * * * * * *

                   Subtitle C--Navy and Marine Corps

                          PART I--ORGANIZATION

Chap.                                                               Sec.

      Definitions...................................................5001
      Department of the Navy........................................5011
      Office of the Chief of Naval Operations.......................5031
     * * * * * * *

                     PART IV--GENERAL ADMINISTRATION

      Secretary of the Navy: Miscellaneous Powers and Duties........7201
      Naval Vessels.................................................7291
     * * * * * * *
      National Oceanographic Partnership Program....................7901
          * * * * * * *

                    PART IV--GENERAL ADMINISTRATION

Chap.                                                               Sec.
      Secretary of the Navy: Miscellaneous Powers and Duties........7201
      Naval Vessels.................................................7291
     * * * * * * *
      National Oceanographic Partnership Program....................7901
          * * * * * * *

        CHAPTER 665--NATIONAL OCEANOGRAPHIC PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM

Sec.
7901. National Oceanographic Partnership Program.
7902. National Ocean Research Leadership Council.
7903. Ocean Research Partnership Coordinating Group.
7904. Ocean Research Advisory Panel.

Sec. 7901. National Oceanographic Partnership Program

    (a) Establishment.--The Secretary of the Navy shall 
establish a program to be known as the ``National Oceanographic 
Partnership Program''.
    (b) Purposes.--The purposes of the program are as follows:
            (1) To promote the national goals of assuring 
        national security, protecting quality of life, and 
        strengthening science and education through improved 
        knowledge of the ocean.
            (2) To coordinate and strengthen oceanographic 
        efforts in support of those goals by--
                    (A) identifying and carrying out 
                partnerships among Federal agencies, academia, 
                industry, and other members of the 
                oceanographic scientific community in the areas 
                of data, resources, and education; and
                    (B) reporting annually to Congress on the 
                program.

Sec. 7902. National Ocean Research Leadership Council

    (a) Council.--There is established a National Ocean 
Research Leadership Council (hereinafter in this chapter 
referred to as the ``Council'').
    (b) Membership.--The Council is composed of the following 
members:
            (1) The Secretary of the Navy, who shall be the 
        chairman of the Council.
            (2) The Administrator of the National Oceanic and 
        Atmospheric Administration, who shall be the vice 
        chairman of the Council.
            (3) The Director of the National Science 
        Foundation.
            (4) The Administrator of the National Aeronautics 
        and Space Administration.
            (5) The Deputy Secretary of Energy.
            (6) The Administrator of the Environmental 
        Protection Agency.
            (7) The Commandant of the Coast Guard.
            (8) The Director of the Geological Survey of the 
        Department of the Interior.
            (9) The Director of the Defense Advanced Research 
        Projects Agency.
            (10) The Director of the Minerals Management 
        Service of the Department of the Interior.
            (11) The President of the National Academy of 
        Sciences, the President of the National Academy of 
        Engineering, and the President of the Institute of 
        Medicine.
            (12) The Director of the Office of Science and 
        Technology.
            (13) The Director of the Office of Management and 
        Budget.
            (14) One member appointed by the Chairman from 
        among individuals who will represent the views of ocean 
        industries.
            (15) One member appointed by the Chairman from 
        among individuals who will represent the views of State 
        governments.
            (16) One member appointed by the Chairman from 
        among individuals who will represent the views of 
        academia.
            (17) One member appointed by the Chairman from 
        among individuals who will represent such other views 
        as the Chairman considers appropriate.
    (c) Term of Office.--The term of office of a member of the 
Council appointed under paragraph (14), (15), (16), or (17) of 
subsection (b) shall be two years, except that any person 
appointed to fill a vacancy occurring before the expiration of 
the term for which his predecessor was appointed shall be 
appointed for the remainder of such term.
    (d) Responsibilities.--The Council shall have the following 
responsibilities:
            (1) To establish the Ocean Research Partnership 
        Coordinating Group as provided in section 7903.
            (2) To establish the Ocean Research Advisory Panel 
        as provided in section 7904.
            (3) To submit to Congress an annual report pursuant 
        to subsection (e).
    (e) Annual Report.--Not later than March 1 of each year, 
the Council shall submit to Congress a report on the National 
Oceanographic Partnership Program. The report shall contain the 
following:
            (1) A description of activities of the program 
        carried out during the fiscal year before the fiscal 
        year in which the report is prepared. The description 
        also shall include a list of the members of the Ocean 
        Research Partnership Coordinating Group, the Ocean 
        Research Advisory Panel, and any working groups in 
        existence during the fiscal year covered.
            (2) A general outline of the activities planned for 
        the program during the fiscal year in which the report 
        is prepared.
            (3) A summary of projects continued from the fiscal 
        year before the fiscal year in which the report is 
        prepared and projects expected to be started during the 
        fiscal year in which the report is prepared and during 
        the following fiscal year.
            (4) A description of the involvement of the program 
        with Federal interagency coordinating entities.
            (5) The amounts requested, in the budget submitted 
        to Congress pursuant to section 1105(a) of title 31 for 
        the fiscal year following the fiscal year in which the 
        report is prepared, for the programs, projects, and 
        activities of the program and the estimated 
        expenditures under such programs, projects, and 
        activities during such following fiscal year.

Sec. 7903. Ocean Research Partnership Coordinating Group

    (a) Establishment.--The Council shall establish an entity 
to be known as the ``Ocean Research Partnership Coordinating 
Group'' (hereinafter in this chapter referred to as the 
``Coordinating Group'').
    (b) Membership.--The Coordinating Group shall consist of 
members appointed by the Council, with one member appointed 
from each Federal department or agency having an oceanographic 
research or development program.
    (c) Chairman.--The Council shall appoint the Chairman of 
the Coordinating Group.
    (d) Responsibilities.--Subject to the authority, direction, 
and control of the Council, the Coordinating Group shall have 
the following responsibilities:
            (1) To prescribe policies and procedures to 
        implement the National Oceanographic Partnership 
        Program.
            (2) To review, select, and identify and allocate 
        funds for partnership projects for implementation under 
        the program, based on the following criteria:
                    (A) Whether the project addresses critical 
                research objectives or operational goals, such 
                as data accessibility and quality assurance, 
                sharing of resources, or education.
                    (B) Whether the project has broad 
                participation within the oceanographic 
                community.
                    (C) Whether the partners have a long-term 
                commitment to the objectives of the project.
                    (D) Whether the resources supporting the 
                project are shared among the partners.
                    (E) Whether the project has been subjected 
                to adequate peer review.
            (3) To promote participation in partnership 
        projects by each Federal department and agency involved 
        with oceanographic research and by prescribing 
        guidelines for participation in the program.
            (4) To submit to the Council an annual report 
        pursuant to subsection (i).
    (e) Partnership Program Office.--The Coordinating Group 
shall establish, using competitive procedures, and oversee a 
partnership program office to carry out such duties as the 
Chairman of the Coordinating Group considers appropriate to 
implement the National Oceanographic Partnership Program, 
including the following:
            (1) To establish and oversee working groups to 
        propose partnership projects to the Coordinating Group 
        and advise the Group on such projects.
            (2) To manage peer review of partnership projects 
        proposed to the Coordinating Group and competitions for 
        projects selected by the Group.
            (3) To submit to the Coordinating Group an annual 
        report on the status of all partnership projects and 
        activities of the office.
    (f) Contract and Grant Authority.--The Coordinating Group 
may authorize one or more of the departments or agencies 
represented in the Group to enter into contracts and make 
grants, using funds appropriated pursuant to an authorization 
for the National Oceanographic Partnership Program, for the 
purpose of implementing the program and carrying out the 
Coordinating Group's responsibilities.
    (g) Forms of Partnership Projects.--Partnership projects 
selected by the Coordinating Group may be in any form that the 
Coordinating Group considers appropriate, including memoranda 
of understanding, cooperative research and development 
agreements, and similar instruments.
    (h) Annual Report.--Not later than February 1 of each year, 
the Coordinating Group shall submit to the Council a report on 
the National Oceanographic Partnership Program. The report 
shall contain, at a minimum, copies of any recommendations or 
reports to the Coordinating Group by the Ocean Research 
Advisory Panel.

Sec. 7904. Ocean Research Advisory Panel

    (a) Establishment.--The Council shall appoint an Ocean 
Research Advisory Panel (hereinafter in this chapter referred 
to as the ``Advisory Panel'') consisting of not less than 10 
and not more than 18 members.
    (b) Membership.--Members of the Advisory Panel shall be 
appointed from among persons who are eminent in the field of 
marine science, or related fields, and who are representative, 
at a minimum, of the interests of government, academia, and 
industry.
    (c) Responsibilities.--(1) The Coordinating Group shall 
refer to the Advisory Panel, and the Advisory Panel shall 
review, each proposed partnership project estimated to cost 
more than $500,000. The Advisory Panel shall make any 
recommendations to the Coordinating Group that the Advisory 
Panel considers appropriate regarding such projects.
    (2) The Advisory Panel shall make any recommendations to 
the Coordinating Group regarding activities that should be 
addressed by the National Oceanographic Partnership Program 
that the Advisory Panel considers appropriate.
          * * * * * * *
                              ----------                              


            FEDERAL FIRE PREVENTION AND CONTROL ACT OF 1974

          * * * * * * *

                    authorization of appropriations

    Sec. 17. (a)  * * *
          * * * * * * *
    (g)(1) Except as otherwise specifically provided with 
respect to the payment of claims under section 11 of this Act, 
there are authorized to be appropriated to carry out the 
purposes of this Act--
            (A)  * * *
          * * * * * * *
            (E) $26,521,000 for the fiscal year ending 
        September 30, 1993; [and]
            (F) $27,529,000 for the fiscal year ending 
        September 30, 1994[.]; and
            (G) $27,560,000 for the fiscal year ending 
        September 30, 1997.
          * * * * * * *
      fire prevention and control guidelines for places of public 
                             accommodation
    Sec. 29. (a) Contents of Guidelines.--The guidelines 
referred to in sections 28 and 30 consist of--
            (1) a requirement that hard-wired, single-station 
        smoke detectors be installed in accordance with 
        National Fire Protection Association Standard 74, or 
        any successor standard thereto, in each guest room in 
        each place of public accommodation affecting commerce; 
        and
            (2) a requirement that an automatic sprinkler 
        system be installed in accordance with National Fire 
        Protection Association Standard 13 or 13-R, whichever 
        is appropriate, or any successor standards thereto, in 
        each place of public accommodation affecting commerce 
        except those places that are 3 stories or lower.
    (b) Exceptions.--(1)  * * *
    (2) The requirement described in subsection (a)(2) shall 
not apply to a place of public accommodation affecting commerce 
to the extent that such place of public accommodation affecting 
commerce is subject to a standard that includes a requirement 
or prohibition that prevents compliance with a provision of 
National Fire Protection Association Standard 13 or 13-R, or 
any successor standards thereto. In such a case, the place of 
public accommodation affecting commerce is exempt only from 
that specific provision.
          * * * * * * *

SEC. 31. FIRE SAFETY SYSTEMS IN FEDERALLY ASSISTED BUILDINGS.

    (a)  * * *
          * * * * * * *
    (c) Housing.--(1)(A) Except as otherwise provided in this 
paragraph, no Federal funds may be used for the construction, 
purchase, lease, or operation by the Federal Government of 
housing in the United States for Federal employees or their 
dependents unless--
            (i) in the case of a multifamily property acquired 
        or rebuilt by the Federal Government after the date of 
        enactment of this section, the housing is protected, 
        before occupancy by Federal employees or their 
        dependents, by an automatic sprinkler system (or 
        equivalent level of safety) and hard-wired smoke 
        detectors; and
            (ii) in the case of any other housing, the housing, 
        before--
                    (I) occupancy by the first Federal 
                employees (or their dependents) who do not 
                occupy such housing as of such date of 
                enactment; or
                    (II) the expiration of 3 years after such 
                date of enactment, or in the case of housing 
                under the control of the Department of the 
                Army, 6 years after such date of enactment,
        whichever occurs first, is protected by hard-wired 
        smoke detectors.
          * * * * * * *
    (2)(A)  * * *
    (B)(i) Except as provided in clause (ii), housing 
assistance may not be used in connection with any rebuilt 
multifamily property, unless after the rebuilding the 
multifamily property complies with the chapter on existing 
apartment buildings of National Fire Protection Association 
Standard 101 (known as the Life Safety Code), or any successor 
standard thereto, as in effect at the earlier of (I) the time 
of any approval by the Department of Housing and Urban 
Development of the specific plan or budget for rebuilding, or 
(II) the time that a binding commitment is made to provide 
housing assistance for the rebuilt property.
    (ii) If any rebuilt multifamily property is subject to, and 
in compliance with, any provision of a State or local fire 
safety standard or code that prevents compliance with a 
specific provision of National Fire Protection Association 
Standard 101, or any successor standard thereto, the 
requirement under clause (i) shall not apply with respect to 
such specific provision.
          * * * * * * *
                              ----------                              


                   WEATHER SERVICE MODERNIZATION ACT

          * * * * * * *

SEC. 702. DEFINITIONS.

    For the purposes of this title, the term--
            (1)  * * *
          * * * * * * *
            [(3) ``Committee'' means the Modernization 
        Transition Committee established by section 707;
            [(4)] (3) ``degradation of service'' means any 
        decrease in or failure to maintain the quality and type 
        of weather services provided by the National Weather 
        Service to the public in a service area, including but 
        not limited to a reduction in existing weather radar 
        coverage at an elevation of 10,000 feet;
            [(5)] (4) ``field office'' means any National 
        Weather Service Office or National Weather Service 
        Forecast Office;
            [(6)] (5) ``Plan'' means the National 
        Implementation Plan required under section 703;
            [(7)] (6) ``relocate'' means to transfer from one 
        location to another location that is outside the local 
        commuting or service area;
            [(8)] (7) ``Secretary'' means the Secretary of 
        Commerce;
            [(9)] (8) ``service area'' means the geographical 
        area for which a field office provides services or 
        conducts observations, including but not limited to 
        local forecasts, severe weather warnings, aviation 
        support, radar coverage, and ground weather 
        observations; and
            [(10)] (9) ``Strategic Plan'' means the 10-year 
        strategic plan for the comprehensive modernization of 
        the National Weather Service, required under section 
        407 of the National Aeronautics and Space 
        Administration Authorization Act, Fiscal Year 1989 (15 
        U.S.C. 313 note).

SEC. 703. NATIONAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN.

    [(a) National Implementation Plan.--]As part of the budget 
justification documents submitted to Congress in support of the 
annual budget request for the Department of Commerce, the 
Secretary shall include a National Implementation Plan for 
modernization of the National Weather Service for each fiscal 
year following fiscal year 1993 until such modernization is 
complete. The Plan shall set forth the actions, during the 2-
year period beginning with the fiscal year for which the budget 
request is made, that will be necessary to accomplish the 
objectives described in the Strategic Plan, and shall include--
            (1) detailed requirements for new technologies, 
        facilities, staffing levels and positions, and funding, 
        in accordance with the overall schedule for 
        modernization;
            (2) notification of any proposed action to change 
        operations at a field office and the intended date of 
        such operational change;
            [(3) identification of any field office that the 
        Secretary intends to certify under section 706, 
        including the intended date of such certification;
            [(4)] (3) special measures to test, evaluate, and 
        demonstrate key elements of the modernized National 
        Weather Service operations prior to national 
        implementation, including a multistation operational 
        demonstration which tests the performance of the 
        modernization in an integrated manner for a sustained 
        period;
            [(5)] (4) detailed plans and funding requirements 
        for meteorological research to be accomplishment under 
        this title to assure that new techniques in forecasting 
        will be developed to utilize the new technologies being 
        implemented in the modernization; and
            [(6)] (5) training and education programs to ensure 
        that employees gain the necessary expertise to utilize 
        the new technologies and to minimize employee 
        displacement as a consequence of modernization.
    [(b) Transmittal to Committee.--The Secretary shall 
transmit a copy of each annual Plan to the Committee.
    [(c) Consultation.--In developing the Plan, the Secretary 
shall consult, as appropriate, with the Committee and public 
entities responsible for providing or utilizing weather 
services.]
          * * * * * * *

[SEC. 706. RESTRUCTURING FIELD OFFICES.

    [Sec. 706. (a) Prohibition.--The Secretary shall not close, 
before January 1, 1996, any field office pursuant to 
implementation of the Strategic Plan.
    [(b) Certification.--The Secretary shall not close, 
consolidate, automate, or relocate any field office, unless the 
Secretary has certified that such action will not result in any 
degradation of service. Such certification shall include--
            [(1) a description of local weather characteristics 
        and weather-related concerns which affect the weather 
        services provided within the service area;
            [(2) a detailed comparison of the services provided 
        within the service area and the services to be provided 
        after such action;
            [(3) a description of any recent or expected 
        modernization of National Weather Service operations 
        which will enhance services in the service area;
            [(4) an identification of any area within any State 
        which would not receive coverage (at an elevation of 
        10,000 feet) by the next generation weather radar 
        network;
            [(5) evidence, based upon operational demonstration 
        of modernized National Weather Service operations, 
        which was considered in reaching the conclusion that no 
        degradation in service will result from such action; 
        and
            [(6) any report of the Committee submitted under 
        section 707(c) that evaluates the proposed 
        certification.
    [(c) Public Review.--Each certification decision shall be 
preceded by--
            [(1) publication in the Federal Register of a 
        proposed certification; and
            [(2) a 60-day period after such publication during 
        which the public may provide comments to the Secretary 
        on the proposed certification.
    [(d) Final Decision.--If after consideration of the public 
comment received under subsection (c) the Secretary, in 
consultation with the Committee, decides to close, consolidate, 
automate, or relocate any such field office, the Secretary 
shall publish a final certification in the Federal Register and 
submit the certification to the Committee on Commerce, Science, 
and Transportation of the Senate and the Committee on Science, 
Space, and Technology of the House of Representatives.
    [(e) Special Circumstances.--The Secretary may not close or 
relocate any field office--
            [(1) which is located at an airport, unless the 
        Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary of 
        Transportation and the Committee, first conducts an air 
        safety appraisal, determines that such action will not 
        result in degradation of service that affects aircraft 
        safety, and includes such determination in the 
        certification required under subsection (b); or
            [(2) which is the only office in a State, unless 
        the Secretary first evaluates the effect on weather 
        services provided to in-State users, such as State 
        agencies, civil defense officials, and local public 
        safety offices, and includes in the certification 
        required under subsection (b) the Secretary's 
        determination that a comparable level of weather 
        services provided to such in-State users will remain.
    [(f) Liaison Officer.--The Secretary may not close, 
consolidate, automate, or relocate a field office until 
arrangements have been made to maintain for a period of at 
least 2 years at least one person in the service area to act as 
a liaison officer who--
            [(1) provides timely information regarding the 
        activities of the National Weather Service which may 
        affect service to the community, including 
        modernization and restructuring; and
            [(2) works with area weather service users, 
        including persons associated with general aviation, 
        civil defense, emergency preparedness, and the news 
        media, with respect to the provision of timely weather 
        warnings and forecasts.

[SEC. 707. MODERNIZATION TRANSITION COMMITTEE.

    [(a) Establishment.--There is established a committee of 12 
members to be known as the Modernization Transition Committee.
    [(b) Membership and Terms.--(1) The Committee shall consist 
of--
            [(A) five members representing agencies and 
        departments of the United States which are responsible 
        for providing or using weather services, including but 
        not limited to the National Weather Service, the 
        Department of Defense, the Federal Aviation 
        Administration, and the Federal Emergency Management 
        Agency; and
            [(B) seven members to be appointed by the Secretary 
        from civil defense and public safety organizations, 
        news media, any labor organization certified by the 
        Federal Labor Relations Authority as an exclusive 
        representative of weather service employees, 
        meteorological experts, and private sector users of 
        weather information such as pilots and farmers.
    [(2) The terms of office of a member of the Committee shall 
be 3 years; except that, of the original membership, four shall 
serve a 5-year term, four shall serve a 4-year term, and four 
shall serve a 3-year term. No individual may serve for more 
than one additional 3-year term.
    [(3) The Secretary shall designate a chairman of the 
Committee from among its members.
    [(c) Duties.--(1) The Committee may review any proposed 
certification under section 706 for which the Secretary has 
provided a notice of intent to certify in the Plan, and should 
review such a proposed certification if there is a significant 
possibility of degradation of service within the affected 
service area. Upon the request of the Committee, the Secretary 
shall make available to the Committee the supporting documents 
developed by the Secretary in connection with the proposed 
certification. The Committee may prepare and submit to the 
Secretary, prior to publication of the proposed certification, 
a report which evaluates the proposed certification on the 
basis of the modernization criteria and with respect to the 
requirement that there be no degradation of service.
    [(2) The Committee shall advise the Congress and the 
Secretary on--
            [(A) the implementation of the Strategic Plan, 
        annual development of the Plan, and establishment and 
        implementation of modernization criteria; and
            [(B) matters of public safety and the provision of 
        weather services which relate to the comprehensive 
        modernization of the National Weather Service.
    [(d) Pay and Travel Expenses.--Members of the Committee who 
are not employees of the United States shall each be paid at a 
rate equal to the daily equivalent of the rate for GS-18 of the 
General Schedule under section 5332 of title 5, United States 
Code, for each day (including travel time) during which the 
member is engaged in the actual performance of duties vested in 
the Committee. Members shall receive travel expenses, including 
per diem in lieu of subsistence, as authorized by section 5703 
of title 5, United States Code.
    [(e) Staff.--The Secretary shall make available to the 
Committee such staff, information, and assistance as it may 
reasonably require to carry out its activities.
    [(f) Termination.--The Committee shall terminate on 
December 31, 1999.]
          * * * * * * *
                              ----------                              


                 NATIONAL SEA GRANT COLLEGE PROGRAM ACT

          * * * * * * *

SEC. 203. DEFINITIONS.

    As used in this title--
            (1)  * * *
          * * * * * * *
            (4) The term ``field related to ocean, coastal, and 
        Great Lakes resources'' means any [discipline or field 
        (including marine science (and the physical, natural, 
        and biological sciences, and engineering, included 
        therein), marine technology, education, marine affairs 
        and resource management, economics, sociology, 
        communications, planning, law, international affairs, 
        and public administration)] field or discipline 
        involving scientific research which is concerned with 
        or likely to improve the understanding, assessment, 
        development, utilization, or conservation of ocean, 
        coastal, and Great Lakes resources.
          * * * * * * *

SEC. 208. FELLOWSHIPS.

    (a)  * * *
    [(b) Dean John A. Knauss Marine Policy Fellowship.--The 
Under Secretary may award marine policy fellowships to support 
the placement of individuals at the graduate level of education 
in fields related to ocean, coastal and Great Lakes resources 
in positions with the executive and legislative branches of the 
United States Government. A fellowship awarded under this 
subsection shall be for a period of not more than 1 year.]
          * * * * * * *

SEC. 209. SEA GRANT REVIEW PANEL.

    (a) Establishment.--There shall be established an 
independent committee to be known as the sea grant review 
panel. The panel shall, on the 60th day after the date of the 
enactment of the Sea Grant Program Improvement Act of 1976, 
supersede the sea grant advisory panel in existence before such 
date of enactment.
            (1) applications or proposals for, and performance 
        under, grants and contracts awarded under section 205 
        [and section 3 of the Sea Grant Program Improvement Act 
        of 1976];
            (2)  * * *
          * * * * * * *

SEC. 212. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

    [(a) There is authorized to be appropriated to carry out 
the provisions of sections 205 and 208 of this Act, and section 
3 of the Sea Grant Program Improvement Act of 1976 (33 U.S.C. 
1124a), an amount--
            [(1) for fiscal year 1991, not to exceed 
        $44,398,000;
            [(2) for fiscal year 1992, not to exceed 
        $46,014,000;
            [(3) for fiscal year 1993, not to exceed 
        $47,695,000;
            [(4) for fiscal year 1994, not to exceed 
        $49,443,000; and
            [(5) for fiscal year 1995, not to exceed 
        $51,261,000.]
    (a) Grants and Contracts; Fellowships.--There are 
authorized to be appropriated to carry out sections 205 and 
208, $34,500,000 for fiscal year 1997.
    (b)(1) There is authorized to be appropriated for 
administration of this Act, including section 209, by the 
National Sea Grant Office and the Administration, [an amount--
            [(A) for fiscal year 1991, not to exceed 
        $2,500,000;
            [(B) for fiscal year 1992, not to exceed 
        $2,600,000;
            [(C) for fiscal year 1993, not to exceed 
        $2,700,000;
            [(D) for fiscal year 1994, not to exceed 
        $2,800,000; and
            [(E) for fiscal year 1995, not to exceed 
        $2,900,000] $1,500,000 for fiscal year 1997.
          * * * * * * *
                              ----------                              


       SECTION 3 OF THE SEA GRANT PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 1976

[SEC. 3. SEA GRANT INTERNATIONAL PROGRAM.

  [(a) In General.--The Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans 
and Atmosphere may enter into contracts and make grants under 
this section to--
          [(1) enhance cooperative international research and 
        educational activities on ocean, coastal and Great 
        Lakes resources;
          [(2) promote shared marine activities with 
        universities in countries with which the United States 
        has sustained mutual interest in ocean, coastal, and 
        Great Lakes resources;
          [(3) encourage technology transfer that enhances wise 
        use of ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes resources in 
        other countries and in the United States;
          [(4) promote the exchange among the United States and 
        foreign nations of information and data with respect to 
        the assessment, development, utilization, and 
        conservation of such resources;
          [(5) use the national sea grant college program as a 
        resource in other Federal civilian agency international 
        initiatives whose purposes are fundamentally related to 
        research, education, technology transfer and public 
        service programs concerning the understanding and wise 
        use of ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes resources; and
          [(6) enhance regional collaboration between foreign 
        nations and the United States with respect to marine 
        scientific research, including activities which improve 
        understanding of global oceanic and atmospheric 
        processes, undersea minerals resources within the 
        exclusive economic zone and special areas, and 
        productivity and enhancement of living marine resources 
        in--
                  [(A) the Caribbean and Latin American 
                regions;
                  [(B) the Pacific Islands region;
                  [(C) the Arctic and Antartic regions;
                  [(D) the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans; and
                  [(E) the Great Lakes.
  [(b) Eligibility, Procedures, and Requirements.--Any sea 
grant college, sea grant program, or sea grant regional 
consortium, and any institution of higher education, 
laboratory, or institute (if the institution, laboratory, or 
institute is located within a State, as defined in section 
203(14) of the National Sea Grant College Program Act (33 
U.S.C. 1122(14)), may apply for and receive financial 
assistance under this section. The Under Secretary shall 
prescribe rules and regulations, in consultation with the 
Secretary of State, to carry out this section. Before approving 
an application for a grant or contract under this section, the 
Under Secretary shall consult with the Secretary of State. A 
grant made, or contract entered into, under this section is 
subject to section 205(d) (2) and (4) of the National Sea Grant 
College Program Act (33 U.S.C. 1124(d) (2) and (4)) and to any 
other requirements that the Under Secretary considers necessary 
and appropriate.]
                              ----------                              


                      NOAA FLEET MODERNIZATION ACT

                  [TITLE VI--NOAA FLEET MODERNIZATION

[SEC. 601. SHORT TITLE.

    [This title may be cited as the ``NOAA Fleet Modernization 
Act''.

[SEC. 602. DEFINITIONS.

    [In this title, the term--
            [(1) ``NOAA'' means the National Oceanic and 
        Atmospheric Administration within the Department of 
        Commerce.
            [(2) ``NOAA fleet'' means the fleet of research 
        vessels owned or operated by NOAA.
            [(3) ``Plan'' means the NOAA Fleet Replacement and 
        Modernization Plan described in section 604.
            [(4) ``Secretary'' means the Secretary of Commerce.
            [(5) ``UNOLS'' means University-National 
        Oceanographic Laboratory System.

[SEC. 603. FLEET REPLACEMENT AND MODERNIZATION PROGRAM.

    [The Secretary is authorized to implement, subject to the 
requirements of this Act, a 15-year program to replace and 
modernize the NOAA fleet.

[SEC. 604. FLEET REPLACEMENT AND MODERNIZATION PLAN.

    [(a) In General.--To carry out the program authorized in 
section 603, the Secretary shall develop and submit to Congress 
a replacement and modernization Plan for the NOAA fleet 
covering the years authorized under section 610.
    [(b) Timing.--The Plan required in subsection (a) shall be 
submitted to Congress within 30 days of the date of enactment 
of this Act, and updated on an annual basis.
    [(c) Plan Elements.--The Plan required in subsection (a) 
shall include the following--
            [(1) the number of vessels proposed to be 
        modernized or replaced, the schedule for their 
        modernization or replacement, and anticipated funding 
        requirements;
            [(2) the number of vessels proposed to be 
        constructed, leased, or chartered;
            [(3) the number of vessels, or days at sea, that 
        can be obtained by using the vessels of the UNOLS;
            [(4) the number of vessels that will be made 
        available to NOAA by the Secretary of the Navy, or any 
        other federal official, and the terms and conditions 
        for their availability;
            [(5) the proposed acquisition of modern scientific 
        instrumentation for the NOAA fleet, including acoustic 
        systems, data transmission positioning and 
        communication systems, physical, chemical, and 
        meteorological oceanographic systems, and data 
        acquisition and processing systems; and
            [(6) the appropriate role of the NOAA Corps in 
        operating and maintaining the NOAA fleet.
    [(d) Contracting Limitation.--The Secretary may not enter 
into any contract for the construction, lease, or service life 
extension of a vessel of the NOAA fleet before the date of the 
submission to Congress of the Plan required in subsection (a).

[SEC. 605. DESIGN OF NOAA VESSELS.

    [(a) Design Requirement.--Except for the vessel designs 
identified under subsection (b), the Secretary, working through 
the Office of the NOAA Corps Operations and the Systems 
Procurement Office, shall--
            [(1) prepare requirements for each class of vessel 
        to be constructed or converted under the Plan; and
            [(2) contract competitively from nongovernmental 
        entities with expertise in shipbuilding for vessel 
        design and construction based on the requirements for 
        each class of vessel to be acquired.
    [(b) Exception.--The Secretary shall--
            [(1) report to Congress identifying any existing 
        vessel design or design proposal that meets the 
        requirements of the Plan within 30 days after the date 
        of enactment of this Act and shall promptly advise the 
        Congress of any modification of these designs; and
            [(2) submit to Congress as part of the annual 
        update of the Plan required in section 604, any 
        subsequent existing vessel design or design proposals 
        that meet the requirements of the Plan.

[SEC. 606. CONTRACT AUTHORITY.

    [(a) Multiyear Contracts.--
            [(1) In general.--Subject to paragraphs (2) and 
        (3), and notwithstanding section 1341 of title 31, 
        United States Code and section 3732 of the Revised 
        Statutes of the United States (41 U.S.C. 11), the 
        Secretary may acquire vessels for the NOAA fleet by 
        purchase, lease, lease-purchase, or otherwise, under 
        one or more multiyear contracts.
            [(2) Required findings.--The Secretary may not 
        enter into a contract pursuant to this subsection 
        unless the Secretary finds with respect to that 
        contract that--
                    [(A) there is a reasonable expectation that 
                throughout the contemplated contract period the 
                Secretary will request from Congress funding 
                for the contract at the level required to avoid 
                contract termination; and
                    [(B) the use of the contract will promote 
                the best interests of the United States by 
                encouraging competition and promoting economic 
                efficiency in the operation of the NOAA fleet.
            [(3) Required contract provisions.--The Secretary 
        may not enter into a contract pursuant to this 
        subsection unless the contract includes--
                    [(A) a provision under which the obligation 
                of the United States to make payments under the 
                contract for any fiscal year is subject to the 
                availability of appropriations provided in 
                advance for those payments;
                    [(B) a provision that specifies the term of 
                effectiveness of the contract; and
                    [(C) appropriate provisions under which, in 
                case of any termination of the contract before 
                the end of the term specified pursuant to 
                subparagraph (B), the United States shall only 
                be liable for the lesser of--
                            [(i) an amount specified in the 
                        contract for such a termination; or
                            [(ii) amounts that--
                                    [(I) were appropriated 
                                before the date of the 
                                termination for the performance 
                                of the contract or for 
                                procurement of the type of 
                                acquisition covered by the 
                                contract; and
                                    [(II) are unobligated on 
                                the date of the termination.
    [(b) Service Contracts.--Notwithstanding any other 
provision of law, the Secretary may enter into multiyear 
contracts for oceanographic research, fisheries research, and 
mapping and charting services to assist the Secretary in 
fulfilling NOAA missions. The Secretary may only enter into 
these contracts if--
            [(1) the Secretary finds that it is in the public 
        interest to do so;
            [(2) the contract is for not more than 7 years; and
            [(3)(A) the cost of the contract is less than the 
        cost (including the cost of operation, maintenance, and 
        personnel) to the NOAA of obtaining those services on 
        NOAA vessels; or
            [(B) NOAA vessels are not available or cannot 
        provide those services.
    [(c) Bonding Authority.--Notwithstanding any other law, the 
Secretary may not require a contractor for the construction, 
alteration, repair or maintenance of a NOAA vessel to provide a 
bid bond, payment bond, performance bond, completion bond, or 
other surety instrument in an amount greater than 20 percent of 
the value of the base contract quantity (excluding options) 
unless the Secretary determines that requiring an instrument in 
that amount will not prevent a responsible bidder or offeror 
from competing for the award of the contract.

[SEC. 607. RESTRICTION WITH RESPECT TO CERTAIN SHIPYARD SUBSIDIES.

    [(a) In General.--The Secretary of Commerce may not award a 
contract for the construction, repair (except emergency 
repairs), or alteration of any vessel of the National Oceanic 
and Atmospheric Administration in a shipyard, if that vessel 
benefits or would benefit from significant subsidies for the 
construction, repair, or alteration of vessels in that 
shipyard.
    [(b) Definition.--In this section, the term ``significant 
subsidy'' includes, but is not limited to, any of the 
following:
            [(1) Officially supported export credits.
            [(2) Direct official operating support to the 
        commercial shipbuilding and repair industry, or to a 
        related entity that favors the operation of 
        shipbuilding and repair, including but not limited to--
                    [(A) grants;
                    [(B) loans and loan guarantees other than 
                those available on the commercial market;
                    [(C) forgiveness of debt;
                    [(D) equity infusions on terms inconsistent 
                with commercially reasonable investment 
                practices; and
                    [(E) preferential provision of goods and 
                services.
            [(3) Direct official support for investment in the 
        commercial shipbuilding and repair industry, or to a 
        related entity that favors the operation of 
        shipbuilding and repair, including but not limited to 
        the kinds of support listed in paragraph (2)(A) through 
        (E), and any restructuring support, except public 
        support for social purposes directly and effectively 
        linked to shipyard closures.
            [(4) Assistance in the form of grants, preferential 
        loans, preferential tax treatment, or otherwise, that 
        benefits or is directly related to shipbuilding and 
        repair for purposes of research and development that is 
        not equally open to domestic and foreign enterprises.
            [(5) Tax policies and practices that favor the 
        shipbuilding and repair industry, directly or 
        indirectly, such as tax credits, deductions, 
        exemptions, and preferences, including accelerated 
        depreciation, if such benefits are not generally 
        available to persons or firms not engaged in 
        shipbuilding or repair.
            [(6) Any official regulation or practice that 
        authorizes or encourages persons or firms engaged in 
        shipbuilding or repair to enter into anticompetitive 
        arrangements.
            [(7) Any indirect support directly related, in law 
        or in fact, to shipbuilding and repair at national 
        yards, including any public assistance favoring 
        shipowners with an indirect effect on shipbuilding or 
        repair activities, and any assistance provided to 
        suppliers of significant inputs to shipbuilding, which 
        results in benefits to domestic shipbuilders.
            [(8) Any export subsidy identified in the 
        Illustrative List of Export Subsidies in the Annex to 
        the Agreement on Interpretation and Application of 
        Articles VI, XVI, and XXIII of the General Agreement on 
        Tariffs and Trade or any other export subsidy that may 
        be prohibited as a result of the Uruguay Round of trade 
        negotiations.

[SEC. 608. USE OF VESSELS.

    [(a) Vessel Agreements.--In implementing the NOAA fleet 
replacement and modernization program, the Secretary shall use 
excess capacity of UNOLS vessels where appropriate and may 
enter into memoranda of agreement with the operators of these 
vessels to carry out this requirement.
    [(b) Report to Congress.--Within one year after the date of 
enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General of the United 
States shall provide a report to Congress, in consultation with 
the Secretary, comparing the cost-efficiency, accounting, and 
operating practices of the vessels of NOAA, UNOLS, other 
Federal agencies, and the United States private sector in 
meeting the missions of NOAA.

[SEC. 609. INTEROPERABILITY.

    [The Secretary shall consult with the Oceanographer of the 
Navy regarding appropriate measures that should be taken, on a 
reimbursable basis, to ensure that NOAA vessels are 
interoperable with vessels of the Department of the Navy, 
including with respect to operation, maintenance, and repair of 
those vessels.

[SEC. 610. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

    [(a) In General.--There are authorized to be appropriated 
to the Secretary for carrying out this title--
            [(1) $50,000,000 for fiscal year 1993;
            [(2) $100,000,000 for fiscal year 1994; and
            [(3) such sums as are necessary for each of the 
        fiscal years 1995, 1996, and 1997.
    [(b) Limitation on Fleet Modernization Activities.--All 
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration fleet 
modernization shipbuilding, and conversion shall be conducted 
in accordance with this title.]
                              ----------                              


      COAST AND GEODETIC SURVEY COMMISSIONED OFFICERS' ACT OF 1948

  AN ACT To provide for the distribution, promotion, separation, and 
 retirement of commissioned officers of the Coast and Geodetic Survey, 
                        and for other purposes.

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

                              [short title

    [Section 1. That this Act may be cited as the ``Coast and 
Geodetic Survey Commissioned Officers' Act of 1948''.

                     [authorized numbers in grades

    [Sec. 2. (a) Of the total authorized number of commissioned 
officers on the active list of the Coast and Geodetic Survey, 
there are authorized numbers in permanent grade, in relative 
rank with officers of the Navy, in the proportion of eight in 
the grade of captain, to fourteen in the grade of commander, to 
nineteen in the grade of lieutenant commander, to twenty-three 
in the grade of lieutenant, to eighteen in the grade of 
lieutenant (junior grade), to eighteen in the grade of ensign.
    [(b) Whenever a final fraction occurs in computing the 
authorized number of officers in any grade, the nearest whole 
number shall be taken, and if such fraction be one-half the 
next higher whole number shall be taken: Provided, That the 
total number of officers as authorized by law shall not be 
increased as the result of the computations prescribed herein, 
and if necessary the number of officers in the lowest grade 
shall be reduced accordingly.
    [(c) No officer shall be reduced in grade or pay or 
separated from the active list as the result of any 
computations made to determine the authorized number of 
officers in the various grades.
    [(d) Nothing in this section shall be construed as 
requiring the filling of any vacancy or as prohibiting 
additional numbers in any grade to compensate for vacancies 
existing in higher grades.
    [(e) The total number of officers on active duty as 
authorized by law may be temporarily exceeded provided that the 
average number on active duty for the fiscal year shall not 
exceed the authorized number.

                 [promotion and separation of officers

    [Sec. 3. Promotion to fill vacancies in all permanent 
grades above that of lieutenant (junior grade) shall be made by 
selection from the next lower respective grades upon 
recommendation of the personnel board hereinafter provided for.
    [Sec. 4. Irrespective of any vacancies, any officer in the 
permanent grade of lieutenant (junior grade) and lieutenant 
shall be considered by the personnel board for promotion to the 
grade of lieutenant and lieutenant commander in sufficient time 
so that, if found fully qualified, such officer may be promoted 
to and appointed in such grade upon completion of seven and 
fourteen years of service, respectively. All promotions under 
this section shall be made on the date on which the required 
service is completed, and the authorized number of officers in 
the grade of lieutenant and lieutenant commander shall be 
temporarily increased, if necessary, to authorize such 
appointments: Provided, That an officer found not fully 
qualified in accordance with this section may be promoted on 
such later date on which he may be found fully qualified.
    [Sec. 5. Irrespective of any vacancies, any officer in the 
permanent grade of lieutenant commander who has completed 
twenty-one years of service and any officer in the permanent 
grade of commander who has completed thirty years of service 
may be considered by the personnel board at any time for 
promotion to the grade of commander and captain, respectively. 
If selected, he may be promoted at any time and the authorized 
number of officers in the grade of commander and captain shall 
be temporarily increased, if necessary, to authorize such 
appointments.
    [Sec. 6. (a) Officers in the permanent grade of ensign 
shall be promoted to and appointed in the grade of lieutenant 
(junior grade) on completion of three years of service, and the 
authorized number of officers in the grade of lieutenant 
(junior grade) shall from time to time be temporarily increased 
as necessary to authorize such appointments.
    [(b) Ensigns who are found not fully qualified at any time 
shall have their commissions revoked and be separated from the 
commissioned service.
    [Sec. 7. Each officer shall be assumed to have, for 
promotion purposes, at least the same length of service as any 
officer below him on the lineal list, except that an officer 
who has lost numbers shall be assumed to have for promotion 
purposes no greater service than the officer next above him in 
his new position on the lineal list.
    [Sec. 8. (a) As recommended by the personnel board--
          [(1) an officer in the permanent grade of captain or 
        commander may be transferred to the retired list; and
          [(2) an officer in the permanent grade of lieutenant 
        commander, lieutenant, or lieutenant (junior grade) who 
        is not qualified for retirement may be separated from 
        the service.
    [(b) In any fiscal year, the total number of officers 
selected for retirement or separation under subsection (a) plus 
the number of officers retired for age may not exceed the whole 
number nearest four percent of the total number of officers 
authorized to be on the active list, except as otherwise 
provided by law.
    [(c) Any retirement or separation under subsection (a) 
shall take effect on the first day of the sixth month beginning 
after the date on which the Secretary of Commerce approves the 
retirement or separation, except that if the officer concerned 
requests earlier retirement or separation, the date shall be as 
determined by the Secretary.
    [Sec. 9. (a) An officer who is separated under section 8 
and who has completed more than three years of continuous 
active service immediately before that separation is entitled 
to separation pay computed under subsection (b) unless the 
Secretary of Commerce determines that the conditions under 
which the officer is separated do not warrant payment of that 
pay.
    [(b)(1) In the case of an officer who has completed five or 
more years of continuing active service immediately before that 
separation, the amount of separation pay which may be paid to 
the officer under this section is 10 percent of the product of 
(A) the years of active service creditable to the officer, and 
(B) twelve times the monthly basic pay to which the officer was 
entitled at the time of separation, or $30,000, whichever is 
less.
    [(2) In the case of an officer who has completed three but 
fewer than five years of continuous active service immediately 
before that separation, the amount of separation pay which may 
be paid to the officer under this section is one-half of the 
amount computed under paragraph (1), but in no event more than 
$15,000.
    [(c) In determining an officer's years of active service 
for the purpose of computing separation pay under this section, 
each full month of service that is in addition to the number of 
full years of service creditable to the officer is counted as 
one-twelfth of a year and any remaining fractional part of a 
month is disregarded.
    [(d)(1) A period for which an officer has previously 
received separation pay, severance pay, or readjustment pay 
under any other provision of law based on service in a 
uniformed service may not be included in determining the years 
of creditable service that may be counted in computing the 
separation pay of the officer under this section.
    [(2) The total amount that an officer may receive in 
separation pay under this section and separation pay, severance 
pay, and readjustment pay under any other provision of law 
based on service in a uniformed service may not exceed $30,000.
    [(e)(1) An officer who has received separation pay under 
this section, or separation pay, severance pay, or readjustment 
pay under any other provision of law, based on service in a 
uniformed service and who later qualifies for retired pay under 
this Act shall have deducted from each payment of retired pay 
so much of that pay as is based on the service for which the 
officer received that separation pay, severance pay, or 
readjustment pay until the total amount deducted is equal to 
the total amount of separation pay, severance pay, and 
readjustment pay received.
    [(2) An officer who has received separation pay under this 
section may not be deprived, by reason of receipt of that pay, 
of any disability compensation to which the officer is entitled 
under the laws administered by the Secretary of Veterans 
Affairs, but there shall be deducted from that disability 
compensation an amount equal to the total amount of separation 
pay received. Notwithstanding the preceding sentence, no 
deduction may be made from disability compensation for the 
amount of separation pay received because of an earlier 
discharge, separation, or release from a period of active duty 
if the disability which is the basis for that disability 
compensation was incurred or aggravated during a later period 
of active duty.
    [Sec. 10. (a) Appointments in and promotions to all 
permanent grades shall be made by the President, by and with 
the advice and consent of the Senate.
    [(b) In time of emergency declared by the President or by 
the Congress, and in time of war, the President is authorized, 
in his discretion, to suspend the operation of all or any part 
or parts of the several provisions of law pertaining to 
promotion.
    [Sec. 11. Nothing in this Act shall be construed to modify 
the provisions of existing law relating to examination of 
officers for promotion, and no officer shall be promoted until 
he shall have passed the prescribed examinations.
    [Sec. 12. (a) Temporary appointment in the grade of ensign 
may be made by the President alone, provided such temporary 
appointment will be terminated at the close of the next regular 
session of the Congress unless confirmed by the Senate.
    [(b) Officers in the permanent grade of ensign may be 
temporarily promoted to and appointed in the grade of 
lieutenant junior grade by the President alone whenever 
vacancies exist in higher grades.
    [(c) When determined by the Secretary of Commerce to be in 
the best interest of the service, officers in any permanent 
grade may be temporarily promoted one grade by the President 
alone. Any such temporary promotion terminates upon the 
transfer of the officer to a new assignment.

                        [retirement of officers

    [Sec. 13. (a) When any commissioned officer serving in a 
rank below that of rear admiral has attained the age of sixty 
years, he shall be placed on the retired list: Provided, That 
this subsection shall not become effective until a date six 
months subsequent to the enactment of this Act, and until such 
effective date the retirement age for officers serving in a 
rank below that of rear admiral shall be sixty-two years.
    [(b) When any officer serving in a rank above that of 
captain has attained the age of sixty-two years, he shall be 
placed on the retired list: Provided, That the President may, 
in his discretion, defer placing any such officer on the 
retired list for the length of time he deems advisable but not 
later than the date upon which such officer attains the age of 
sixty-four years.
    [Sec. 14. When any commissioned officer has completed 
twenty years of service, he may at any time thereafter, upon 
his own application, in the discretion of the President, be 
placed on the retired list.
    [Sec. 16. (a) Each commissioned officer on the retired list 
who first became a member of a uniformed service (as defined in 
section 101 of title 10, United States Code) before September 
8, 1980, shall receive retired pay at the rate determined by 
multiplying--
          [(1) the retired pay base determined under section 
        1406(g) of title 10, United States Code; by
          [(2) 2\1/2\ percent of the number of years of service 
        that may be credited to the officer under section 1405 
        of such title as if the officer's service were service 
        as a member of the Armed Forces.
The retired pay so computed may not exceed 75 percent of the 
retired pay base.
    [(b) Each commissioned officer on the retired list who 
first became a member of a uniformed service (as defined in 
section 101 of title 10, United States Code) on or after 
September 8, 1980, shall receive retired pay at the rate 
determined by multiplying--
          [(1) the retired pay base determined under section 
        1407 of title 10, United States Code; by
          [(2) the retired pay multiplier determined under 
        section 1409 of such title for the number of years of 
        service that may be credited to the officer under 
        section 1405 of such title as if the officer's service 
        were service as a member of the Armed Forces.
    [(c)(1) In computing the number of years of service of an 
officer for the purposes of subsection (a)--
          [(A) each full month of service that is in addition 
        to the number of full years of service creditable to 
        the officer shall be credited as \1/12\ of a year; and
          [(B) any remaining fractional part of a month shall 
        be disregarded.
    [(2) Retired pay computed under this section, if not a 
multiple of $1, shall be rounded to the next lower multiple of 
$1.
    [Sec. 17. (a) Each commissioned officer heretofore or 
hereafter retired pursuant to any provision of law shall be 
placed on the retired list with the highest rank, permanent or 
temporary, held by him while on active duty, if his performance 
of duty, in the case of temporary rank, has been satisfactory 
as determined by the Secretary of the department or departments 
under whose jurisdiction the officer served, and shall receive 
retired pay based on such higher rank: Provided, That for the 
purposes of this section the words ``temporary rank'' shall 
mean temporary rank held prior to June 30, 1946.
    [(b) Officers on the retired list returned to an inactive 
status with higher rank pursuant to subsection (a) of this 
section shall receive retired pay based on such higher rank.
    [Sec. 18. Nothing in this Act shall prevent any officer 
from being placed on the retired list with the highest rank and 
with the highest retired pay to which he might be entitled 
under other provision of law.

                            [personnel board

    [Sec. 19. At least once a year and at such other times as 
may be necessary, the Secretary of Commerce shall appoint a 
personnel board consisting of not less than five officers not 
below the permanent rank of commander on the active list, to 
recommend such changes in the lineal list as the board may 
determine, and to make selections and recommendations for the 
promotion, separation, and retirement of officers as herein 
prescribed: Provided, That in case any recommendation by the 
board is not acceptable to the Secretary of Commerce or to the 
President, the board shall make such further recommendations as 
shall be acceptable.

  [amendments to and repeal of appointment, promotion, and retirement 
                                  laws

    [Sec. 21. (a) Section 5 of the Act of February 16, 1929 (45 
Stat. 1186), as amended by the Act of March 18, 1936 (ch. 147, 
49 Stat. 1164), is hereby further amended by deleting the word 
``not'' in the third line.
    [(b) Section 8 of the Act of January 19, 1942 (59 Stat. 8), 
is hereby amended by deleting the word ``not'' in the fourth 
line, by changing the period at the end of the section to a 
colon, and by adding the words ``Provided further, That any 
officer, upon expiration of his appointment as Director or 
Assistant Director, shall, unless reappointed, revert to the 
grade and number that he would have occupied had he not served 
as Director or Assistant Director. Such officer shall be an 
extra number in his grade and the authorized number of ensigns 
shall be decreased accordingly.''
    [Sec. 22. (a) Sections 1, 2 (except the second proviso of 
section 2(b)), 3, 4, 5, and 6 of the Act of January 19, 1942 
(59 Stat. 8), are hereby repealed.
    [(b) The word ``physicial'' in the first line of section 7 
of the said Act of January 19, 1942, is hereby amended to read 
``physical''.
    [Sec. 23. (a) Original appointments may be made in grades 
up to and including lieutenant after passage of a mental and 
physical examination given in accordance with regulations 
prescribed by the Secretary of Commerce: Provided, That the 
President, under such regulations as he may prescribe, may 
revoke the commission of any officer appointed under this 
section during his first three years of service if he is found 
not qualified for the service.
    [(b) Any person appointed under authority of this section 
shall be placed on the lineal list of active duty officers in a 
position commensurate with his age, education, and experience 
in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary of 
Commerce.
    [(c)(1) For the purposes of basic pay any person appointed 
under this section to the grade of lieutenant or lieutenant 
(junior grade) shall be considered as having, on date of 
appointment, three years or one and one-half years service 
respectively.
    [(2) If a person appointed under this section is entitled 
to credit for the purpose of basic pay under other provision of 
law which would exceed that authorized by subsection (c)(1) he 
shall be credited with that service in lieu of the credit 
provided by subsection (c)(1).
    [Sec. 24. (a) The Secretary may designate positions in the 
Administration as being positions of importance and 
responsibility for which it is appropriate that commissioned 
officers of the Administration, if serving in those positions, 
serve in the grade of vice admiral, rear admiral, or rear 
admiral (lower half) as designated by the Secretary for each 
position, and may assign officers to those positions. An 
officer assigned to any position under this section has the 
grade designated for that position if appointed to that grade 
by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the 
Senate.
    [(b) the number of officers serving on active duty under 
appointments under this section may not exceed--
          [(1) one in the grade of vice admiral;
          [(2) three in the grade of rear admiral; and
          [(3) three in the grade of rear admiral (lower half).
    [(c) An officer appointed to a grade under this section, 
while serving in that grade, shall have the pay and allowances 
of the grade to which appointed.
    [(d) An appointment of an officer under this section--
          [(1) does not vacate the permanent grade held by the 
        officer; and
          [(2) creates a vacancy on the active list.
    [(e) the provisions of section 2(g) of Reorganization Plan 
Numbered 4 of 1970 (84 Stat. 2090, 5 U.S.C. App.) apply to an 
officer who serves in a grade above captain under an 
appointment under this section in the same manner as if the 
officer served in that grade under section 2(d) or 2(f) of that 
Reorganization Plan.]
                              ----------                              --
--------


                        ACT OF FEBRUARY 16, 1929

 CHAP. 22I. An Act To amend the Act entitled ``An Act to readjust the 
 pay and allowances of the commissioned and enlisted personnel of the 
 Army, Navy, Marine Corps, Coast Guard, Coast and Geodetic Survey, and 
      Public Health Service,'' approved June 10, 1922, as amended.

          * * * * * * *
    [Sec. 5. That the Director of the Coast and Geodetic Survey 
shall be appointed and hold office as now authorized by law; 
his appointment shall create a vacancy, and while holding said 
office he shall have the rank, pay, and allowances of a Chief 
of Bureau of the Navy Department.]
                              ----------                              


                        ACT OF JANUARY 19, 1942

   AN ACT To regulate the distribution and promotion of commissioned 
   officers of the Coast and Geodetic Survey, and for other purposes.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
the United States of America in Congress assembled, [That the 
total number of commissioned officers on the active list of the 
Coast and Geodetic Survey shall be distributed in rank relative 
with officers of the Navy in the proportion of five in the 
grade of captain to eight in the grade of commander, to eighty-
seven in the grades of lieutenant commander, lieutenant, 
lieutenant (junior grade) and ensign, inclusive: Provided, That 
the number of officers in the grade of lieutenant commander 
shall not exceed 35 per centum of the total authorized number 
of commissioned officers on the active list.

                         [promotion of officers

    [Sec. 2. (a) Promotions to the grades of captain and 
commander shall be made as vacancies occur and shall be by 
selection from the next lower respective grades upon 
recommendation of the Personnel Board hereinafter authorized.
    [(b) Except as otherwise provided in this Act, lieutenants, 
lieutenants (junior grade), and ensigns shall be promoted to 
the respective grades of lieutenant commander, lieutenant, and 
lieutenant (junior grade) in the order in which the names 
appear on the current lineal list hereinafter authorized as the 
officers become credited with seventeen years', ten years', and 
three years' service, respectively: Provided, That lieutenants 
with not less than fourteen years' accredited service and 
lieutenants (junior grade) with not less than seven years' 
accredited service may be promoted to the grades of lieutenant 
commander and lieutenant, respectively, at any time in such 
numbers as will not cause the resulting number of officers in 
each of the grades of lieutenant commander and lieutenant to 
exceed 28 per centum of the total authorized force of 
commissioned officers on the active list: Provided further, 
That for purposes of pay, longevity pay, allowances, promotion, 
or retirement, which are now or may hereafter be authorized for 
officers appointed after June 30, 1992, there shall be counted 
in addition to active commissioned service, as deck officer and 
junior engineer in excess of one year.
    [(c) All promotions, when made, shall be effective from the 
date of the respective vacancies, and promotions to all grades 
shall be made by the President, by and with the advice and 
consent of the Senate.
    [(d) Each officer shall be assumed to have, for promotion 
purposes, at least the same length of service as any officer 
junior to him on the lineal list hereinafter authorized, except 
that an officer who has lost numbers on the lineal list shall 
be assumed to have for promotion purposes no greater service 
than the officer next above him in his new position on the 
lineal list.
    [(e) Whenever a final fraction occurs in computing the 
authorized number of officers of any grade, the nearest whole 
number shall be regarded as the authorized number: Provided, 
That the total number of officers as authorized by law shall 
not be increased as a result of the computations prescribed 
herein, and if necessary the number of officers in the lowest 
grade shall be reduced accordingly: Provided further, That no 
officer shall be reduced in grade or pay or separated from the 
active list as the result of any computations made to determine 
the authorized number of officers in the various grades.

                            [personnel board

    [Sec. 3. At least once a year and at such other times as 
may be necessary, the Secretary of Commerce shall appoint and 
convene a Personnel Board consisting of not less than five 
officers not below the rank of commander on the active list of 
the Coast and Geodetic Survey, to make the computations 
prescribed herein, to prepare and maintain a lineal list on 
which the names of all officers on the active list shall be 
arranged in such order as the board may determine, and to make 
selections and recommendations for the promotion and retirement 
of officers as herein prescribed.
    [Sec. 4. Each report of the Personnel Board shall be 
submitted to the President for approval or disapproval: 
Provided, That in case any recommendation by the board is not 
acceptable to the President, the board shall be so informed and 
shall make such further recommendations as shall be acceptable 
to the President and, if necessary, the board shall be 
reconvened for this purpose: Provided further, That when the 
report of the board shall have been approved, the 
recommendations therein shall be carried out in accordance with 
the provisions of this Act.

                        [retirement of officers

    [Sec. 5. The President may transfer to the retired list 
from the grades of captain, commander, lieutenant commander, 
and lieutenant such officers as have been recommended for 
retirement by the Personnel Board: Provided, That the total 
number of officers so retired in any fiscal year shall not 
exceed the whole number nearest 1 per centum of the total 
authorized number of commissioned officers on the active list, 
and, except as otherwise required by law, the number of 
officers so retired plus the number of officers retired for age 
in any fiscal year shall not exceed 3 per centum of the total 
authorized number of commissioned officers on the active list: 
Provided further, That all transfers to the retired list 
pursuant to this Act shall become effective on the next ensuing 
July 1 and the resulting vacancies may be filled as of that 
date.
    [Sec. 6. Officers retired pursuant to section 5 of this Act 
shall receive pay at the rate of 2\1/2\ per centum of their 
active-duty pay at the time of retirement multiplied by the 
number of years of service for which entitled to credit in the 
computation of their pay on the active list, not to exceed a 
total of 75 per centum of said active-duty pay: Provided, That 
a fractional year of six months or more shall be considered a 
full year in computing the number of years' service by which 
the rate of 2\1/2\ per centum is multiplied.
    [Sec. 7. Should an officer fail in his physical examination 
for promotion and be found incapacitated for service by reason 
of physical disability contracted in line of duty, he shall be 
retired with the rank to which he would otherwise be entitled 
to be promoted, with retired pay at the rate of 75 per centum 
of the active-duty pay of that grade.

                       [miscellaneous provisions

    [Sec. 8. The President is authorized to appoint, by and 
with the advice and consent of the Senate, an officer on the 
active list of the Coast and Geodetic Survey not below the rank 
of commander to serve as Assistant Director; his appointment 
shall not create a vacancy and while holding said office he 
shall have the rank, pay, and allowances of rear admiral (lower 
half): Provided, That any officer who may be retired while 
serving as Director or Assistant Director, or who has or shall 
have served four years as Director or Assistant Director and is 
retired after completion of such service while serving in a 
lower rank or grade, shall be retired with the rank, pay, and 
allowances authorized by law for the highest grade or rank held 
by him as Director or Assistant Director.
    [Sec. 9. The provisions of sections 1 to 5, inclusive, of 
the Act of April 20, 1940 (54 Stat. 144), relating to the 
burial expenses of Navy personnel, and the provisions of the 
Act of June 4, 1920 (41 Stat. 824), as amended by the Act of 
May 22, 1928 (45 Stat. 710), relating to the payment of a death 
gratuity to dependents of commissioned officers and other 
personnel of the Navy or Marine Corps, shall apply to 
commissioned officers of the Coast and Geodetic Survey, except 
that the duties and obligations imposed in said Acts upon the 
Secretary of the Navy are hereby imposed for the purposes of 
this Act upon the Secretary of Commerce who shall cause the 
necessary payments to be made from funds appropriated for the 
Coast and Geodetic Survey: Provided, That the provisions of 
this section shall be effective from December 8, 1941.
    [Sec. 10. Commissioned officers, ships' officers, and 
members of the crews of vessels of the Coast and Geodetic 
Survey shall be permitted to purchase commissary and 
quartermaster supplies as far as available from the Army, Navy, 
or Marine Corps at the prices charged officers and enlisted men 
of those services.
    [Sec. 11. All laws or parts of laws inconsistent with the 
provisions of this Act are hereby repealed, and the provisions 
of this Act shall be in effect in lieu thereof.]
                              ----------                              


                     SECTION 9 OF PUBLIC LAW 87-649

AN ACT To revise, codify, and enact title 37 of the United States Code, 
       entitled ``Pay and Allowances of the Uniformed Services''.

          * * * * * * *

  [AMENDMENTS TO CERTAIN LAWS APPLICABLE TO COAST AND GEODETIC SURVEY

    [Sec. 9. (a) Section 3(a) of the Act of August 10, 1956, 
ch. 1041, as amended (33 U.S.C. 857a(a)), is amended by adding 
the following new clause at the end thereof:
          [``(10) Chapter 40. Leave.''
    [(b) The Act of June 3, 1948, ch. 390, as amended, is 
further amended as follows:
          [(1) Section 9 (33 U.S.C. 853h) is amended by 
        striking out the words ``active-duty pay with longevity 
        credit'' wherever they appear and inserting the words 
        ``basic pay'' in place thereof.
          [(2) Section 16(a) (33 U.S.C. 853o(a)) is amended by 
        striking out the words ``active-duty pay with longevity 
        credit'' wherever they appear and inserting the words 
        ``basic pay'' in place thereof.
    [(c) Active service in the Coast and Geodetic Survey as a 
deck officer or junior engineer and active service counted on 
June 30, 1992, for longevity pay, shall be credited to 
commissioned officers as active commissioned service for 
purposes of retirement and retirement pay.]
                              ----------                              


                          ACT OF MAY 22, 1917

CHAP. 20.--An Act To temporarily increase the commissioned and warrant 
   and enlisted strength of the Navy and Marine Corps, and for other 
                               purposes.

          * * * * * * *
    [Sec. 16. The President is authorized, whenever in his 
judgment a sufficient national emergency exists, to transfer to 
the service and jurisdiction of a military department such 
vessels, equipment, stations, and commissioned officers of the 
Environmental Science Services Administration as he may deem to 
the best interest of the country, and after such transfer all 
expenses connected therewith shall be defrayed out of the 
appropriations for the department to which transfer is made: 
Provided, That such vessels, equipment, stations, and 
commissioned officers shall be returned to the Environmental 
Science Services Administration when such national emergency 
ceases, in the opinion of the President, and nothing in this 
section shall be construed as transferring the Environmental 
Science Services Administration or any of its functions from 
the Department of Commerce except in time of national emergency 
and to the extent herein provided: Provided further, That any 
of the commissioned officers of the Environmental Science 
Services Administration who may be transferred as provided in 
this section, shall, while under the jurisdiction of a military 
department, have proper military status and shall be subject to 
the laws, regulations, and orders for the government of the 
Army, Navy, or Air Force, as the case may be, insofar as the 
same may be applicable to persons whose retention permanently 
in the military service of the United States is not 
contemplated by law.
    [Nothing in this Act shall reduce the total amount of pay 
and allowances they were receiving at the time of transfer. 
While actually employed in active service under direct orders 
of the War Department or of the Navy Department members of the 
Coast and Geodetic Survey shall receive the benefit of all 
provisions of laws relating to disability incurred in line of 
duty or loss of life.
    [When serving with the Army, Navy, or Air Force, 
commissioned officers of the Coast and Geodetic Survey shall 
rank with and after officers of corresponding grade in the 
Army, Navy, or Air Force of the same length of service in 
grade.
    [And nothing in this Act shall be construed to affect or 
alter their rates of pay and allowances when not assigned to 
military duty as hereinbefore mentioned.
    [The Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of Commerce 
shall jointly prescribe regulations governing the duties to be 
performed by the Environmental Science Services Administration 
in time of war, and for the cooperation of that service with 
the military departments in time of peace in preparation for 
its duties in war, which regulations shall not be effective 
unless approved by each of those Secretaries, and included 
therein may be rules and regulations for making reports and 
communications between a military department and the 
Environmental Science Services Administration.]
                              ----------                              


                        ACT OF DECEMBER 3, 1942

    AN ACT Authorizing the temporary appointment or advancement of 
 commissioned officers of the Coast and Geodetic Survey in time of war 
             or national emergency, and for other purposes.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
the United States of America in Congress assembled, [Personnel 
of the Environmental Science Services Administration shall be 
subject in like manner and to the same extent as personnel of 
the Navy to all laws authorizing temporary appointment or 
advancement of commissioned officers in time of war or national 
emergency subject to the following limitations:
          [(1) Commissioned officers in the service of a 
        military department, under the provisions of section 16 
        of the Act of May 22, 1917 (40 Stat. 87), as amended, 
        may, upon the recommendation of the Secretary of the 
        military department concerned, be temporarily promoted 
        to higher ranks or grades.
          [(2) Commissioned officers in the service of the 
        Environmental Science Services Administration may be 
        temporarily promoted to fill vacancies in ranks and 
        grades caused by the transfer of commissioned officers 
        to the service and jurisdiction of a military 
        department under the provisions of section 16 of the 
        Act of May 22, 1917 (40 Stat. 87), as amended.
          [(3) Temporary appointments may be made in all grades 
        to which original appointments in the Environmental 
        Science Service Administration are authorized: 
        Provided, That the number of officers holding temporary 
        appointments shall not exceed the number of officers 
        transferred to a military department under the 
        provisions of section 16 of the Act of May 22, 1917 (40 
        Stat. 87), as amended.
    [Sec. 3. Any commissioned officer of the Coast and Geodetic 
Survey promoted to a higher grade at any time after December 7, 
1941, shall be deemed for all purposes to have accepted his 
promotion to higher grade upon the date such promotion is made 
by the President unless he shall expressly decline such 
promotion, and shall receive the pay and allowances of the 
higher grade from such date unless he is entitled under some 
other provision of law to receive the pay and allowances of the 
higher grade from an earlier date. No such officer who shall 
have subscribed to the oath of office required by section 1757, 
Revised Statutes, shall be required to renew such oath or to 
take a new oath upon his promotion to a higher grade, if his 
service after the taking of such an oath shall have been 
continuous.]
                              ----------                              --
--------


                           PUBLIC LAW 91-621

 AN ACT To clarify the status and benefits of commissioned officers of 
  the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and for other 
                               purposes.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
    [Section 1. Definitions listed in section 101 of title 10, 
United States Code, apply to this Act, except as noted below:
          [(1) ``active duty'' means full-time duty in the 
        active service of a uniformed service;
          [(2) ``Administration'' means the National Oceanic 
        and Atmospheric Administration;
          [(3) ``grade'' means a step or degree, in a graduated 
        scale of office or rank, that is established and 
        designated as a grade by law or regulation;
          [(4) ``officer'' means a commissioned officer;
          [(5) ``Secretary'' means the Secretary of Commerce;
          [(6) ``Secretary concerned'' as defined in section 
        101 of title 37, United States Code.
          [(7) ``uniformed services'' is defined in section 101 
        of title 37, United States Code.
    [Sec. 2. Each officer retired pursuant to any provision of 
law shall be placed on the retired list with the highest grade 
satisfactorily held by him while on active duty including 
active duty pursuant to recall, under permanent or termpoary 
appointment, and he shall receive retired pay based on such 
highest grade: Provided, That his performance of duty in such 
highest grade has been satisfactory, as determined by the 
Secretary of the department or departments under whose 
jurisdiction the officer served, and unless retired for 
disability, his length of service in such highest grade is no 
less than that required by the Secretary of officers retiring 
under permanent appointment in that grade.
    [Sec. 3. (a) Active service of officers of the 
Administration shall be deemed to be active military service in 
the armed forces of the United States for the purposes of all 
rights, privileges, immunities, and benefits now or hereafter 
provided by--
          [(1) laws administered by the Secretary of Veterans 
        Affairs;
          [(2) laws administered by the Interstate Commerce 
        Commission; and
          [(3) the Soldiers' and Sailors' Civil Relief Act of 
        1940, as amended.
In the administration of these laws and regulations, with 
respect to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 
the authority vested in the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary 
of the Army, the Secretary of the Navy, and the Secretary of 
the Air Force and their respective departments shall be 
exercised by the Secretary of Commerce.
    [(b) The Secretary may provide medical and dental care, 
including care in private facilities, for personnel of the 
Administration entitled to that care by law or regulation.
    [Sec. 4. (a) Commissioned officers, ships' officers, and 
members of crews of vessels of the Administration shall be 
permitted to purchase commissary and quartermaster supplies as 
far as available from the armed forces at the prices charged 
officers and enlisted men of those services.
    [(b) The Secretary may purchase ration supplies for messes, 
stores, uniforms, accouterments, and related equipment for sale 
aboard ship and shore stations of the Administration to members 
of the uniformed services and to personnel assigned to such 
ships or shore stations. Sales shall be in accordance with 
regulations prescribed by the Secretary, and proceeds therefrom 
shall, as far as is practicable, fully reimburse the 
appropriations charged without regard to fiscal year.
    [(c) Rights extended to members of the uniformed services 
in this section are extended to their widows and to such others 
as are designated by the Secretary concerned.
    [Sec. 5. (a) All statutes that applied to commissioned 
officers of the Coast and Geodetic Survey on July 12, 1965, 
shall apply to officers of the Environmental Science Services 
Administration on that date and subsequent thereto, unless 
amended or repealed, and service as a commissioned officer in 
the Coast and Geodetic Survey shall constitute service as a 
commissioned officer in the Environmental Science Services 
Administration.
    [(b) All statutes that applied to commissioned officers of 
the Coast and Geodetic Survey on July 12, 1965, and to 
commissioned officers of the Environmental Science Services 
Administration subsequent to that date shall apply to officers 
of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration on 
October 3, 1970, and subsequent thereto, unless amended or 
repealed, and service as a commissioned officer in the Coast 
and Geodetic Survey or the Environmental Science Services 
Administration shall constitute service as a commissioned 
officer in the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
    [(c) The enactment of this Act does not increase or 
decrease the pay or allowances of any person.
    [(d) A reference to a law replaced by this Act, including a 
reference in a regulation, order, or other law, is deemed to 
refer to the corresponding provisions enacted by this Act.
    [(e) An order, rule, or regulation in effect under a law 
replaced by this Act continues in effect under the 
corresponding provisions enacted by this Act until repealed, 
amended, or superseded.
    [(f) An inference of a legislative construction is not to 
be drawn by reason of the location in the United States Code of 
a provision enacted by this Act or by reason of the caption or 
catchline thereof.
    [(g) If any provision of this Act or the application 
thereof to any person or circumstances is held invalid, the 
remainder of this Act and the application of such provision to 
other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby.]
                              ----------                              --
--------


                         ACT OF AUGUST 10, 1956

 AN ACT To revise, codify, and enact into law, title 10 of the United 
  States Code, entitled ``Armed Forces'', and title 32 of the United 
               States Code, entitled ``National Guard''.

          * * * * * * *

        [PARTS OF TITLE 10 ADOPTED FOR COAST AND GEODETIC SURVEY

    [Sec. 3. (a) The rules of law that apply to the Armed 
Forces under the following provisions of title 10, Armed 
Forces, United States Code, as those provisions are in effect 
from time to time, apply also to the commissioned officer corps 
of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration:
          [(1) Section 1036, Escorts for dependents of members: 
        transportation and travel allowances.
          [(2) Chapter 61, Retirement or Separation for 
        Physical Disability.
          [(3) Chapter 69, Retired Grade, except sections 1370, 
        1374, 1375, and 1387(a).
          [(4) Chapter 71, Computation of Retired Pay, except 
        formula No. 3 of section 1401.
          [(5) Chapter 73, Retired Serviceman's Family 
        Protection Plan; Survivor Benefit Plan.
          [(6) Chapter 75, Death Benefits.
          [(7) Section 2771, Final settlement of accounts: 
        deceased members.
          [(8) Sections 2731, 2732, and 2735, property loss 
        incident to service.
          [(9) Such other provisions of subtitle A as may be 
        adopted for applicability to the commissioned officer 
        corps of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
        Administration by any other provision of law.
          [(10) Chapter 40. Leave.
          [(11) Section 2634, Motor vehicles: for members on 
        permanent change of station.
          [(12) Section 1035, Deposits of Savings.
          [(13) Section 716, Commissioned officers: transfers 
        among the Armed Forces, the National Oceanic and 
        Atmospheric Administration, and the Public Health 
        Service.
          [(14) Section 7572(b), Quarters: accommodations in 
        place of for members on sea duty.
          [(15) Section 1174a, special separation benefits 
        (except that benefits under subsection (b)(2)(B) of 
        such section are subject to the availability of 
        appropriations for such purpose and are provided at the 
        discretion of the Secretary of Commerce).
    [(b) The authority vested by title 10, United States Code, 
in the ``military departments'' Secretary concerned'', or ``the 
Secretary of Defense'' with respect to the provisions of law 
referred to in subsection (a) shall be exercised, with respect 
to the commissioned officer corps of the National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration, by the Secretary of Commerce or his 
designee.]
                              ----------                              


                          ACT OF MAY 18, 1920

 CHAP. 190.--An Act To increase the efficiency of the commissioned and 
enlisted personnel of the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, Coast Guard, Coast 
            and Geodetic Survey, and Public Health Service.

          * * * * * * *
    [Sec. 11. That in lieu of compensation now prescribed by 
law, commissioned officers of the Coast and Geodetic Survey 
shall receive the same pay and allowances as now are or 
hereafter may be prescribed for officers of the Navy with whom 
they hold relative rank as prescribed in the Act of May 22, 
1917, entitled ``An Act to temporarily increase the 
commissioned and warrant and enlisted strength of the Navy and 
Marine Corps, and for other purposes,'' including longevity; 
and all laws relating to the retirement of commissioned 
officers of the Navy shall hereafter apply to commissioned 
officers of the Coast and Geodetic Survey: Provided, That 
hereafter longevity pay for officers in the Army, Navy, Marine 
Corps, Coast Guard, Public Health Service, and Coast and 
Geodetic Survey shall be based on the total of all service in 
any or all of said services.]
                              ----------                              


                          ACT OF JULY 22, 1947

   AN ACT To provide basic authority for the performance of certain 
  functions and activities of the Coast and Geodetic Survey, and for 
                            other purposes.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
the United States of America in Congress assembled, [That the 
Coast and Geodetic Survey is hereby authorized to provide, from 
appropriations now or hereafter made available to the Survey, 
for--
    [(a) Transportation (including packing, unpacking, crating, 
and uncrating) of personal and household effects of 
commissioned officers who die on active duty to the official 
residence of record for such officers, or, upon application by 
their dependents, to such other locations as may be determined 
by the Director of the Coast and Geodetic Survey or by such 
person as he may designate.
    [(b) Reimbursement, under regulations prescribed by the 
Secretary, of commissioned officers for food, clothing, 
medicines, and other supplies furnished by them for the 
temporary relief of distressed persons in remote localities and 
to shipwrecked persons temporarily provided for by them.
    [Sec. 2. The Secretary of Commerce is hereby authorized to 
pay extra compensation to members of crews of vessels when 
assigned duties as instrument observer or recorder, and to 
employees of other Federal agencies while observing tides or 
currents, or tending seismographs or magnetographs, at such 
rates as may be specified from time to time by him and without 
regard to section 301 of the Dual Compensation Act.]
                              ----------                              


                         ACT OF AUGUST 3, 1956

AN ACT To authorize officers of the Coast and Geodetic Survey to act as 
             notaries in places outside the United States.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
the United States of America in Congress assembled, [That, in 
places where the Coast and Geodetic Survey is serving which are 
not within the jurisdiction of any one of the States of the 
continental United States, excluding Alaska commanding officers 
of Coast and Geodetic Survey vessels, and such other officers 
of the Coast and Geodetic Survey as the Secretary of Commerce 
may designate, may exercise the general powers of the notary 
public in the administration of oaths for the execution, 
acknowledgment, and attestation of instruments and papers, and 
the performance of all other notarial acts. The powers hereby 
conferred shall be limited to acts performed in behalf of the 
personnel of the Coast and Geodetic Survey or in connection 
with the proper execution of the functions of that agency.
    [Sec. 2. No fee of any kind shall be paid to any officer 
for the performance of any notarial act herein authorized. The 
signature without seal together with indication of grade of any 
officer performing any notarial act shall be prima facie 
evidence of his authority.]
                              ----------                              


                         ACT OF OCTOBER 1, 1890

CHAP. 1266.--An act to increase the efficiency and reduce the expenses 
of the Signal Corps of the Army, and to transfer the Weather Service to 
                     the Department of Agriculture.

          * * * * * * *
    [Sec. 3. That the Chief of the Weather Bureau, under the 
direction of the Secretary of Agriculture, on and after July 
first, eighteen hundred and ninety-one, shall have charge of 
the forecasting of weather, the issue of storm warnings the 
display of weather and flood signals for the benefit of 
agriculture, commerce, and navigation, the gauging and 
reporting of rivers, the maintenance and operation of sea-coast 
telegraph lines and the collection and transmission of marine 
intelligence for the benefit of commerce and navigation, the 
reporting of temperature and rain-fall conditions for the 
cotton interests, the display of frost and cold-wave signals, 
the distribution of meteorological information in the interests 
of agriculture and commerce, and the taking of such 
meteorological observations as may be necessary to establish 
and record the climatic conditions of the United States, or as 
are essential for the proper execution of the foregoing 
duties.]
          * * * * * * *
    Sec. 9. That on and after July first, eighteen hundred and 
ninety-one, the appropriations for the support of the Signal 
Corps of the Army shall be made with those of other staff corps 
of the Army, and the appropriations for the support of the 
Weather Bureau shall be made with those of the other bureaus of 
the Department of Agriculture[, and it shall be the duty of the 
Secretary of Agriculture to prepare future estimates for the 
Weather Bureau which shall be hereafter specially developed and 
extended in the interest of agriculture.].
          * * * * * * *
                              ----------                              


       SECTION 12 OF THE EARTHQUAKE HAZARDS REDUCTION ACT OF 1977

SEC. 12. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

    (a)(1)  * * *
          * * * * * * *
    (7) There are authorized to be appropriated to the Director 
of the Agency, to carry out this Act, $5,778,000 for the fiscal 
year ending September 30, 1988, $5,788,000 for the fiscal year 
ending September 30, 1989, $8,798,000 for the fiscal year 
ending September 30, 1990, $14,750,000 for the fiscal year 
ending September 30, 1991, $19,000,000 for the fiscal year 
ending September 30, 1992, $22,000,000 for the fiscal year 
ending September 30, 1993, $25,000,000 for the fiscal year 
ending September 30, 1995, [and $25,750,000 for the fiscal year 
ending September 30, 1996] $25,750,000 for the fiscal year 
ending September 30, 1996, and $18,825,000 for the fiscal year 
ending September 30, 1997.
    (b) Geological Survey.--There are authorized to be 
appropriated to the Secretary of the Interior for purposes for 
carrying out, through the Director of the United States 
Geological Survey, the responsibilities that may be assigned to 
the Director under this Act not to exceed $27,500,000 for the 
fiscal year ending September 30, 1978; not to exceed 
$35,000,000 for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1979; not 
to exceed $40,000,000 for the fiscal year ending September 30, 
1980; $32,484,000 for the fiscal year ending September 30, 
1981; $34,425,000 for the fiscal year ending September 30, 
1982; $31,843,000 for the fiscal year ending September 30, 
1983; $35,524,000 for the fiscal year ending September 30, 
1984; $37,300,200 for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1985 
$35,578,000 for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1986; 
$37,179,000 for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1987; 
$38,540,000 for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1988; 
$41,819,000 for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1989; 
$55,283,000 for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1990, of 
which $8,000,000 shall be for earthquake investigations under 
section 11; $50,000,000 for the fiscal year ending September 
30, 1991; $54,500,000 for the fiscal year ending September 30, 
1992; $62,500,000 for the fiscal year ending September 30, 
1993; $49,200,000 for the fiscal year ending September 30, 
1995; [and $50,676,000 for the fiscal year ending September 30, 
1996] $50,676,000 for the fiscal year ending September 30, 
1996, and $46,130,000 for the fiscal year ending September 30, 
1997.
    (c) National Science Foundation.--To enable the Foundation 
to carry out responsibilities that may be assigned to it under 
this Act, there are authorized to be appropriated to the 
Foundation not to exceed $27,500,000 for the fiscal year ending 
September 30, 1978; not to exceed $35,000,000 for the fiscal 
year ending September 30, 1979; not to exceed $40,000,000 for 
the first year ending September 30, 1980; $26,600,000 for the 
fiscal year ending September 30, 1981; $27,150,000 for the 
fiscal year ending September 30 1982; $25,000,000 for the 
fiscal year ending September 30, 1983; $25,800,000 for the 
fiscal year ending September 30, 1984; $28,665,000 for the 
fiscal year ending September 30, 1985 $27,760,000 for the 
fiscal year ending September 30, 1986; $29,009,000 for the 
fiscal year ending September 30, 1987; $28,235,000 for the 
fiscal year ending September 30, 1988; $31,634,000 for the 
fiscal year ending September 30, 1989; $38,454,000 for the 
fiscal year ending September 30, 1990. Of the amounts 
authorized for Engineering under section 101(d)(1)(B) of the 
National Science Foundation Authorization Act of 1988, 
$24,000,000 is authorized for carrying out this Act for the 
fiscal year ending September 30, 1991, and of the amounts 
authorized for Geosciences under section 101(d)(1)(D) of the 
National Science Foundation Authorization Act of 1988, 
$13,000,000 is authorized for carrying out this Act for the 
fiscal year ending September 30, 1991. Of the amounts 
authorized for Research and Related Activities under section 
101(e)(1) of the National Science Foundation Authorization Act 
of 1988, $29,000,000 is authorized for engineering research 
under this Act, and $14,750,000 is authorized for geosciences 
research under this Act, for the fiscal year ending September 
30, 1992. Of the amounts authorized for Research and Related 
Activities under section 101(f)(1) of the National Science 
Foundation Authorization Act of 1988, $34,500,000 is authorized 
for engineering research under this Act, and $17,500,000 is 
authorized for geosciences research under this Act, for the 
fiscal year ending September 30, 1993. There are authorized to 
be appropriated, out of funds otherwise authorized to be 
appropriated to the National Science Foundation: (1) 
$16,200,000 for engineering research and $10,900,000 for 
geosciences research for the fiscal year ending September 30, 
1995, and (2) $16,686,000 for engineering research and 
$11,227,000 for geosciences research for the fiscal year ending 
September 30, 1996. There are authorized to be appropriated, 
out of funds otherwise authorized to be appropriated to the 
National Science Foundation, $28,400,000 for fiscal year 1997, 
including $17,500,000 for engineering research and $10,900,000 
for geosciences research.
    (d) National Intitute of Standards and Technology--To 
enable the National Institute of Standards and Technology to 
carry out responsibilities that may be assigned to it under 
this Act, there are authorized to be appropriated $425,000 for 
the fiscal year ending September 30, 1981; $425,000 for the 
fiscal year ending September 30, 1982; $475,000 for the fiscal 
year ending September 30, 1983; $475,000 for the fiscal year 
ending September 30, 1984; $498,750 for the fiscal year ending 
September 30, 1985 $499,000 for the fiscal year ending 
September 30, 1986; $521,000 for the fiscal year ending 
September 30, 1987; $525,000 for the fiscal year ending 
September 30, 1988; $525,000 for the fiscal year ending 
September 30, 1989; $2,525,000 for the fiscal year ending 
September 30, 1990; $1,000,000 for the fiscal year ending 
September 30, 1991; $3,000,000 for the fiscal year ending 
September 30, 1992; and $4,750,000 for the fiscal year ending 
September 30, 1993. There are authorized to be appropriated, 
out of funds otherwise authorized to be appropriated to the 
National Institute of Standards and Technology, $1,900,000 for 
the fiscal year ending September 30, 1995, and $1,957,000 for 
the fiscal year ending September 30, 1996. There are authorized 
to be appropriated, out of funds otherwise authorized to be 
appropriated to the National Institute of Standards and 
Technology, $1,932,000 for fiscal year 1997.
          * * * * * * *

                    XIII. Committee Recommendations

    On April 25, 1996, a quorum being present, the Committee 
favorably reported the Omnibus Civilian Science Authorization 
Act, by voice vote, and recommends its enactment.

                         XIV. Dissenting Views

 Dissenting Views on the Omnibus Civilian Science Authorization Act of 
                                  1996

Introduction

    Democratic Members of the House Science Committee 
unanimously supported a substitute amendment which incorporated 
the President's budget request in fiscal year 1997 for the 
civilian research and development programs under our 
jurisdiction. Compared to the extreme measures endorsed by the 
Republicans, the President's request is a more responsible 
balancing of investments in our Nation's future with efforts to 
end federal deficit spending. The Republican Majority's desire 
to blindly slash spending can balance the budget in the short-
term, but irresponsibly cutting programs endangers our long-
term economic well-being.
    Civilian research and development programs are especially 
vital in building a high-skill work force and in creating new 
knowledge that translates into new products, processes and 
insights. Compared to the Republican plan, the Democratic 
alternative would invest approximately $2 billion more in our 
children's future. Further, the Democratic alternative supports 
all types of research and development work. We do not choose 
winners and losers by selectively supporting only some types of 
so-called basic research while discriminating against work in 
the social sciences, in environmental research and in 
technology development. The following report documents the 
procedural abuses and policy differences that separate the 
Republican plan from the Democratic vision.

The Continuing Marginalization of the Committee Process

    The process by which the Committee considered the ``Omnibus 
Civilian Science Authorization Act of 1996'' represents a new 
low point in the increasing marginalization of the Committee's 
deliberative process. The markup procedures were obviously 
designed to ensure minimal challenge to the Chairman's budget 
proposal. The tactics were predictable and effective:

 First, bypass the Subcommittee markup. Subcommittee 
        markups take time, are less controllable, and give the 
        minority too much notice. So, over the objections of 
        the Ranking Democratic Subcommittee Members (who 
        jointly wrote to the Chairman on April 4, 1996 
        requesting Subcommittee markups), the bill went to full 
        committee without ever being considered by the 
        subcommittees. Contrary to claims made at the markup, 
        we are not aware of any instance in the past in which 
        Democrats bypassed subcommittee markups over the 
        objections of the Minority members.
 Second, roll all of the authorization bills usually 
        considered separately together into a single $20-
        billion markup vehicle. Marking up individual 
        authorization bills takes too much time and gives 
        Members too much of an opportunity to consider the 
        merits of each bill separately. By packaging them all 
        together, Members with limited time would only be able 
        to focus on a few matters. This strategy worked. Last 
        year, in a process that had already been abbreviated, 
        the Committee and its constituent subcommittees spent 
        49 hours marking up R&D; authorization bills. This year, 
        the Committee spent all of five hours debating the 
        Committee's entire civilian science portfolio. 
        Nevertheless, after about only an hour of debate, the 
        markup was replete with Majority complaints that the 
        Minority was conducting a ``filibuster'' against the 
        bill.
 Third, avoid negotiations; it's the Chairman's way or 
        no way at all. When disagreement surfaced among 
        Republicans about the Chairman's energy R&D; 
        authorization proposal, the Chairman simply jettisoned 
        the energy provisions altogether. After all, resolving 
        disputes takes time, and who has time when the trains 
        are leaving the station? And, in any event, in his 
        capacity as Vice-Chair of the Budget Committee, the 
        Chairman is likely to be successful again this year in 
        inserting his energy R&D; budget in the report 
        accompanying the budget resolution, so who needs an 
        energy R&D; authorization?
 Fourth, set up artifical constraints. This year, 
        without a House-passed budget resolution, the Chairman 
        could not claim that the Science Committee was somehow 
        constrained by budget ``caps'' contained in the non-
        binding resolution. Nevertheless, the Chairman stated 
        that the funding in the bill could not be altered 
        without rendering the Committee's work meaningless or 
        irrelevant to the budget process. However, the bogus 
        nature of these caps and restraints is underscored by 
        the fact the FY96 authorization levels for R&D; which 
        passed the House in H.R. 2405 were $1.15 billion less 
        than the amount ultimately appropriated. In addition, 
        the funding levels in this year's Republican bill are 
        substantially higher than the FY97 levels approved in 
        last year's House-passed budget resolution.
 Finally, don't give anyone any time to actually read 
        and deliberate the bill, since that's just likely to 
        cause more questions and trouble. The Chairman unveiled 
        his stealth bill on Monday morning before a Wednesday 
        full committee markup, during a week when Members were 
        not scheduled to be back in Washington until Tuesday 
        afternoon. The practical result was that Members barely 
        had time to read the 132-page bill and accompanying 
        staff charts and tables, much less to deliberate 
        policies or propose alternatives. In the 103rd 
        Congress, every authorization bill was circulated 
        widely at least ten days before Subcommittee markup.

    The Committee has also continued its unsavory practice of 
making policy first, and finding the facts about those policies 
later. The hearing record was altogether inadequate to give 
Members an opportunity to learn about the programs and make 
informed policy choices. In a number of instances, policy and 
budget positions contained in the Chairman's bill had no basis 
in hearings. For example, Members heard no testimony on NOAA's 
Sea Grant and Ocean and Coastal Management programs, yet the 
Committee drastically cut funding for those programs. 
Conversely, the Chairman's bill increased funding above the 
President's request for NIST's labs and for NASA's science 
programs, without any justification in the record. The 
Technology Subcommittee will hold hearings later to provide the 
post hoc justification for the Committee's actions on the NIST 
labs.
    Why does any of this matter? Are these procedural 
complaints little more than the frustrated expressions of a 
party no longer in power, or, as the Chairman of the Space 
Subcommittee so eloquently put it, the ``squealing of 
animals?'' In our view, what is happening in this and in other 
committees is not just ``inside the Beltway'' gamesmanship. 
What is at stake is the traditional role of expert committees, 
and beyond that the rights and prerogatives of all Members. It 
has become evident that the Republican leadership has decided 
that the considered judgment of expert committees no longer 
matter. As we have seen in many cases this year, bills have 
been brought to the floor which were never reported by 
committees. In other instances, the Republican leadership 
simply rewrote provisions they did not like in committee-
reported bills. These practices have often led to the passage 
of ill-considered legislation which must then be ``fixed'' in 
the quiet backroom negotiations of a conference committee. The 
marginalization of the committees is part of a pattern of 
concentrating political power in the hands of the anointed few 
in the Republican leadership. The committee structure is being 
replaced by webs of personal influence that bind a handful of 
Republican Members to the Republican leadership. So far, 
Republican freshman have supported this power structure, but 
they may be beginning to learn that the flip side of this 
centralization of power is the inevitable devaluation of their 
own vote.
    It is ironic that the Chairman asserted at the markup--
erroneously--that Minority members had called for the abolition 
of the Science Committee. To the contrary, we believe that a 
Committee of Members well-versed in science and technology, and 
their implications for economic growth, environmental and 
public health, and the quality of life, is critical to informed 
Congressional decision-making. What we object to, quite simply, 
are any efforts to bypass the collective, considered judgment 
of the Committee through tactics that discourage Members from 
participating in thoughtful discussion, negotiation, and 
compromise.

Overall Budget Context
    The Omnibus Science Authorization Bill of 1996 reflects the 
stark differences between Republican and Democratic views 
towards the role of research and development in the national 
agenda. Both parties are committed to the need for a balanced 
budget, but the President and Congressional Democrats have 
emphasized the need to include in any balanced budget plan 
sustained investments in R&D; that will stimulate productivity. 
That is, long term economic growth will depend on achieving 
both a balanced budget and productivity gains. Democrats have 
framed this objective as a direct responsibility of the Federal 
Government and have supported not only basic research, but also 
applied research and targeted technology programs. Republicans, 
on the other hand, have emphasized shrinking the Government and 
cutting spending as the only legitimate paths to economic 
growth and have advocated deep reductions in R&D.; For example, 
the 1996 Budget Resolution supported by every Republican Member 
of Congress would have led to a one-third reduction in civilian 
R&D; over seven years.
    Republicans also believe that the market alone should 
address technology development and associated productivity 
gains. However, because of well known market failures, the 
private sector underinvests in long term research and 
technology development and is doing so at an accelerating pace. 
The President's F.Y. 97 budget has set aside funding for 
certain priority investments in R&D; to fill this gap. Not 
surprisingly, many of these critical investments have been 
targeted by Congressional Republicans.
    Thus the debate over R&D;, as in other areas, is more 
related to differing policy priorities than deficit reduction 
per se. The questions Congress will address in the context of 
the F.Y. 97 budget will include allocating resources between 
defense and non-defense programs, determining the breadth of 
the Federal role in funding research and development, and 
structuring R&D; priorities within a declining budget to best 
meet economic and broader social goals.
    On March 19, the President submitted a seven-year budget 
plan which, according to OMB assumptions, eliminates the 
deficit by the year 2000. Under CBO's most cautious economic 
and technical assumptions, the deficit would be eliminated in 
the year 2002 provided that additional contingent policies 
proposed in the budget are carried out. During Committee 
hearings and during the markup, Republicans contrasted the 
President's budget with the Republican budget as too generous 
in early years, yet below the Republican budget in later years. 
Mr. Baker summarized the Republican view by saying that it is 
more humane to ``shoot the baby'' in the first years since the 
final endpoint for both budgets is similar. Although both 
budgets impose long-term budget constraints, the Republican 
cuts in investment are much deeper. Further, the President's 
budget provides sufficient levels of interim funding to make a 
smooth transition--that is, it contains enough funding to 
reduce personnel levels in an orderly fashion and to develop 
the necessary technologies to carry out a cost effective and 
productive science program in the future.

Basic Research

    The Majority has characterized its bill as more supportive 
of basic research than is the President's R&D; budget request, 
which is the basis for the Democratic substitute. During 
Committee markup of the bill, the Chairman displayed a chart 
which purported to show a total authorization level for basic 
research in the bill that was $285 million above the 
President's budget request. However, the chart is misleading 
because it is based on an arbitrary classification of ``basic'' 
versus ``applied'' rather than the classification used by the 
Office of Management and Budget (OMB).\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ OMB Circular A-11, Budget Formulation / Submission Processes, 
specifies that agency R&D; budgets be divided into the categories of 
basic research, applied research, and development. The agencies are 
required to submit to OMB data on budget allocations within these 
categories. The American Association for the Advancement of Science 
(AAAS), which has established an R&D; Budget and Policy Project to track 
this information, has gathered the FY 1997 basic research allocations 
in the President's budget request, as reported by the agencies 
authorized in the bill. AAAS identifies only four of the agencies that 
are authorized by the bill, NSF, NASA, NIST, and EPA, as having 
reported budget allocations for basic research. The basic research 
activities are contained within specific subcomponents of their 
budgets. Historical data show that a percentage of each subcomponent is 
allocated for basic research, where the percentage may change slightly 
from year to year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    For example, the Chairman's chart for basic research 
authorizations in the bill includes NOAA, which reports no 
basic research expenditures to OMB, but excludes EPA, which 
does report such expenditures. The chart also includes 
inappropriate shares of the budget subcomponents for NSF, NASA, 
and NIST that contain basic research activities, but excludes 
subcomponents of NSF and NASA for which basic research 
expenditures are reported. Table 1 shows the comparison of 
budget authority for basic research activities between the 
Republican bill, as reported, and the Democratic substitute.\2\ 
Despite the Chairman's claims to the contrary, it is clear that 
the totals for basic research activities for the Republican 
bill and the Democratic substitute are essentially equivalent, 
the totals differing by less than 0.5 percent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ Agencies report basic research activities for only some budget 
subaccounts. The names of these subaccounts and the amounts included in 
each subaccount that are reported to OMB as supporting basic research 
are shown in the table. Both FY 1997 columns in the table are estimates 
because the percentage of funding for each subaccount that is 
identified as supporting basic research is based on historical data, 
which may vary slightly from year to year. The numbers shown in the 
columns labeled ``FY 1996'' and ``FY 1997, Brown Substitute'' (same 
budget numbers as President's request) were reported by the AAAS R&D; 
Budget and Policy Analysis Project. The numbers in the column labeled 
``FY 1997, Rep. Bill'' result from applying the same percentages, which 
will generate the Brown substitute estimate for basic research funding, 
to the authorizations in the bill for the corresponding subaccounts for 
each agency. 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The two measures do differ, however, in important ways in 
the details of the allocations made and in the policies applied 
to the agencies. While the Majority has expressed a preference 
for NASA Space Science through a more generous allocation than 
in the Democratic substitute, NSF, the premier basic research 
funding agency in the Committee's jurisdiction and the agency 
with the broadest charter for advancing research and education 
in science and engineering, merits less than inflationary 
growth. The Republican bill provides growth of 2.2 percent 
above the FY 1996 Appropriations Conference Report, and less 
than 1 percent above the level in the final FY 1996 omnibus 
appropriation agreement. The equivalent increases for the 
Democratic substitute are 4.6 percent and 3.3 percent, 
respectively. For research project support, the differences are 
more striking, with the Democratic substitute providing 5 
percent growth compared to 1 percent in the bill, relative to 
the FY 1996 omnibus appropriations agreement. As in the NSF 
authorization reported by the Committee during the first 
session of this Congress, the Majority seems determined to 
authorize NSF at levels that are inadequate for meeting the 
vital research and education mission of NSF and that will 
likely be ignored in the appropriations process. The Majority's 
implacable position led to an authorization level for FY 1996 
that was $54 million below the Appropriations Conference 
agreement and $94 million below the final omnibus 
appropriations agreement.
    The Republican bill also totally ignores a major component 
of the federal civilian basic research funding by excluding 
authorizations for the Department of Energy, which has the 
largest basic research budget, after NSF, in the Committee's 
jurisdiction. This negligence is hardly consistent with the 
Majority's claim to champion and protect basic research in the 
federal R&D; budget. The Democratic substitute by contrast 
includes the President's request for DOE.
    Further, unlike the Republican bill, the Democratic 
substitute places no bans or restrictions on legitimate areas 
of scientific inquiry, presuming that merit review will be used 
to select the most promising research directions to advance 
fundamental knowledge. In contrast, the Republican bill 
essentially eliminates EPA's ability to fund research related 
to global climate change and other examples of ``liberal 
claptrap'', and it continues an oblique attack on NSF's support 
of the behavioral and social sciences through elimination of a 
scientific directorate and specific guidance in the 
accompanying report language.
    We object to the unfavorable characterization in the 
Committee View of the value and content of the research 
sponsored by NSF's Social, Behavioral, and Economic Sciences 
(SBE) Directorate in light of the lack of any hearing or 
oversight record to support these statements. The most recent 
testimony received by the Committee concerning the social 
sciences, obtained in hearings on March 2, 1995, May 20, 1993, 
and March 14, 1989, documents the important contributions of 
research in the social, behavioral, and economic sciences. None 
of these hearings provides a basis for questioning the priority 
or basic nature of the research sponsored by NSF in these 
fields.\3\ \4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\ For example, one accomplishment of basic research in the social 
sciences described in the March 2, 1995 hearing was the development of 
game theory, which deals with the study of rational behavior in 
situations involving interdependence. Recently, this body of knowledge 
provided the basis for the design of ground rules for the auction by 
the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) of the radio spectrum for 
personal communications services. Special rules were needed because, 
unlike traditional auctions in which goods are sold one at a time in 
sequence, the licenses had to be sold all at once in a series of rounds 
since the value of a particular license was dependent on what other 
licenses a particular bidder could obtain. The benefit to the 
government of the auction is apparent from the Explanation of the 
Conference Agreement on the Budget (H. Con. Res. 67), which in the 
discussion of Function 950, Undistributed Offsetting Receipts, states 
that, ``The conference agreement assumes the FCC is providing 
sufficient authority to recover value from the spectrum amounting to 
$14 billion over seven years.''
    \4\ Moreover, the overall importance of the social and behavioral 
sciences have been affirmed by the scientific community. The NSF 
Director in a May 22, 1995 letter to the Committee stated:
    I am, however, concerned that we have not been more effective in 
informing Congress about the important role played by the social, 
behavioral, and economic sciences in the Nation's basic research 
enterprise. These areas of science have been an integral part of the 
portfolio of research that we have funded since the 1950s, and are 
important to our mission to maintain the health of the Nation's science 
and engineering enterprise. These disciplines have contributed 
significant advances in research.
    Dr. Bruce Alberts, the President of the National Academy of 
Sciences, recently stated that:
    The National Academy of Sciences strongly affirms that the social 
and behavioral sciences are important disciplines in which independent 
scholarship and basic research have made significant contributions to 
mankind's store of knowledge and to the ability to meet critical 
societal challenges...The National Institutes of Health and the 
National Science Foundation, through competitively awarded research 
grants, provide financial support for the generation of the basic 
scientific knowledge needed to devise solutions to ... pressing 
[social] problems. These programs are particularly valuable for the 
quality of the science they produce.
    And finally, in a June 1, 1995 letter to the Committee, Rita 
Colwell, President of the American Associations for the Advancement of 
Science, stated:
    These [social science] disciplines are an integral part of the U.S. 
research and development enterprise, as important to the Nation's 
future as physics, chemistry, engineering, and biology. They have been 
part of NSF's research portfolio for over four decades and have 
contributed in important ways to our growing understanding of the 
natural and human environment, to the improvement of our health and 
standard of living, and to the structure of our economy and government.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Majority characterizes the elimination of an NSF 
scientific directorate not as an attack on the social sciences, 
but as merely imposing needed management streamlining on the 
agency. The Majority, however, produces no evidence to support 
this contention. The committee has no hearing record whatever 
on this matter. Neither NSF, nor any independent entity, has 
been asked by the Committee to develop a plan for 
reorganization that lays out the advantages and provides an 
estimate of cost savings of such a change. In fact, the bill 
asks for the plan for reorganization after the change is 
imposed. Section 111(c) of the bill bans use of FY 1997 funding 
for more than 6 directorates, while section 130 specifies that 
the agency has until November 15, 1996, one and a half months 
into the new fiscal year, to present a reorganization plan to 
Congress. In short, the agency is being forced into a 
significant internal realignment prior to assessment of the 
impact and development of an implementation plan. Adverse 
impacts on the agency will be felt by academic researchers, who 
may experience delays in funding for the FY 1997 increment of 
multi-year awards from a directorate that may suddenly 
disappear at the beginning of FY 1997.
    Available evidence on the administrative efficiency of NSF 
suggests that the agency does not need micromanagement 
direction from Congress. NSF is not a bloated bureaucracy. 
Between fiscal years 1983 and 1993, NSF's full time staff 
positions remained constant, while its budget nearly tripled 
and the workload, measured by numbers of proposals processed, 
more than doubled. In the current fiscal year, the cost of 
operating NSF is 4% of the total budget, which is a modest 
amount of administrative overhead. NSF has been able to operate 
with increasing efficiency due to the dedication of its people 
and due to information infrastructure investments, which have 
resulted in productivity improvements.
    During the markup, Rep. Cramer offered an amendment to the 
bill to replace the provisions that eliminate a directorate 
with a requirement for NSF to submit by February 15, 1997 a 
reorganization plan with several options to further improve 
operational effectiveness and to reduce administrative costs. 
The amendment required that one option included in the plan be 
elimination of one directorate. Approval of the Cramer 
amendment would have given the Committee time to consider the 
recommendations of the plan through the hearings process prior 
to preparation of the FY 1998 authorization legislation and to 
make an informed decision on necessary legislation. The 
amendment failed on a party line vote. If the Majority were 
serious that the provisions in the bill are about 
administrative efficiency, the reasonable approach recommended 
by the Cramer amendment would have found support on the merits 
of the argument.
    The Republican bill also imposes ill-considered cuts to 
NSF's salaries and administrative expenses account of more than 
$7 million, or 5.5 percent, below the current fiscal year 
budget and $9 million below the Democratic substitute. NSF has 
pointed out that, after taking into account fixed costs for 
rent and utilities, such a cut would translate into a reduction 
of 120 staff positions--about 10 percent of the authorized 
staffing level. NSF estimates that a budget cut of this 
magnitude will result in layoffs of scientific and engineering 
personnel--the people who run the research programs B and will 
degrade the efficiency of operations by placing new burdens on 
the remaining, demoralized staff. Moreover, the cut would 
result in a reduction of $1 to $2 million in the infrastructure 
investments that have been the basis of past productivity 
improvements.
    The net result of the cut to internal operations will be to 
impede virtually all business operations of NSF from 
disbursement of payments to awardees to the timing and quality 
of award decisions. An amendment was offered by Rep. Cramer to 
restore funding for salaries and administrative expenses for 
NSF to the level of the Democratic substitute. The amendment 
failed on a party line vote. The Majority is remarkably immune 
to arguments against imposition of such disruptive effects on 
the administration of federal programs as evidenced by the 
government shutdowns imposed by the Republican congressional 
majority during the current fiscal year, when NSF suffered a 
backlog of 2500 proposals and had to delay $100 to $200 million 
in research grants. Significant delays occurred in newly-
planned research competitions and in new awards, leading to 
disruptions in important research projects at universities 
throughout the nation. Similar results will obtain from the 
proposed drastic cuts to NSF staff.

              TABLE 1. COMPARISON OF BASIC RESEARCH FUNDING             
                  REPUBLICAN BILL VS. BROWN SUBSTITUTE                  
                              [$ millions]                              
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            FY      FY  
                                                    FY     1997    1997 
                     AGENCY                        1996    Rep.    Brown
                                                           Bill   Subst.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NSF                                                 1968    2018    2090
R&RA;1                                                       1947    2016
EHR2                                                          71      74
NASA                                                1868    1928    1826
Space Sci.                                                  1084     928
Life&Micro.;                                                  204     204
Aero. R&T;                                                    222     232
MPE3                                                          41      56
Acad. Pgm.                                                    91      96
Mission Spt.                                                 286     307
NIST                                                  37      39      38
STRS4                                                         39      38
EPA                                                   69      67      80
S&T; Res.                                                      67      80
                                                                        
TOTAL                                               3942    4052    4034
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 Research & Related Activities                                         
2 Education and Human Resources                                         
3 Mission to Planet Earth                                               
4 Scientific and Technical Research and Services Technology             

Technology

In General

    The Republican bill, as reported, would do major damage to 
our country's efforts to stay competitive in international 
markets. The cuts in technology programs read almost as if 
someone has been given the assignment to go through the bill, 
find programs of use to struggling small businessmen, and 
remove all of them. These same Republicans, who would abolish 
the Department of Energy at a time of record gasoline imports 
and abolish the Commerce Department at a time of oppressive 
trade deficits, are going after like-minded programs wherever 
their location.
    This systematic attack on US industry-government 
cooperation comes at a time when our major foreign competitors 
realize the benefits of such programs and are beefing up their 
sponsorship of industry-government cooperation as part of their 
overall research and development strategy. By supporting only 
basic research and leaving technology development to industry 
and other governments around the world, we are setting the 
table for other nations to eat our lunch.
    A just-released study by Commerce's Office of Technology 
Policy entitled ``International Science and Technology: 
Emerging Trends in Government Policies and Expenditures'' shows 
that we are the only nation in retreat. It explains that:

 European nations are accelerating investment in 
        commercial technologies through national programs and 
        through European Union (EU) joint R&D; initiatives.
 Japan plans to double the government science and 
        technology budget by the year 2000.
 China plans to triple its investment in R&D; by 2000 
        targeting computers, software, telecommunications, 
        pharmaceuticals, and infrastructure.
 Korea has considerably boosted its R&D; efforts in key 
        industrial areas and is actively acquiring foreign 
        technology.
 The Newly Emerging Asian economies are planning to 
        significantly increase the percent of their GDP devoted 
        to science and technology.

    For these nations, technology policy is an integral part of 
their preparation for the 21st century marketplace. We, on the 
other hand, are being asked to ignore the contributions to 
technology development of competing nations and to attack the 
very cooperative programs that are giving our manufacturers a 
chance. Consider the following recommendations of the 
Republican bill:

 The Advanced Technology Program of the Department of 
        Commerce is slated for elimination. Technologies funded 
        by the ATP program are high risk, yet high payoff, 
        programs that are too risky and too long-term to be of 
        interest to venture capitalists. NIST systematically 
        surveys industry for ATP research topics that can 
        revolutionize industries and then uses merit review to 
        make sure that only highly capable companies, willing 
        to put up at least half of the money themselves, are 
        assisted by the program. Time to market is essential in 
        the high-tech marketplace; the difference between 
        market leadership or being out-maneuvered by a foreign 
        competitor is measured in months if not weeks. 
        Virtually every company assisted by the ATP reported 
        that it was able to move forward much faster because of 
        ATP grants.
 The Manufacturing Extension Program is the one source 
        of modernization advice that is available to the 
        smallest of manufacturers. MEP Centers now serve most 
        Congressional districts. Literally thousands of 
        companies which have been aided by MEP, this country's 
        premier program for assisting small businessmen who 
        manufacture for a living. Yet, the Republican budget 
        cuts this program off at the knees.
 The Republican bill also ends funding for a number of 
        interagency initiatives which help US industry. The 
        Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles, for 
        instance, is a cooperative effort with over 300 
        American auto companies and suppliers, to develop an 
        automobile with all of today's advantages and three 
        times the gas mileage. The Republican bill also attacks 
        our government's efforts to help US industry keep up in 
        high performance computing and environmental 
        technology.

    What is the Committee's hearing record to justify 
elimination of these programs? All but two businessmen who have 
testified about these programs over the last decade have sung 
these programs' praises. Thousands of businessmen have written 
the Congress explaining the difference these programs have made 
in their companies' ability to compete in world markets.
    A clue to Republican opposition can be found in an April 
18, 1996 letter from the Chairman to the editor of Nature in 
which he quotes the following passage from ``Ending Corporate 
Welfare as We Know It,'' by Stephen Moore and Dean Stansel of 
the Cato Institute:
    ``Many of the top recipients of technology research grants 
awarded by the Clinton administration were also substantial 
contributors to the Clinton campaign or the Democratic National 
Committee. For example, Table 1 [on page 8 of the study] lists 
eight Fortune 500 firms that were multi-million-dollar winners 
of the Advanced Technology Program or the Technology 
Reinvestment Program in 1994 that were also large Democratic 
campaign contributors, according to Federal Election Commission 
(FEC) data compiled by Common Cause. At the very least, these 
golden handshake programs create an impression that government 
is for sale.''
    We decided to take a look at Table 1--the only Cato 
``documentation'' of political chicanery--and found the devil 
is in the details. The five ATP award winners (AT&T;, Boeing, 
Chevron, Shell, and Texaco) hardly have reputations as partisan 
Democratic companies. Each of these companies gives more 
heavily to Republican candidates than to Democrats. Even Cato 
should realize that the overriding political interests of these 
companies are telecommunications reform, space and defense 
procurements, and oil and gas policy, not ATP grants. For 
instance, the report mentions Boeing's $2 million from the ATP 
program, but overlooks its $6 billion contract for the space 
station. We are also struck that the Chairman would give 
credence to a study which also calls for elimination of many of 
the programs in the Republican bill, including NIST's 
laboratory programs, R&D; support of university researchers, 
NOAA's Advanced Short-Term Forecast and Warning Services, FAA's 
research program, the Office of Science and Technology Policy, 
CRADAs, and all civilian research programs of the Department of 
Energy. Cato also is on record as calling both the space 
station and the space shuttle corporate welfare and calling for 
their elimination.
    In short, by referencing the Cato ``study'', the Chairman 
may not have originated a sloppy, unsubstantiated assertion, 
but he has certainly repeated one.
    This Republican bill's approach to technology would be 
laughable if the underlying problem were not so deadly serious. 
If we do not give our own companies the help they request and 
need, no one will. It is time to understand that American 
companies are competing in the real world, not the ideal world. 
American manufacturers are our foot soldiers in international 
trade, and it is foolish, if not unpatriotic, to refuse them 
the tactical support they need. Any hockey fan knows it would 
be insane for our government to pull itself off the field while 
the European and East Asian industry-government power plays are 
underway. It is ironic that the ``party of business'' has 
suffered massive hearing loss when American businesses cry for 
help. We hope that when the budget plays itself out in FY 1997 
saner heads will have prevailed, just as they did in FY 1996.

National Institute of Standards and Technology

    The Democratic substitute seeks to achieve a balance 
between the short-term, medium-term, and long-term research 
goals of the Nation and represents our best effort to develop a 
research and development policy that reflects today's economic 
realities, within the context of balancing the Federal budget.
    The Democratic substitute moves the debate over the 
direction of Federal research and development above partisan 
politics and follows the recommendations and guidance of the 
business and academic communities. For example, the April, 1996 
Council on Competitiveness report, ``Endless Frontier, Limited 
Resources'', urges Congress to discard outdated distinctions 
between basic and applied research and to develop a 
comprehensive and seamless vision of Federal R&D; policy.\5\ The 
central finding of the report is ``that R&D; partnerships hold 
the key to meeting the challenge of transition that our Nation 
now faces.'' Examples of current partnerships included in the 
report are the Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles, 
the Advanced Technology Program, the Manufacturing Extension 
Program, and Cooperative Research and Development Agreements--
four programs which are abolished or greatly constrained in the 
Republican bill.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \5\ Endless Frontier, Limited Resources is a recent study by the 
Council on Competitiveness, a non-profit, non-partisan forum of CEOs 
from all of our high-tech companies. The report is devoted to the new 
approaches to investment needed in the post-Cold War age of global 
economic competitiveness. Here are some excerpts from the study:
    *... civilian and commercial interests are the primary drivers of 
leading-edge technology, rather than the defense sector
    *...[We] call for a reasoned end to the unproductive ideological 
debate over the federal government's proper role in R&D.;
    **Battles over the proper limits of government activity have 
reinforced the outdated distinction between `basic' and `applied' 
research as the primary basis for decision-making.
    *A national consensus on goals is needed ... [but] has not yet 
taken place because discussion is mired in symbols and code words. ... 
`basic' and `applied' no longer reflects the realities of the 
innovation process. The U.S. must adopt ... more up-to-date vocabulary, 
one that accounts for changing calculations of R&D; risk and relevance 
over short-, medium- and long-term horizons:
    **Federal R&D; spending is ... an investment that can often have 
important economic and social multipliers. ... another core mission of 
R&D; policy should be to stimulate the research required to keep the 
U.S. economically competitive, particularly research related to 
critical technologies that are out of reach of industry sectors by 
themselves... The government, industry and academia should select these 
technologies together.[emphasis added]
    **The government should ... foster research partnerships to promote 
industrial innovation: The national labs' technology transfer efforts, 
the inter-agency Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles and the 
Commerce Department's Advanced Technology Program are three different 
approaches to encourage partnering that appear to have merit.
    **...the neglect of longer-term corporate research could undermine 
the viability of American industry. Incremental research is unlikely to 
produce the type of breakthrough inventions--like the transistor and 
laser--that have been so important to our economy and our standard of 
living. [Note that the long-term research that lead to these two 
devices was `applied research' in the sense that the objectives were 
the solutions of known problems.]
    **...policy makers must cut through the semantic quagmire and come 
to grips with two fundamental questions:1] What research is necessary 
to maintain the nation's scientific and technological competitiveness? 
and 2] Which of those research endeavors will not be accomplished 
without government investment?
    \6\ The Advanced Technology Program supports government/industry/
university partnerships to jointly fund prototype development of new 
enabling technology that could propel the U.S. technology base into the 
21st century. The Manufacturing Extension Partnership also brings 
government, industry, and universities together to help America's small 
and medium-sized manufacturers modernize to meet the challenges of a 
technology-driven, world-wide economy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Chairman has repeatedly said that the Science Committee 
is making itself relevant to the process of setting priorities. 
We remind our colleagues that the Democratic substitute offered 
last year would have provided overall funding of $754.1 million 
for the Technology Administration, including the NIST labs, 
ATP, and MEP. The Senate Commerce Committee unanimously 
approved funding of $755 million for these same programs--
including funding for ATP and MEP. And the Omnibus 
Appropriations bill for fiscal year 1996 also includes funding 
for the Office of the Undersecretary of Technology, ATP, and 
MEP. In short, last year's Republican authorization bill was 
ultimately disregarded by the House, the Senate, and the White 
House, among others. This year's bill will no doubt suffer the 
same fate.
    We are also concerned that the Majority, with no hearing 
record, is again micromanaging the NIST laboratory research 
functions. This year's actions are reminiscent of last year's 
report language which forbade NIST from performing basic 
metrology research in the areas of health, environment, fire, 
and information infrastructure. In the FY96 authorization 
process, overall ``budget caps'' set by the Chairman drove the 
decision-making process. In FY97 these same budget 
considerations apparently require an increase of almost $10 
million over the President's request for NIST laboratory 
funding. The majority justifies these increases as ``unfunded 
FY96 requests for increased funding'' and then micromanages the 
windfall by specifying exactly which lab account should be 
increased and for what purpose.\7\ In the absence of any 
outside expert testimony on the NIST laboratory program we fail 
to see the need to micromanage NIST's lab program--particularly 
in light of last year's actions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \7\ We note that the overall shortfall last year was $13.2 million 
which means that some FY96 requests will remain unfunded. What is 
perplexing is how and why the majority decided to micromanage the 
increased funding. For example, the majority increased funding for 
semiconductor metrology related to National Technology Roadmap for 
Semiconductors. However, the FY97 budget request includes a $3.4 
million increase for this same objective.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    We feel that the most important recommendation of the 
Council on Competitiveness report was for ``a reasoned end to 
the unproductive ideological debate over the federal 
government's proper role in R&D.;'' With Committee passage of 
the Republican bill, that unproductive debate will 
unfortunately continue.

Space

    The Committee's treatment of the funding and programs of 
the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is 
ill-advised and ultimately unsustainable. If enacted, the 
measures contained in the Republican bill will do real damage 
to the Nation's civil space program and will send a message 
that the Congress is no longer interested in maintaining 
American leadership in space.
    There are several major objections that we have to the 
Republican approach, all of which were remedied in the 
Democratic substitute. First, the Republican bill slashes 
NASA's overall funding by more than $300 milllion relative to 
the President's request for Fiscal Year 1997 and is more than 
$400 million below the Fiscal Year 1996 funding level. These 
additional cuts are being imposed despite the fact that NASA's 
planned outyear funding has already been cut by more than a 
third over the past three years. In responding to those earlier 
funding reductions, NASA has restructured all of its major 
programs--including the Space Station and Mission to Planet 
Earth--cut its costs, and streamlined its operations. How would 
the Republican bill reward NASA's efforts to absorb major cuts 
while still maintaining its world-class research and 
development capabilities? It would reward all of NASA's hard 
work by making even deeper cuts to its budget! The Democratic 
substitute would have restored NASA's budget to the President's 
request level.
    Second, specific NASA cuts contained in the Republican bill 
are quite troubling, and inconsistent with the input received 
by the Committee. Consider, for example, the cut made to 
Mission to Planet Earth (MTPE). The MTPE program is a major 
national environmental research and development initiative that 
seeks to increase our understanding of the interactions of the 
Earth's atmosphere, oceans, and biosphere, their impacts on 
climate and weather, and their implications for vital sectors 
of our economy, ranging from agriculture to insurance. The 
Republican bill would cut the request for MTPE by 27 percent, 
with the majority of the cuts allocated to the Earth Observing 
System. In particular, the Republican bill would essentially 
cancel the EOS PM-1 and CHEM-1 spacecraft projects, and cut 
funding for the EOS Data and Information System (EOSDIS) in 
half. The actions to cancel the PM-1 and CHEM-1 missions would, 
of course, be directly counter to the recommendations of the 
National Research Council review of Mission to Planet EarthCa 
review that was specifically requested last year by the 
Chairman. Sadly, the Mission to Planet Earth cuts represent 
additional evidence of Republican antipathy towards the 
Nation's environmental agenda. The Democratic substitute would 
have restored the requested funding for Mission to Planet 
Earth.
    Another cut that is quite troubling is the $34 million 
reduction (almost 20 percent) to NASA's Advanced Subsonics 
aeronautics research program. With this action, the Advanced 
Subsonics program would be cut below the FY 1996 level. What 
sorts of research activities does the Advanced Subsonics 
program support? The R&D; undertaken in the program is broad in 
scope and important in content: aging aircraft safety concerns; 
improvements to the Nation's overburdened air traffic 
management system; development of quieter, more fuel-efficient 
aircraft; improvements to general aviation and short-haul 
aircraft; and development of low cost unpiloted aircraft for 
environmental monitoring in the stratosphere, to name just a 
few of the areas addressed. It is research that is important in 
its own right, but it also is research that is directly 
relevant to America's continued competitive advantage in the 
world's aerospace markets--a competitive advantage that means 
good-paying, high-skilled jobs for American workers. Why the 
Republicans would want to cut such beneficial research is a 
mystery. The Democratic substitute would have restored the 
Advanced Subsonics research funding.
    Finally, the Committee's bill makes major cuts to NASA's 
personnel and maintenance accounts--cuts that are a 
particularly ill-advised and that will impose real hardships on 
the hardworking employees of all of NASA's Centers, including 
Kennedy Space Center, Johnson Space Center, Marshall Space 
Flight Center, the Langley, Lewis, and Ames Research Centers, 
and others. As the NASA Comptroller has noted, ``unless a 
miracle occurs and we have both buyout authority and a lot of 
takers, there is simply no way feasible to implement this 
reduction, without resorting to furloughs [emphasis added]''. 
The Republicans' delay in enacting an FY 1996 appropriation for 
NASA has already led to two governmental shutdowns. Do 
Republicans really want to put NASA's employees through another 
furlough in Fiscal Year 1997?
    The arbitrary cuts to NASA's maintenance budget will have 
an equally negative impact on the ability of NASA's field 
Centers to carry out their missions. Reducing the NASA 
facilities account by one-third will seriously jeopardize the 
agency's ability to maintain the physical infrastructure at its 
Centers and to ensure the safety of those facilities. Cutting 
NASA's maintenance budget is simply one more example of an 
approach that strives for the appearance of fiscal 
responsibility while in reality costing the taxpayers more over 
the long run. The Democratic substitute would have restored the 
needed personnel and maintenance funding for the NASA Centers.
    It is noteworthy that the Republican bill increases funding 
for the Space Science account by $300 million above the 
President's request for Fiscal Year 1997. Certainly, the 
Committee's record since the dawn of the space age demonstrates 
bipartisan support for a strong Space Science program. That 
bipartisan support continues to this day. Yet the approach 
taken in the Republican bill does nothing to advance the health 
of the Space Science program beyond what was already done in 
the President's FY 1997 request. Rather the Committee's large 
funding increase in FY 1997 fixes a largely non-existent 
problem.
    Witnesses before the Science Committee have in general 
found the FY 1997 Space Science funding level in the 
President's request to be a good one; their concern has been 
with future funding. Unfortunately, increased funding in FY 
1997 does nothing to address that potential out-year problem. 
Moreover, the ability of NASA to effectively spend the proposed 
increase in FY 1997 has never been seriously examined in the 
Committee's limited hearings this year. Thus, given the choice 
between seriously unbalancing and weakening NASA's overall 
program by arbitrarily increasing the Space Science account 
above the President's request or maintaining a balanced, robust 
space program with full funding for Space Science, the 
Democratic substitute took the latter approach.
    One other element of the Republican bill should be 
mentioned--namely, a series of policy directives that have 
little or no basis of support or even discussion in this year's 
hearing record. Some of the proposals may have merit, but the 
Committee has had little opportunity to review them in any 
depth. For example, the Republican bill requests additional 
studies of the Mission to Planet Earth program that duplicate 
studies already undertaken--at the Committee's request--by the 
National Research Council. Such study requests call into 
question the Committee's willingness to give serious 
consideration to the advice it solicits and impose yet another 
burden on NASA at a time that the Committee is proposing to cut 
its budget.

Environment

    During the same week that the Republican leadership brought 
bills to the House floor to demonstrate their Members' 
dedication to environmental protection, this Committee reported 
an authorization bill in stark contrast to that packaged pro-
environment message. The Republican Committee bill authorizes 
6% fewer funds for science programs than requested in the FY97 
budget overall. However, environmental research and development 
programs were cut more than 20% below the Democratic 
alternative.
    The Republican bill has numerous examples which illustrate 
the majority's bias against environmental R&D.; Mission to 
Planet Earth, NASA's primary environmental science program, 
receives 27% fewer funds in this authorization bill than the 
Administration requested even though the overall NASA 
authorization is only 2% below the Administration's FY 97 
request.
    The Republican's NOAA authorization is 15% below the FY97 
request. Overall, the Republican bill would reduce NOAA's 
funding by $316 million from the request level supported by 
Democratic members of the Science Committee. This is a steep 
cut in funding for NOAA's programs. However, these overall 
reductions appear mild in comparison to those suggested for the 
Coastal Zone Management Programs (CZMA) and the National Marine 
Fisheries Service (NMFS) in the budget tables adopted by the 
Committee. These two programs, under the jurisdiction of the 
Resources Committee, are cut by 83% and 22%, respectively, 
below the FY97 request.
    The cuts in CZMA and NMFS are due to the fact that the 
Republican bill imposes an arbitrary budget cap on NOAA 
spending. The suggested cuts to the CZMA programs--from a $64.7 
million request to $10.9 million--demonstrate a 180 degree 
reversal by Committee Republicans to the votes they cast just 
one day earlier on the floor of the House. In that vote, with 
the floor cameras on them, every Committee Republican voted in 
favor of reauthorization of the CZMA; the next day in the 
Science Committee, Republicans voted to slash funding for that 
program. By contrast, the Democratic substitute contained no 
budget caps and made no attempt to force cuts on programs in 
the Resources Committee's jurisdiction.
    The Republican proposal to cut NMFS from the request level 
of $305.6 million to $240 million risks thousands of jobs in 
the commercial and recreational fishing industry as well as 
substantial loss of international competitiveness in the 
seafood export business. The Republican Majority is blissfully 
unaware of these consequences because the Committee has never 
held hearings on coastal, ocean or fisheries programs; 
fundamentally, the Republicans cut most what they understand 
least.
    In another area at NOAA, the Republican bill makes a $13.8 
million reduction from the $49.8 million requested for the Sea 
Grant program. The irony in this action is that it directly 
contradicts the warm praise offered by Republican Members for 
the Sea Grant program during the markup and the claim made by 
the Chair that the Sea Grant program was being increased in the 
Republican bill. Again, no hearings have been held on the Sea 
Grant program to support the Republicans' hostile position and 
budgetary actions.
    Among other major reductions in the Republican bill is a 
$26 million reduction to the National Weather Service 
Operations and Research line which funds NWS personnel 
nationwide. In order to meet this reduction, the NWS has stated 
that it would need to reduce staffing in field offices and 
consider consolidation of existing field offices, and would be 
unable to provide additional weather services to the three 
additional areas recently identified by the National Research 
Council as being at risk in the weather service modernization 
plan.
    The Republican bill again attempts to undercut NOAA's role 
in the Global Change program. This program was characterized by 
the Subcommittee Chair as ``throwing money down a rat hole.'' 
This narrow minded view of environmental research and 
development epitomizes the uncompromising extremism of the 
Republican party towards an issue about which the public has 
expressed a clear concern. The irony in this case is that in 
the Republican attempt to undercut Global Change, other 
critical initiatives directed at near term environmental 
problems will suffer. For example, the reduction will 
jeopardize NOAA's Health of the Atmosphere program which was 
intended to develop a scientific data base on ozone non-
compliance in the Southeast in order to structure a regulatory 
relief effort by those affected states.
    With respect to the Environmental Protection Agency, the 
authorization in the Republican bill is 16% below the FY97 
request. These cuts represent another direct contradiction 
between the Majority's rhetoric and their policy. Numerous 
debates have occurred in which Members have called for 
environmental protection policies based upon ``sound science'' 
and focused on problems that present the greatest risk to human 
health and the environment. We agree, but fail to see how 
decreasing the funding for the portion of EPA's budget that is 
devoted to environmental research and development will help us 
to achieve this goal.
    It is our belief that funding a strong EPA research and 
development program will provide knowledge to retool our 
environmental protection programs so that society's scarce 
resources will be used to maximize environmental and social 
benefits and minimize costs. A lesser investment in 
environmental research and development may save federal dollars 
in FY97, but history has taught us that ignorance does not come 
cheap in the long term. Prevention of pollution is cheaper than 
mitigating pollution effects. If we want to focus our 
environmental and human health protection programs on the most 
pressing environmental problems we must have an understanding 
of what the problems are. If we are serious about reforming our 
regulatory structure to facilitate the use of more flexible, 
creative ways to achieve environmental goals, we must invest in 
the design of new environmental protection options. The public 
has never called for a reduction in environmental and human 
health protection. They do, however, want the government to 
ensure that these protections are provided without undue 
burdens and costs to the health of our economy. A strong EPA 
research and development program is essential to meeting this 
goal.
    We also are in strong disagreement with the imposition of 
bans on research included in the EPA authorization title. There 
is no testimony in the limited hearing record to support a ban 
on indoor air research, the Environmental Technology 
Initiative, or the Climate Change Action Plan. All three of 
these programs are directed toward the development of 
voluntary, non-regulatory means of achieving environmental and 
human health goals in cooperation with industry.
    We fail to see how drastic cuts in environmental research 
funding and termination of voluntary, non-regulatory 
initiatives done in cooperation with industry will achieve a 
cleaner environment and adequate human health protection at 
lower cost. Although the Majority's rhetoric declares solid 
support for environmental protection, the policies and funding 
priorities contained in this bill make it clear they are 
unwilling to back up their rhetoric with real resources.

Energy

    Unlike the bill reported last year, which included all of 
the agencies under the Committee's jurisdiction, and contrary 
to what seemed the intent of the Republican Majority only days 
before the markup, the Chairman chose to leave the Department 
of Energy--20 percent of the Committee's jurisdiction--orphaned 
in the Never-Never Land between future hearings, an elusive 
Subcommittee markup, and an increasingly-ephemeral full 
Committee markup.
    The Chairman stated that a Department of Energy 
authorization was not needed, because H.R. 2405, the Omnibus 
Science Act of 1995 (passed by the House in October, 1995), 
already contained a DOE authorization for fiscal year 1997. 
But, by that argument, the Republican bill also should not have 
included the Fire Administration, NSF, or the Space Station, 
all of which had FY 1997 authorizations that passed the House 
last year. In addition, H.R. 2405 provided only the grossest 
level of detail for energy R&D; accounts in FY 1997. The bill 
authorized $2.6 billion for Energy Supply R&D; $950 million for 
high energy and nuclear physics; $221 million for fossil energy 
R&D; and $230 million for energy conservation R&D.; Furthermore, 
by authorizing the energy R&D; programs for FY 1997 through a 
little-debated stealth floor amendment, the Chairman 
circumvented the Committee, which had never considered FY 1997 
funding at DOE, despite claims to the contrary. By settling for 
the FY 1997 authorizations in H.R. 2405, the Committee has 
abrogated its responsibility to provide direction to DOE 
programs such as fusion energy research, high energy and 
nuclear physics, and basic energy sciences early in the budget 
process.
    This state of affairs is especially egregious because the 
cuts required by the funding levels contained in H.R. 2405 are 
drastic. When compared with the President's budget, H.R. 2405 
would require decreases on the order of 50 percent cut to solar 
and conservation research and development, one-third to 
renewables (even including a substantial increase for hydrogen 
R&D;), 10 percent in biological and environmental research, over 
20 percent to fusion research, and one-third in fossil energy 
R&D; (which the President already cut by over 15 percent).
    In this light, a vote against the Democratic substitute can 
only be construed as a vote to leave in effect the House-passed 
FY 1997 authorizations for energy R&D; in H.R. 2405 and the 
drastic cuts that accompany those authorizations. These cuts 
will be felt in research laboratories across the Nation. The 
Democratic substitute, on the other hand, offered the 
President's budget for energy R&D.; Through the Strategic 
Realignment Initiative, which streamlined the DOE bureaucracy 
and cut red tape, and through several tough budgetary 
decisions, the President held the overall DOE budget level from 
FY 1996 to FY 1997. However, within that budget, the President 
chose to increase civilian energy R&D; activities by $250 
million in FY 1997. Furthermore, these budget figures fit 
integrally into the President's overall plan to reach a 
balanced budget in the year 2002. The Administration made tough 
choices in energy R&D; to fund its priorities. These choices 
included scaling back fossil energy R&D; and canceling several 
clean coal projects.
    These decreases were applied in part to Presidential 
priorities. One of the strongest priorities in energy R&D; is 
energy efficiency and renewables R&D.; These programs have 
already proved themselves by providing tremendous returns to 
the taxpayer in the form of lower energy bills, environmental 
protection, greater energy security and high-tech jobs.
    There are many examples of DOE success stories resulting 
from these programs that outweigh the taxpayers' funds that 
were used to support them. For instance, conservation R&D; 
programs in the 1980s led to tremendous advances in domestic 
production of photovoltaic technologies. These advances have 
produced over $100 million in sales, which support 3,800 U.S. 
jobs. In another example, DOE R&D; programs developed new 
fluorescent light ballasts that reduce the flicker and hum of 
traditional ballasts and have saved consumers $750 million in 
energy bills. These same programs also developed advanced 
energy efficient windows, which have produced energy savings of 
over $1.8 billion. Recently, a DOE laboratory developed a 
prototype window that loses less heat than a wall! Other 
example include the development of high-energy lithium 
batteries, which enabled the explosive growth of the multi-
billion dollar portable electronics industry, which includes 
items like lap-top computers. A final example that almost all 
Americans now have in their homes is the development of a new 
refrigerator compressor that saved energy consumers $6 billion 
in energy costs from 1980 to 1990 alone.
    Because of these success stories and others, the energy 
efficiency and renewables programs of the Department are 
tremendously popular with the public. In poll after poll, when 
asked what the highest priority should be in the Department of 
Energy, an overwhelming majority of Americans favors the energy 
efficiency and renewables programs. In addition, when asked to 
make a choice between decreasing the deficit or funding these 
programs, poll respondents heavily favor going into further 
debt rather than cutting off these valuable programs that they 
feel will lead to a higher standard of living for themselves 
and their children. The President and Democrats share the views 
of the public, and are working hard to protect these programs 
that are so important to the economy and to the environment.
    To cover their tracks, the Republican Majority says that 
they are increasing basic science and university research. 
However, the Democratic Substitute is better for basic research 
at DOE than the House-passed authorization numbers now in 
effect. Specifically, when compared with H.R. 2405, the 
Administration provides $60 million more for high energy and 
nuclear physics research and roughly $50 million more for basic 
research within the Energy Supply R&D; account, which H.R. 2405 
would cut by $300 million from the President's request (from 
$2.9 million to $2.6 million).
    In total, the Administration provides almost $800 million 
more for energy R&D; than does H.R. 2405. The President includes 
$2.9 billion for Energy Supply, $1 billion for high energy and 
nuclear physics; $350 million for fossil energy; and $540 
million for conservation R&D; for a total of $4.8 billion as 
opposed to the total of $4 billion authorized in H.R. 2405.
    The Democratic substitute provided the President's request 
for fusion energy R&D.; Many Members of the Science Committee, 
on both sides of the aisle, signed a letter in April, 1996 to 
Energy Secretary O'Leary requesting a funding level $10 million 
higher than was eventually contained in the President's budget. 
The Democratic substitute also provided full funding for such 
key initiatives as the Partnership for a New Generation of 
Vehicles, the Environmental Technologies Initiative, the U.S. 
Global Change Research Program, and the High Performance 
Computing and Communications program at DOE.
    With their party-line vote on the Democratic substitute, 
Republicans were clearly intent on making drastic and unwise 
cuts in energy R&D.; Once again, the Majority has put tax cuts 
for the wealthy ahead of programs that will promote the 
economy, high-tech jobs, international security, and 
environmental protection.

Conclusion

    The Republican proposal for civilian science and technology 
programs represents a withdrawal from this generation's 
obligation to the next to insure that we make investments in 
new knowledge and technologies. Hiding behind the myth that 
they like basic research, Republicans ban specific types of 
research they fear. Hiding behind the myth that they are simply 
trying to balance the budget, Republicans slash civilian 
science and technology programs far beyond the demands of 
fiscal prudence. Hiding behind the myth that they oppose 
corporate pork, the Republicans hand out billions in regulatory 
and tax benefits to big industry while cutting millions of 
dollars in technology development programs that help bring new 
ideas and new firms into the market. All of this was done in a 
process that counts on limited time, knowledge and opportunity 
for debate to guarantee that the Chairman's bill cannot be 
improved or challenged. The new Republican majority, in a 
perfect analogue to their attitudes on certain types of 
research, would prefer to move a bill with little or no 
hearings record and with little notice or knowledge, because it 
is easier to make unwise cuts if you don't understand the first 
thing about the programs that you are cutting. The Republicans 
of the Science Committee endorse the ``hear no evil, see no 
evil, speak no evil'' approach to legislation.
    The Democratic alternative is as good for ``basic 
research'' as the Republican bill, but we also maintain funding 
in technology development and environmental research programs. 
Having no fear of new knowledge, the Democratic alternative 
contains not a single research ban. The Democratic alternative 
fully supports important, cross-agency Presidential 
initiatives--many of which were established under President 
Bush and which in a more bipartisan era received substantial 
Republican support. On balance, the Democratic alternative 
represents a stronger vote of confidence in our Nation's future 
expressed through fuller funding of R&D; programs--all within 
the context of balancing the budget. We think we have a better 
idea and we hope our colleagues will set aside partisan 
considerations and join us in acting in the Nation's interests.

                                                  George Brown, Jr.
                                                     Harold Volkmer
                                                        Bart Gordon
                                                        John Tanner
                                                         Tim Roemer
                                           Robert E. ``Bud'' Cramer
                                                        Paul McHale
                                                        Jane Harman
                                              Eddie Bernice Johnson
                                                         John Olver
                                                     Alcee Hastings
                                                        Lynn Rivers
                                                     Karen McCarthy
                                                          Mike Ward
                                                        Zoe Lofgren
                                                 Sheila Jackson Lee
                                                      Lloyd Doggett
                                                         Mike Doyle
                XV. Proceedings of Full Committee Markup



   FULL COMMITTEE MARKUP ON H.R. 3322--THE OMNIBUS CIVILIAN SCIENCE 
                       AUTHORIZATION ACT OF 1996

                              ----------                              


                       WEDNESDAY, APRIL 24, 1996

             U.S. House of Representatives,
                              Committee on Science,
                                                    Washington, DC.
    The Chairman. Pursuant to notice, the Committee will now 
consider the Omnibus Civilian Science Authorization Act of 
1996, the Committee Print.
    I ask unanimous consent the bill be considered as read and 
open to amendment by Title. I ask the members proceed with 
amendments in the order of the roster.
    [Text of the amendment roster and the bill follow:]
    
    

       NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION FY 1997 BUDGET REQUEST SUMMARY       
                        [In millions of dollars]                        
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        FY 1996     FY 1997     FY 1997 
            ACCOUNT TITLE              Estimate     Request      Auth.  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Research and Related Activities.....       2274        2472      2340.3 
Education and Human Resources.......        599         619         600 
Major Research Equipment............         70          95          80 
Academic Research Facilities                                            
 Modernization......................        100           0         100 
Salaries and Expenses...............      127.3        *134         120 
Office of Inspector General.........        4.5           5           5 
Headquarters Relocation.............        5.2          --         5.2 
                                                                        
TOTAL...............................       3180        3325      3250.5 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Includes $5.2 million for HQ Relocation.                               



                         FY97 NASA Authorization                        
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ACCOUNT   FY96 est.    FY97 Req.    FY97 Mark    FY97 Diff.   FY96 Diff.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HUMAN                                                                   
 SPACE                                                                  
 FLIGHT     5456.60      5362.90      5362.90         0.00       -93.70 
Space                                                                   
 Statio                                                                 
 n          1863.60      1802.00     1802.00          0.00       -61.60 
Mir                                                                     
 Suppor                                                                 
 t (w/i                                                                 
 $2.1B                                                                  
 cap)         29.20        38.20        38.20         0.00        +9.00 
Shuttle                                                                 
 Operat                                                                 
 ions       2485.40      2514.90      2514.90         0.00       +29.50 
Shuttle                                                                 
 Upgrad                                                                 
 es          663.40       636.00       636.00         0.00       -27.40 
Payload                                                                 
 &                                                                      
 Utiliz                                                                 
 ation       315.00       271.80       271.80         0.00       -43.20 
U.S./                                                                   
 Russia                                                                 
 n                                                                      
 Cooper                                                                 
 ation       100.00       100.00       100.00         0.00         0.00 
                                                                        
SCIENCE                                                                 
 , AERO                                                                 
 AND                                                                    
 TECH       5845.90      5862.10      5734.80      -127.30      -111.10 
                                                                        
Space                                                                   
 Scienc                                                                 
 e          2032.60      1857.30      2167.40      +310.10      +134.80 
  AXAF       237.60       178.60      178.60         0.00        -59.00 
  Cassi                                                                 
   ni        191.50       106.70       106.70         0.00       -84.80 
  GP-B        51.50        59.60        59.60         0.00        +8.10 
  Paylo                                                                 
   ad/                                                                  
   lnst                                                                 
   rume                                                                 
   nt                                                                   
   Dev.       30.70        16.90        32.50       +15.60        +1.80 
    Ast                                                                 
     ro-                                                                
     E         7.40         5.60         5.60        0.00         -1.80 
    Mar                                                                 
     s                                                                  
     In                                                                 
     st                                                                 
     ru                                                                 
     me                                                                 
     nt                                                                 
     s         1.40         0.60         0.60         0.00        -0.80 
    Shu                                                                 
     tt                                                                 
     le/                                                                
     ln                                                                 
     te                                                                 
     rn                                                                 
     at                                                                 
     io                                                                 
     na                                                                 
     l                                                                  
     Pa                                                                 
     yl                                                                 
     oa                                                                 
     ds       16.20        10.70        26.30       +15.60       +10.10 
    Tet                                                                 
     he                                                                 
     re                                                                 
     d                                                                  
     Sa                                                                 
     te                                                                 
     ll                                                                 
     it                                                                 
     e                                                                  
     Sy                                                                 
     st                                                                 
     em        5.70         0.00         0.00         0.00        -5.70 
  Explo                                                                 
   rers      132.20       135.00       160.00       +25.00       +27.80 
    ACE       31.50        24.70        24.70         0.00        -6.80 
    FUS                                                                 
     E        39.00        39.60        39.60         0.00        +0.60 
    MID                                                                 
     EX        0.00        19.80        19.80         0.00       +19.80 
    SME                                                                 
     X        39.50        38.70        38.70         0.00        -0.80 
    Exp                                                                 
     lo                                                                 
     re                                                                 
     r                                                                  
     Pl                                                                 
     an                                                                 
     ni                                                                 
     ng       22.20        12.20        37.20       +25.00       +15.00 
  Disco                                                                 
   very      102.20        74.80       104.80       +30.00        +2.60 
    Lun                                                                 
     ar                                                                 
     Pr                                                                 
     os                                                                 
     pe                                                                 
     ct                                                                 
     or       36.40        19.80        19.80         0.00       -16.60 
    Fut                                                                 
     ur                                                                 
     e                                                                  
     Mi                                                                 
     ss                                                                 
     io                                                                 
     ns       23.80        55.00        85.00       +30.00       +61.20 
    Mar                                                                 
     s                                                                  
     Pa                                                                 
     th                                                                 
     fi                                                                 
     nd                                                                 
     er       33.70         0.00         0.00         0.00       -33.70 
    NEA                                                                 
     R         8.30         0.00         0.00         0.00        -8.30 
  Mars                                                                  
   Surv                                                                 
   eyor      111.90        90.00       120.00       +30.00       +8.10  
    Mar                                                                 
     s                                                                  
     Gl                                                                 
     ob                                                                 
     al                                                                 
     Su                                                                 
     rv                                                                 
     ey                                                                 
     or       58.20         9.40         9.40         0.00       -48.80 
    Mar                                                                 
     s                                                                  
     Su                                                                 
     rv                                                                 
     ey                                                                 
     or                                                                 
     '9                                                                 
     8        52.30        77.50        77.50         0.00       +25.20 
    Fut                                                                 
     ur                                                                 
     e                                                                  
     Mi                                                                 
     ss                                                                 
     io                                                                 
     ns        1.40         3.10        33.10       +30.00       +31.70 
  New                                                                   
   Mill                                                                 
   enni                                                                 
   um         30.00        21.50        40.00       +18.50       +10.00 
  MO&DA;      563.80       592.40       642.40       +50.00       +78.60 
  Suppo                                                                 
   rtin                                                                 
   g                                                                    
   R&T;       238.90       259.20       309.20       +50.00       +70.30 
  Subor                                                                 
   bita                                                                 
   l                                                                    
   Prog                                                                 
   ram        88.00        69.10        97.10       +28.00        +9.10 
    SOF                                                                 
     IA       30.00        26.30        46.30       +20.00       +16.30 
    KAO        3.40         0.00         0.00         0.00        -3.40 
    Bal                                                                 
     lo                                                                 
     on                                                                 
     Pr                                                                 
     og                                                                 
     ra                                                                 
     m        16.00        14.00        16.00        +2.00         0.00 
    Sou                                                                 
     nd                                                                 
     in                                                                 
     g                                                                  
     Ro                                                                 
     ck                                                                 
     et                                                                 
     s        38.60        28.80        34.80        +6.00        -3.80 
  Launc                                                                 
   h                                                                    
   Serv                                                                 
   ices      254.30       253.50       282.50       +29.00       +28.20 
  Space                                                                 
   Scie                                                                 
   nce                                                                  
   Data                                                                 
   Purc                                                                 
   hase        0.00         0.00        34.00       +34.00       +34.00 
                                                                        
Life &                                                                  
 Microg                                                                 
 ravity                                                                 
 Scienc                                                                 
 e           488.50       498.50       498.50         0.00       +10.00 
  Life                                                                  
   Scie                                                                 
   nces      136.40       106.20       106.20         0.00       -30.20 
  Micro                                                                 
   grav                                                                 
   ity                                                                  
   Scie                                                                 
   nce       133.00       144.30       144.30         0.00       +11.30 
  Shutt                                                                 
   le/                                                                  
   Spac                                                                 
   elab                                                                 
   Miss                                                                 
   ions       77.60        54.40        54.40         0.00       -23.20 
  Aeros                                                                 
   pace                                                                 
   Medi                                                                 
   cine        8.00         6.50         6.50         0.00        -1.50 
  Stati                                                                 
   on                                                                   
   Payl                                                                 
   oad                                                                  
   Faci                                                                 
   liti                                                                 
   es        133.50       187.10       187.10         0.00       +53.60 
                                                                        
Mission                                                                 
 to                                                                     
 Planet                                                                 
 Earth      1289.40      1402.10      1028.40      -373.70      -261.00 
  Earth                                                                 
   Obse                                                                 
   rvin                                                                 
   g                                                                    
   Syst                                                                 
   em                                                                   
    AM-                                                                 
     1                                                                  
     Sp                                                                 
     ac                                                                 
     ec                                                                 
     ra                                                                 
     ft       81.20        40.00        40.00         0.00       -41.20 
    AM-                                                                 
     1                                                                  
     In                                                                 
     st                                                                 
     ru                                                                 
     me                                                                 
     nt                                                                 
     s        25.10         3.80         3.80         0.00       -21.30 
    AM-                                                                 
     1                                                                  
     Ma                                                                 
     na                                                                 
     ge                                                                 
     me                                                                 
     nt       63.70        31.10        31.10         0.00       -32.60 
    all                                                                 
     ot                                                                 
     he                                                                 
     r                                                                  
     AM                                                                 
     se                                                                 
     ri                                                                 
     es        0.00         9.80         4.00        -5.80        +4.00 
    Lan                                                                 
     ds                                                                 
     at                                                                 
     7                                                                  
     Sp                                                                 
     ac                                                                 
     ec                                                                 
     ra                                                                 
     ft       61.70        29.10        29.10         0.00       -32.60 
    Lan                                                                 
     ds                                                                 
     at                                                                 
     7                                                                  
     ET                                                                 
     M+        4.20         4.00         4.00         0.00        -0.20 
    Lan                                                                 
     ds                                                                 
     at                                                                 
     7                                                                  
     Gr                                                                 
     ou                                                                 
     nd                                                                 
     Sy                                                                 
     st                                                                 
     em        4.00         0.00         0.00         0.00        -4.00 
    Lan                                                                 
     ds                                                                 
     at                                                                 
     7                                                                  
     Ma                                                                 
     na                                                                 
     ge                                                                 
     me                                                                 
     nt        8.90        40.80        40.80         0.00       +31.90 
    PM-                                                                 
     1                                                                  
     Sp                                                                 
     ac                                                                 
     ec                                                                 
     ra                                                                 
     ft       20.80        82.10         0.00       -82.10       -20.80 
    PM-                                                                 
     1                                                                  
     In                                                                 
     st                                                                 
     ru                                                                 
     me                                                                 
     nt                                                                 
     s        69.40        44.20        44.20         0.00       -25.20 
    PM-                                                                 
     1                                                                  
     Ma                                                                 
     na                                                                 
     ge                                                                 
     me                                                                 
     nt       11.60        44.90         0.00       -44.90       -11.60 
    Che                                                                 
     m-                                                                 
     1                                                                  
     Sp                                                                 
     ac                                                                 
     ec                                                                 
     ra                                                                 
     ft        0.50         1.20         0.00        -1.20        -0.50 
    Che                                                                 
     m-                                                                 
     1                                                                  
     In                                                                 
     st                                                                 
     ru                                                                 
     me                                                                 
     nt                                                                 
     s        25.50        68.00         0.00       -68.00       -25.50 
    Che                                                                 
     m-                                                                 
     1                                                                  
     Ma                                                                 
     na                                                                 
     ge                                                                 
     me                                                                 
     nt        1.30         8.20         0.00        -8.20        -1.30 
  Speci                                                                 
   al                                                                   
   Spac                                                                 
   ecra                                                                 
   ft:        71.70        66.70        63.30        -3.40        -8.40 
    Alt                                                                 
     Ra                                                                 
     da                                                                 
     r-                                                                 
     1         8.60         9.30         9.30         0.00        +0.70 
    Alt                                                                 
     La                                                                 
     se                                                                 
     r-                                                                 
     1         1.90         5.50         3.50        -2.00        +1.60 
    Sol                                                                 
     st                                                                 
     ic                                                                 
     e                                                                  
     In                                                                 
     st                                                                 
     ru                                                                 
     me                                                                 
     nt        0.30         0.30         0.30        0.00          0.00 
    CER                                                                 
     ES                                                                 
     on                                                                 
     TR                                                                 
     MM        0.40         0.20         0.20         0.00        -0.20 
    LIS                                                                 
     on                                                                 
     TR                                                                 
     MM        0.30         0.30         0.30         0.00         0.00 
    CER                                                                 
     ES                                                                 
     Fo                                                                 
     ll                                                                 
     ow-                                                                
     On        1.40         3.30         3.30         0.00        +1.90 
    ACR                                                                 
     IM        4.90         3.80         2.40        -1.40        -2.50 
    Sea                                                                 
     wi                                                                 
     nd                                                                 
     s        23.70        21.00        21.00         0.00        -2.70 
    Oce                                                                 
     an                                                                 
     Co                                                                 
     lo                                                                 
     r         5.40         5.00         5.00         0.00        -0.40 
    SAG                                                                 
     E-                                                                 
     II                                                                 
     I                                                                  
     (R                                                                 
     us                                                                 
     si                                                                 
     an                                                                 
     )        14.80        11.40        11.40         0.00        -3.40 
    SAG                                                                 
     E-                                                                 
     II                                                                 
     I                                                                  
     (S                                                                 
     ta                                                                 
     ti                                                                 
     on                                                                 
     pa                                                                 
     yl                                                                 
     oa                                                                 
     d)        3.70         9.00         9.00         0.00        +5.30 
    all                                                                 
     ot                                                                 
     he                                                                 
     r                                                                  
     sp                                                                 
     ec                                                                 
     ia                                                                 
     l                                                                  
     sp                                                                 
     ac                                                                 
     ec                                                                 
     ra                                                                 
     ft        6.30        -2.40        -2.40         0.00        -8.70 
  New                                                                   
   Mill                                                                 
   enni                                                                 
   um                                                                   
   Prog                                                                 
   ram                                                                  
   (NMP                                                                 
   )          10.00        10.00        10.00         0.00         0.00 
  Algor                                                                 
   ithm                                                                 
   s          75.70       101.80        88.80       -13.00       +13.10 
  EOS                                                                   
   Data                                                                 
   Info                                                                 
   rmat                                                                 
   ion                                                                  
   Syst                                                                 
   em        244.20       261.10       130.00      -131.10      -111.20 
  Earth                                                                 
   Prob                                                                 
   es         46.00        47.10        47.10         0.00        +1.10 
Researc                                                                 
 h &                                                                    
 Data                                                                   
 Analys                                                                 
 is          337.80       379.10       368.10       -11.00       +30.30 
  MTPE                                                                  
   Scie                                                                 
   nce       248.20       277.10       277.10         0.00       +28.90 
    dat                                                                 
     a                                                                  
     pu                                                                 
     rc                                                                 
     ha                                                                 
     se        0.00        50.00        50.00         0.00       +50.00 
    res                                                                 
     ea                                                                 
     rc                                                                 
     h                                                                  
     an                                                                 
     d                                                                  
     an                                                                 
     al                                                                 
     ys                                                                 
     is      145.00       145.00       145.00         0.00         0.00 
    sci                                                                 
     en                                                                 
     ce                                                                 
     te                                                                 
     am                                                                 
     s        19.40        16.80        16.80         0.00        -2.60 
    EOS                                                                 
     sc                                                                 
     ie                                                                 
     nc                                                                 
     e        56.50        47.50        47.50         0.00        -9.00 
    Air                                                                 
     bo                                                                 
     rn                                                                 
     e                                                                  
     sc                                                                 
     ie                                                                 
     nc                                                                 
     e        27.30        17.80       17.80          0.00        -9.50 
  Ops/                                                                  
   Data                                                                 
   Retr                                                                 
   ieva                                                                 
   l/                                                                   
   Stor                                                                 
   age        89.60       102.00        91.00       -11.00        +1.40 
    MO&                                                                 
     DA       53.90        65.10        65.10         0.00       +11.20 
    HPC                                                                 
     C        26.10        28.30        17.30       -11.00        -8.80 
    Inf                                                                 
     or                                                                 
     ma                                                                 
     ti                                                                 
     on                                                                 
     Sy                                                                 
     st                                                                 
     em                                                                 
     s         9.60         8.60         8.60         0.00        -1.00 
Earth                                                                   
 System                                                                 
 Scienc                                                                 
 e                                                                      
 Buildi                                                                 
 ng           17.00                                                     
GLOBE          5.00         5.00         5.00        0.00          0.00 
Launch                                                                  
 Servic                                                                 
 es          107.10       124.10       119.10        -5.00       +12.00 
                                                                        
Aeronau                                                                 
 tical                                                                  
 Resear                                                                 
 ch &                                                                   
 Tech        845.90       857.80       823.40       -34.40       -22.50 
    Res                                                                 
     ea                                                                 
     rc                                                                 
     h                                                                  
     &                                                                  
     Te                                                                 
     ch                                                                 
     no                                                                 
     lo                                                                 
     gy                                                                 
     Ba                                                                 
     se      350.30       354.40       354.40         0.00        +4.10 
    HPC                                                                 
     C        32.20        23.30        23.30         0.00        -8.90 
    #                                                                   
     Ae                                                                 
     ro                                                                 
     nd                                                                 
     yn                                                                 
     am                                                                 
     ic                                                                 
     Si                                                                 
     mu                                                                 
     la                                                                 
     ti                                                                 
     on       48.10        38.60        38.60         0.00        -9.50 
    Hig                                                                 
     h-                                                                 
     Sp                                                                 
     ee                                                                 
     d                                                                  
     Re                                                                 
     se                                                                 
     ar                                                                 
     ch      245.50       254.30       254.30         0.00        +8.80 
    Adv                                                                 
     an                                                                 
     ce                                                                 
     d                                                                  
     Su                                                                 
     bs                                                                 
     on                                                                 
     ic                                                                 
     Te                                                                 
     ch                                                                 
     .       169.80       187.20       152.80       -34.40       -17.00 
                                                                        
Space                                                                   
 Access                                                                 
 & Tech      641.30       725.00       711.00       -14.00       +69.70 
    Adv                                                                 
     an                                                                 
     ce                                                                 
     d                                                                  
     Sp                                                                 
     ac                                                                 
     e                                                                  
     Tr                                                                 
     an                                                                 
     sp                                                                 
     or                                                                 
     ta                                                                 
     ti                                                                 
     on      188.50       324.70       324.70         0.00      +136.20 
    Spa                                                                 
     ce                                                                 
     cr                                                                 
     af                                                                 
     t                                                                  
     &                                                                  
     Re                                                                 
     mo                                                                 
     te                                                                 
     Se                                                                 
     ns                                                                 
     in                                                                 
     g       174.10       151.00       151.00         0.00       -23.10 
    Adv                                                                 
     an                                                                 
     ce                                                                 
     d                                                                  
     Sm                                                                 
     al                                                                 
     ls                                                                 
     at                                                                 
     Te                                                                 
     ch                                                                 
     .        39.10        30.00        30.00         0.00        -9.10 
    Spa                                                                 
     ce                                                                 
     Pr                                                                 
     oc                                                                 
     es                                                                 
     si                                                                 
     ng       54.00        41.80       41.80          0.00       -12.20 
    Fli                                                                 
     gh                                                                 
     t                                                                  
     Pr                                                                 
     og                                                                 
     ra                                                                 
     ms        8.80         0.00         0.00         0.00        -8.80 
    Com                                                                 
     me                                                                 
     rc                                                                 
     ia                                                                 
     l                                                                  
     Te                                                                 
     ch                                                                 
     .                                                                  
     Pr                                                                 
     og                                                                 
     ra                                                                 
     ms       27.40        24.20        11.80       -12.40       -15.60 
    Tec                                                                 
     h.                                                                 
     Tr                                                                 
     an                                                                 
     sf                                                                 
     er                                                                 
     Ag                                                                 
     en                                                                 
     t/                                                                 
     NT                                                                 
     TC       17.10         7.30         0.00        -7.30       -17.10 
    SBI                                                                 
     R                                                                  
     Fu                                                                 
     nd                                                                 
     in                                                                 
     g                                                                  
     Al                                                                 
     lo                                                                 
     ca                                                                 
     ti                                                                 
     on                                 -0.50        -0.50        -0.50 
    Adv                                                                 
     an                                                                 
     ce                                                                 
     d                                                                  
     Co                                                                 
     nc                                                                 
     ep                                                                 
     ts        6.60         3.80        10.00        +6.20        +3.40 
    SBI                                                                 
     R       125.70       142.20       142.20         0.00       +16.50 
                                                                        
Mission                                                                 
 Commun                                                                 
 icatio                                                                 
 n           441.30       420.60       410.60       -10.00       -30.70 
Academi                                                                 
 c                                                                      
 Progra                                                                 
 ms          106.90       100.80       95.50         -5.30       -11.40 
                                                                        
MISSION                                                                 
 SUPPOR                                                                 
 T          2502.20      2562.20      2380.80      -181.40      -121.40 
SRQA          37.60        36.70        36.70         0.00        -0.90 
Space                                                                   
 Commun                                                                 
 icatio                                                                 
 n           269.40       291.40       281.25       -10.15       +11.85 
  Space                                                                 
   Ntwk                                                                 
   .                                                                    
   (inc                                                                 
   lude                                                                 
   s                                                                    
   TDRS                                                                 
   )         156.70       185.10       185.10         0.00       +28.40 
  Telec                                                                 
   ommu                                                                 
   nica                                                                 
   tion                                                                 
   s         112.70       106.30        96.15       -10.15       -16.55 
Researc                                                                 
 h &                                                                    
 Progra                                                                 
 m Mgt.     2052.80      2078.80      1957.85      -120.95       -94.95 
  Perso                                                                 
   nnel                                                                 
   &                                                                    
   Rela                                                                 
   ted                                                                  
   Cost                                                                 
   s        1565.10      1611.00      1529.50       -81.50       -35.60 
  Trave                                                                 
   l          45.50        45.50       40.00         -5.50        -5.50 
  Resea                                                                 
   rch                                                                  
   Oper                                                                 
   atio                                                                 
   ns                                                                   
   Supp                                                                 
   ort       442.20       422.30       388.30       -34.00       -53.90 
    fac                                                                 
     il                                                                 
     it                                                                 
     ie                                                                 
     s                                                                  
     se                                                                 
     rv                                                                 
     ic                                                                 
     es      137.00       141.90       120.90       -21.00       -16.10 
    tec                                                                 
     hn                                                                 
     ic                                                                 
     al                                                                 
     se                                                                 
     rv                                                                 
     ic                                                                 
     es      150.60       132.40       132.40         0.00       -18.20 
    mgt                                                                 
     .                                                                  
     an                                                                 
     d                                                                  
     op                                                                 
     er                                                                 
     at                                                                 
     io                                                                 
     ns      154.60       148.00       135.00       -13.00       -19.60 
Constru                                                                 
 ction                                                                  
 of                                                                     
 Facili                                                                 
 ties        142.40       155.30       105.00       -50.30       -37.40 
                                                                        
INSPECT                                                                 
 OR                                                                     
 GENERA                                                                 
 L            16.00        17.00        17.00         0.00        +1.00 
                                                                        
TOTAL      13820.70     13804.20     13495.50     -308.70       -325.20 
                                                                        
Office                                                                  
 of                                                                     
 Space                                                                  
 Commer                                                                 
 ce            0.46         0.50         0.50         0.00        +0.04 
OCST           5.76         6.17         5.77        -0.40        +0.01 
------------------------------------------------------------------------



    UNITED STATES FIRE ADMINISTRATION FY 1997 BUDGET REQUEST SUMMARY    
                        [In millions of dollars]                        
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        FY 1996     FY 1997     FY 1997 
            ACCOUNT TITLE              Estimate     Request      Auth.  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
United States Fire Administration...     28.491       27.56       27.56 
------------------------------------------------------------------------



             NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION            
                         [DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS]                         
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Mark Compared  
                                                              With      
                      FY                FY 1997   FY  ------------------
   Account Title     1995     FY 1996            1997  (+ or -)  (+ or -
                    Actual  Conference  Request  Mark   FY 1996   )  FY 
                                                                   1997 
                                                       Estimate  Request
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NATIONAL OCEAN                                                          
 SERVICE:                                                               
Mapping, charting,                                                      
 and geodesy        52,816  56,667      58,916   56,6                   
                                                 63      -4      -2,253 
Observation and                                                         
 assessment         64,659  59,249      65,874   46,0                   
                                                 75    -13,174   -19,799
Ocean and coastal                                                       
 management*        66,811  59,385      64,716   10,9                   
                                                 27    -48,458   -53,789
                   -----------------------------------------------------
Total, National                                                         
 Ocean Service      184,28                                              
                      6     175,301     189,506  113,                   
                                                 665   -61,636   -75,841
                                                                        
OCEANIC AND                                                             
 ATMOSPHERIC                                                            
 RESEARCH:                                                              
Climate and air                                                         
 quality research   105,04                                              
                      2     101,772     122,681  99,2                   
                                                 72    -2,500    -23,409
Atmospheric                                                             
 programs           46,946  43,446      43,766   43,1                   
                                                 82    -264      -584   
Ocean and Great                                                         
 Lakes programs     88,591  80,726      66,101   68,1                   
                                                 08    -12,618   2,007  
                   -----------------------------------------------------
Total, Oceanic and                                                      
 Atmospheric                                                            
 Research           240,57                                              
                      9     225,944     232,548  210,                   
                                                 562   -15,382   -21,986
                                                                        
NATIONAL WEATHER                                                        
 SERVICE:                                                               
Operations and                                                          
 research           513,26                                              
                      9     473,758     471,672  445,                   
                                                 668   -28,090   -26,004
Systems                                                                 
 acquisition        145,42                                              
                      9     132,287     198,994  180,                   
                                                 201   47,914    -18,793
                   -----------------------------------------------------
Total, National                                                         
 Weather Service    658,69                                              
                      8     606,045     670,666  625,                   
                                                 869   19,824    -44,797
                                                                        
NATIONAL                                                                
 ENVIRONMENTAL                                                          
 SATELLITE, DATA                                                        
 AND INFORMATION                                                        
 SERVICE (NESDIS)                                                       
Satellite                                                               
 observing systems  351,74                                              
                      1     430,371     486,933  419,                   
                                                 094   -11,277   -67,839
Environmental data                                                      
 management                                                             
 systems            35,665  41,165      44,898   41,1                   
                                                 65       0      -3,733 
                   -----------------------------------------------------
Total, NESDIS       387,40                                              
                      6     471,536     531,831  460,                   
                                                 259   -11,277   -71,572
                                                                        
PROGRAM SUPPORT:                                                        
Administration and                                                      
 services           74,697  62,206      64,694   60,7                   
                                                 06    -1,500    -3,988 
Marine services     62,011  61,100      56,292   56,2                   
                                                 92    -4,808      0    
Aircraft services   10,453  9,153       10,182   9,15                   
                                                  3       O      -1,029 
                   -----------------------------------------------------
Total, program                                                          
 support            147,16                                              
                      1     132,459     131,168  126,                   
                                                 151   -6,308    -5,017 
                                                                        
NATIONAL MARINE                                                         
 FISHERIES SERVICE                                                      
 (NMFS)*                                                                
Total, NMFS         321,65                                              
                      0     281,642     305,640  240,                   
                                                 000   -41,642   -65,640
General reduction                                                       
 to operations,                                                         
 research and                                                           
 facilities           0         0         0      -11,                   
                                                 147   -11,147   -10,000
                   -----------------------------------------------------
Total, Operations,                                                      
 Research and                                                           
 Facilities         1,939,                                              
                    780     1,892,927   2,061,3                         
                                         59      1,76                   
                                                 5,35                   
                                                  9    -127,568  -296,00
                                                                   0    
Construction        79,883  50,000      37,366   29,5                   
                                                 70    -20,430   -7,796 
NOAA fleet                                                              
 modernization      22,936  8,000       12,000    0    -8,000    -12,000
Other               2,199   2,477         3       0    -2,477     -3    
TOTAL, NOAA         2,044,                                              
                    798     1,953,404   2,110,7                         
                                         28      1,79                   
                                                 4,92                   
                                                  9    -158,475  -315,79
                                                                   9    
                                                                        
NATIONAL OCEAN                                                          
 SERVICE:                                                               
MAPPING, CHARTING,                                                      
 AND GEODESY:                                                           
  Mapping and                                                           
   charting         30,899  34,000      36,086   34,0                   
                                                 00       0      -2,086 
  Automated                                                             
   nautical                                                             
   charting system                                                      
   II               1,250   2,500       2,500    2,50                   
                                                  0       0        0    
                   -----------------------------------------------------
  Subtotal,                                                             
   mapping and                                                          
   charting         32,149  36,500      38,586   36,5                   
                                                 00       0      -2,086 
  Subtotal,                                                             
   geodesy          20,667  20,167      20,330   20,1                   
                                                 63      -4      -167   
                   -----------------------------------------------------
Total, mapping,                                                         
 charting, and                                                          
 geodesy            52,816  56,667      58,916   56,6                   
                                                 63      -4      -2,253 
                                                                        
OBSERVATION AND                                                         
 ASSESSMENT:                                                            
OBSERVATION AND                                                         
 PREDICTION:                                                            
  Observation and                                                       
   prediction       12,358  11,000      11,679   11,0                   
                                                 00       0      -679   
  Circulatory                                                           
   Survey Program   700         0         0       0       0        0    
  Chesapeake Bay                                                        
   observation                                                          
   buoys            400       400         0       0    -400        0    
  Ocean services    4,418   3,000       3,000    3,00                   
                                                  0       0        0    
                   -----------------------------------------------------
  Subtotal,                                                             
   Observation and                                                      
   prediction       17,876  14,400      14,679   14,0                   
                                                 00    -400      -679   
                                                                        
ESTUARINE AND                                                           
 COASTAL                                                                
 ASSESSMENT:                                                            
  Estuarine and                                                         
   coastal                                                              
   assessment       2,674   2,674       2,674    2,67                   
                                                  4       0        0    
  Ocean Assessment                                                      
   Program          24,528  21,925      24,204   21,9                   
                                                 25       0      -2,279 
  Damage                                                                
   assessment       1,200   1,200       3,200    1,20                   
                                                  0       0      -2,000 
  Transfer from                                                         
   damage                                                               
   assessment                                                           
   fund*            7,838   6,550       5,276    5,27                   
                                                  6    -1,274      0    
  Oil Pollution                                                         
   Act of 1990*     1,300   1,000       1,000    1,00                   
                                                  0       0        0    
                   -----------------------------------------------------
  Subtotal,                                                             
   estuarine and                                                        
   coastal                                                              
   assessment       37,540  33,349      36,354   32,0                   
                                                 75    -1,274    -4,279 
COASTAL OCEAN                                                           
 SCIENCE:                                                               
  Coastal Ocean                                                         
   Program          9,243   11,500      14,841   Move                   
                                                 d to                   
                                                 OAR     NA       NA    
  Subtotal,                                                             
   Coastal Ocean                                                        
   Science          9,243   11,500      14,841    0      NA       NA    
                   -----------------------------------------------------
Total, Observation                                                      
 and assessment     64,659  59,249      65,874   46,0                   
                                                 75    -13,174   -19,799
Total, Ocean and                                                        
 Coastal                                                                
 Management*        66,811  59,385      64,716   10,9                   
                                                 27    -48,458   -53,789
                   -----------------------------------------------------
TOTAL, NATIONAL                                                         
 OCEAN SERVICE      184,28                                              
                      6     175,301     189,506  113,                   
                                                 665   -61,636   -75,841
                                                                        
OCEANIC AND                                                             
 ATMOSPHERIC                                                            
 RESEARCH (OAR)                                                         
CLIMATE AND AIR                                                         
 QUALITY RESEARCH:                                                      
  Interannual &                                                         
   Seasonal                                                             
   Climate                                                              
   Research/and                                                         
   related Global                                                       
   Climate Change   64,770  65,500      76,712   65,5                   
                                                 00       0      -11,212
  Long-Term                                                             
   Climate and Air                                                      
   Quality                                                              
   Research         27,772  27,272      29,402   27,2                   
                                                 72       0      -2,130 
  Vents               0     2,500         0       0    -2,500      0    
  High Performance                                                      
   Computing        5,500   6,500       9,567    6,50                   
                                                  0       0      -3,067 
  Globe             7,000       0       7,000     0       0      -7,000 
                   -----------------------------------------------------
Total, Climate and                                                      
 Air Quality                                                            
 Research           105,04                                              
                      2     101,772     122,681  99,2                   
                                                 72    -2,500    -23,409
                                                                        
ATMOSPHERIC                                                             
 PROGRAMS:                                                              
  Weather Research  37,113  33,613      33,905   33,6                   
                                                 13       0      -292   
  Wind Profiler     4,350   4,350       4,350    4,35                   
                                                  0       0        0    
                   -----------------------------------------------------
  Subtotal,                                                             
   Weather                                                              
   Research         41,463  37,963      38,255   37,9                   
                                                 63       0      -292   
  Solar-                                                                
   Terrestrial                                                          
   Services and                                                         
   Research         5,483   5,483       5,511    5,21                   
                                                  9    -264      -292   
                   -----------------------------------------------------
Total, Atmospheric                                                      
 Programs           46,946  43,446      43,766   43,1                   
                                                 82    -264      -584   
                                                                        
OCEAN AND GREAT                                                         
 LAKES PROGRAMS:                                                        
  Marine                                                                
   Prediction                                                           
   Research         15,175  15,026      14,808   14,8                   
                                                 08    -218        0    
  Southeast                                                             
   Fisheries                                                            
   Oceanographic                                                        
   Coordinated                                                          
   Investigations   450       400         0       0    -400        0    
  Lake Champlain                                                        
   Study            150         0         0       0       0        0    
  Pacific Island                                                        
   Technical                                                            
   Assistance       190         0         0       0       0        0    
  Vents             2,496       0       2,500     0       0      -2,500 
                   -----------------------------------------------------
Total, Marine                                                           
 Prediction                                                             
 Research           18,461  15,426      17,308   14,8                   
                                                 08    -618      -2,500 
                                                                        
SEA GRANT/COP:                                                          
  Sea Grant                                                             
   College Program  51,698  53,300      48,793   36,0                   
                                                 00    -17,300   -12,793
  Sea Grant-Oyster                                                      
   Disease          1,500       0         0       0       0        0    
  National Coastal                                                      
   R&D; Institute    1,000       0         0       0       0        0    
                   -----------------------------------------------------
  Subtotal, Sea                                                         
   Grant            54,198  53,300      48,793   36,0                   
                                                 00    -17,300   -12,793
  Subtotal,                                                             
   Coastal Ocean                                                        
   Program            O         0         0      17,3                   
                                                 00      NA       NA    
                   -----------------------------------------------------
Total, Sea Grant/                                                       
 COP                54,198  53,300      48,793   53,3                   
                                                 00       0      4,507  
                                                                        
UNDERSEA RESEARCH                                                       
 PROGRAM:                                                               
Total, Undersea                                                         
 Research Program   15,932  12,000        0       0    -12,000     0    
                   -----------------------------------------------------
Total, Ocean &                                                          
 Great Lakes                                                            
 Programs           88,591  80,726      66,101   68,1                   
                                                 08    -12,618   2,007  
                   -----------------------------------------------------
TOTAL, OCEANIC AND                                                      
 ATMOSPHERIC                                                            
 RESEARCH           240,57                                              
                      9     225,944     232,548  210,                   
                                                 562   -15,382   -21,986
                                                                        
NATIONAL WEATHER                                                        
 SERVICE                                                                
OPERATIONS AND                                                          
 RESEARCH:                                                              
  Local Warnings                                                        
   and Forecasts    321,67                                              
                      1     405,300     409,020  391,                   
                                                 950   -13,350   -17,070
  Modernization                                                         
   and                                                                  
   Restructuring                                                        
   Demonstration                                                        
   and                                                                  
   Implementation                                                       
   (MARDI)          115,94                                              
                      6         0         0       0       0        0    
  Radiosonde                                                            
   replacement      1,339       0       4,255    4,25                   
                                                  5    4,255       0    
  Susquehanna                                                           
   River Basin                                                          
   Flood System     1,250     669       669      669      0        0    
  Agricultural and                                                      
   Fruit Frost                                                          
   Program          2,316       0         0       0       0        0    
  Fire Weather                                                          
   Services         449         0         0       0       0        0    
  Aviation                                                              
   Forecasts        35,596  35,596      35,596   35,5                   
                                                 96       0        0    
  Regional Climate                                                      
   Centers          3,200   2,000         0       0    -2,000      0    
  De-certification/                                                     
   Privatization       na        na     -10,000  -17,                   
                                                 000             -7,000 
                   -----------------------------------------------------
  Subtotal, Local                                                       
   Warnings and                                                         
   Forecasts        481,76                                              
                      7     443,565     439,540  415,                   
                                                 470   -28,095   -24,070
  Central Forecast                                                      
   Guidance         29,015  28,193      29,543   28,1                   
                                                 98       5      -1,345 
  Atmospheric and                                                       
   Hydrological                                                         
   Research         2,487   2,000       2,589    2,00                   
                                                  0       0      -589   
                   -----------------------------------------------------
Total, Operations                                                       
 and Research       513,26                                              
                      9     473,758     471,672  445,                   
                                                 668   -28,090   -26,004
SYSTEMS                                                                 
 ACQUISITIONS:                                                          
  Public Warning                                                        
   and Forecast                                                         
   Systems:                                                             
  Next Generation                                                       
   Weather Radar                                                        
   (NEXRAD)         82,982  53,335      53,145   53,1                   
                                                 45    -190        0    
  Automated                                                             
   Surface                                                              
   Observing                                                            
   System (ASOS)    17,515  16,952      10,056   10,0                   
                                                 56    -6,896      0    
  Advanced Weather                                                      
   Interactive                                                          
   Processing                                                           
   System (AWIPS)/                                                      
   NOAA Port        34,947  50,000      119,800  105,                   
                                                 000   55,000    -14,800
  Computer                                                              
   Facility                                                             
   Upgrades         9,985   12,000      15,993   12,0                   
                                                 00       0      -3,993 
Total, Systems                                                          
 Acquisition        145,42                                              
                      9     132,287     198,994  180,                   
                                                 201   47,914    -18,793
                   -----------------------------------------------------
TOTAL, NATIONAL                                                         
 WEATHER SERVICE    658,69                                              
                      8     606,045     670,666  625,                   
                                                 869   19,824    -44,797
                                                                        
NATIONAL                                                                
 ENVIRONMENTAL                                                          
 SATELLITE, DATA                                                        
 AND INFORMATION                                                        
 SERVICE (NESDIS)                                                       
SATELLITE                                                               
 OBSERVING                                                              
 SYSTEMS:                                                               
  Polar Spacecraft                                                      
   and Launching    146,22                                              
                      8     174,765     147,644  147,                   
                                                 664   -27,101    20    
  Polar                                                                 
   Convergence/                                                         
   Joint Program                                                        
   Office           16,000  39,500      78,200   39,5                   
                                                 00       0      -38,700
  Geostationary                                                         
   Spacecraft and                                                       
   Launching        132,24                                              
                      2     153,106     205,922  181,                   
                                                 378   28,272    -24,544
  Ocean Remote                                                          
   Sensing          6,000   4,000       1,552    1,55                   
                                                  2    -2,448      0    
  Environmental                                                         
   Observing                                                            
   Services         51,271  49,000      53,615   49,0                   
                                                 00       0      -4,615 
  LandSat                                                               
   Operations         0     10,000        0       0    -10,000     0    
                   -----------------------------------------------------
  Total, Satellite                                                      
   Observing                                                            
   Systems          351,74                                              
                      1     430,371     486,933  419,                   
                                                 094   -11,277   -67,839
                                                                        
ENVIRONMENTAL DATA                                                      
 MANAGEMENT                                                             
 SYSTEMS:                                                               
  Data and                                                              
   Information                                                          
   Services         24,365  29,865      30,098   29,8                   
                                                 65       0      -233   
  Environmental                                                         
   Services Data                                                        
   and Information                                                      
   Management                                                           
   (ESDIM)          11,300  11,300      14,800   11,3                   
                                                 00       0      -3,500 
                   -----------------------------------------------------
  Total,                                                                
   Environmental                                                        
   Data Management                                                      
   Systems          35,665  41,165      44,898   41,1                   
                                                 65       0      -3,733 
                   -----------------------------------------------------
TOTAL, NESDIS       387,40                                              
                      6     471,536     531,831  460,                   
                                                 259   -11,277   -71,572
------------------------------------------------------------------------


                    Proposed Authorization Figures for the EPA Science and Technology Account                   
                                             [Dollars in Thousands]                                             
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Estimated                    Mark V              
                 Account Title                      FY1996       FY1996    FY1997  FY1997   FY1997     Mark V   
                                                Authorization     App.    Request   Mark   Request   FY1996 App.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, AIR RESEARCH                             96,300.9       95,000.0   88,163.                               
                                                                            2      75,519                       
                                                                                    .9     -12,643    -19,480.1 
                                                                                                                
  Air Quality Research                          93,915.2       75,000.0   69,723.                               
                                                                            5      74,119                       
                                                                                    .9     4,396         -880.1 
    Criteria Air                                57,145.1                  26,782.                               
                                                                            2      41,000                       
                                                                                    .0     14,218               
    Air Toxics                                  6,319.60                  9,102.0  12,000                       
                                                                                    .0     2,898                
    Indoor Air                                       0                    3,664.2    0     -3,664               
    Infrastructure                              26,803.8                  30,175.                               
                                                                            1      21,119                       
                                                                                    .9     -9,055               
                                                                                                                
  Global Climate Change                         2,385.7        20,000.0   18,439.                               
                                                                            7      1,400.                       
                                                                                     0     -17,040    -18,600.0 
    Stratospheric Ozone                                                                                         
    Depletion                                   2,385.7                   1,256.5  1,400.                       
                                                                                     0     144                  
    Climate Change Action Plan                     0.0                    6,200.0  0.0     -6,200               
    Climate C. Research/Infrastruct.                 0                    10,983.                               
                                                                            2      0.0     -10,983              
                                                                                                                
WATER QUALITY RESEARCH                          21,243.1       20,000.0   26,293.                               
                                                                            8      26,294                       
                                                                                    .0       0          6,294.0 
  Ecosystem Protection                          9,188.9                   12,007.                               
                                                                            7      12,007                       
                                                                                    .7       0                  
  Infrastructure                                12,054.2                  14,286.                               
                                                                            1      14,286                       
                                                                                    .1       0                  
                                                                                                                
DRINKING WATER RESEARCH                         20,652.4       20,000.0   26,593.                               
                                                                            7      26,593                       
                                                                                    .7       0          6,593.7 
  Drinking Water                                10,376.5                  12,156.                               
                                                                            6      13,361                       
                                                                                    .6     1,205                
  Infrastructure                                10,275.9                  14,437.                               
                                                                            1      13,232                       
                                                                                    .1     -1,205               
                                                                                                                
PESTICIDE RESEARCH                              13,345.2       12,000.0   20,632.                               
                                                                            0      20,632                       
                                                                                    .0       0          8,632.0 
  Ecosystem Protection                             0.0                    4,232.9  4,232.                       
                                                                                     9       0                  
  Human Health Protection                       5,531.1                   6,270.8  6,887.                       
                                                                                     3     617                  
  Special Envir. Problems                       1,243.3                   0.0      0.0       0                  
  Infrastructure                                6,152.4                   10,128.                               
                                                                            3      9,511.                       
                                                                                     8     -617                 
                                                                                                                
TOXIC SUBSTANCES RESEARCH                       11,053.9       14,000.0   12,341.                               
                                                                            5      12,341                       
                                                                                    .5       0         -1,658.5 
  Ecosystem Protection                           974.4                    2,982.8  2,982.                       
                                                                                     8       0                  
  Human Health Project                          2,941.2                   2,279.7  2,400.                       
                                                                                     0     120                  
  Special Envir. Problems                       1,113.0                   220.9    220.9   220.9              0 
  Infrastructure                                6,025.3                   6,858.1  6,738.                       
                                                                                     1     -120                 
                                                                                                                
HAZARDOUS WASTE RESEARCH                        21,020.2       2O,000.0   10,343.                               
                                                                            9      12,000                       
                                                                                    .0     1,656       -8,000.0 
  Waste/Site/Risk                               1,430.8                   1,498.7  3,154.                       
                                                                                     8     1,656                
  Waste Management                              8,868.1                   3,718.1  3,718.                       
                                                                                     1       0                  
  New Technology                                 678.8                    173.1    173.1     0                  
  Infrastructure                                10,042.5                  4,954.0  4,954.                       
                                                                                     0       0                  
                                                                                                                
Total, MULTIMEDIA                               240,943.2      265,000.0  300,837                               
                                                                           .0      256,34                       
                                                                                   6.5     -44,491     -8,653.5 
                                                                                                                
  Multimedia Research                           158,656.8      210,000.0  211,786                               
                                                                           .2      174,06                       
                                                                                   0.1     -37,726    -35,939.9 
  Ecosystem Protection                          47,351.7                  58,887.                               
                                                                            2      58,887                       
                                                                                    .2       0                  
  New Technologies                              12,610.0                  40,741.                               
                                                                            3      13,121                       
                                                                                    .9     -27,619              
  Human Health Project                          21,983.0                  16,065.                               
                                                                            4      17,000                       
                                                                                    .0     935                  
  Special Environmental Prob.                   1,706.8                   7,137.1  8,000.                       
                                                                                     0     863                  
  Infrastructure                                75005.3                   88,955.                               
                                                                            2      77,051                       
                                                                                    .0     -11,904              
                                                                                                                
  Headquarters Infrastructure                   9,254.8        7,000.0    10,837.                               
                                                                            2      9,254.                       
                                                                                     8     -1,582       2,254.8 
  Lab and Field Expenses                        73,031.6       48,000.0   78,213.                               
                                                                            6      73,031                       
                                                                                    .6     -5,182      25,031.6 
                                                                                                                
MISSION & POLICY MANAGEMENT                     6,399.3        7,500.0    8,184.7  6,399.                       
                                                                                     0     -1,786      -1,101.0 
  Infrastructure                                6,399.3                   8,184.7  6,399.                       
                                                                                     0     -1,786               
                                                                                                                
Environmental Research Labs                           na       51,000.0   85,358.                               
                                                                            2      51,000                       
                                                                                    .0     -34,358          0.0 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY*                    430,958.2      504,500.0  578,748                               
                                                                           .0      487,12                       
                                                                                   6.6     -91,621    -17,373.4 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LUST                                             769.4         650.0      681.0    769.0    88            119.0 
  Waste Management                               589.5                    500.0    601.2   101                  
  New Technologies                                12.1                    0.0      0.0       0                  
  Infrastructure                                 167.8                    181.3    167.8   -14                  
                                                                                                                
OIL SPILL RESEARCH                              2,076.9        1,500.0    1,031.0  2,076.                       
                                                                                     9     1,046          576.9 
  Waste Management                                    na                  900.1    1,850.                       
                                                                                     0     950                  
  Infrastructure                                      na                  131.0    226.9    96                  
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Excluding Superfund which will be authorized as part of Superfund Reauthorization.                            



             NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY             
        SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL RESEARCH SERVICES & CONSTRUCTION       
                 FISCAL YEAR 1997 PROPOSED AUTHORIZATION                
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                   FY96 Estimate*      FY97 Request      FY97 Proposed  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Electronics &                                                           
 electrical                                                             
 engineering                             $38,114,000      $38,407,000 1 
Manufacturing                                                           
 engineering                              18,747,000         18,747,000 
Chemical                                                                
 science &                                                              
 technology                               31,939,000       33,939,000 2 
Physics                                   28,048,000         28,048,000 
Materials                                                               
 science &                                                              
 engineering                              51,026,000       54,589,000 3 
Building & fire                                                         
 research                                 13,085,000         13,085,000 
Computer                                                                
 science &                                                              
 applied                                                                
 mathematics                              43,076,000         43,076,000 
Technology                                                              
 assistance                               14,950,000       18,950,000 4 
National                                                                
 Quality                                                                
 Program                                   2,987,000          2,987,000 
Research                                                                
 support                                                                
 activities                               28,772,000         28,772,000 
                                                                        
STRS                                                                    
 Appropriations      259,000,000*        270,744,000        280,600,000 
Construction of                                                         
 Research                                                               
 Facilities           60,000,000*        105,240,000        105,240,000 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* As funded in the FY96 Commerce Appropriations bill, which was vetoed  
  by the President                                                      
                                                                        
1 Exceeds the President's request by authorizing unfunded FY96 requested
  increase to develop and deliver new measurement tools and services to 
  the semiconductor device, equipment, and materials industries, as     
  called for in the National Technology Roadmap for Semiconductors.     
2 Exceeds the President's request by authorizing unfunded FY96 requested
  increase to develop biotechnology measurement and data tools needed by
  United States industry to accelerate commercialization of bioproducts 
  through improved product design, process optimization, and quality    
  assurance.                                                            
3 Exceeds the President's request by authorizing unfunded FY96 requested
  increase to permit work with industry to accelerate the               
  commercialization of advanced materials through projects that         
  emphasize the measurement science/characterization elements of        
  synthesis and processing and the process integration of relevant      
  materials.                                                            
4 Exceeds the President's request by authorizing unfunded FY96 requested
  increase to provide a new generation of physical standards,           
  measurements, test methods, and reference data needed by emerging     
  instrumentation industries, focusing on metrology. This increase would
  also provide funds to implement the requirements of the National      
  Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-113)  
  to make NIST the lead governmental coordinating agency on standards   
  and conformity assessment.                                            



 FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION RESEARCH, ENGINEERING, AND DEVELOPMENT 
                   (RE&D;) FY97 PROPOSED AUTHORIZATION                   
                        [In millions of dollars]                        
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                        FY96                             FY97 Proposed  
                    Appropriated     FY97 PB Request     Authorization  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sys Dev/                                                                
 Infrastructure            10.000             16.822             10.000 
Capacity/ATM                                                            
 technology                37.200             40.570             39.911 
Comm/Nav/                                                               
 Surveillance              23.000             20.371             20.371 
Weather                     6.493              6.411              6.411 
Airport                                                                 
 Technology                 6.000              6.000              6.000 
Air Safety                                                              
 Technology                37.978             38.999             37.978 
System Security            36.045             36.045             36.045 
Human Factors/                                                          
 Aviation                                                               
 Medicine                  23.682             23.682             23.682 
Environment/                                                            
 Energy                     3.800              3.800              3.800 
Innovative/                                                             
 Cooperative                                                            
 Research                   1.500              3.000              1.500 
                                                                        
                          185.698            195.700            185.698 
------------------------------------------------------------------------



  NATIONAL EARTHQUAKE HAZARDS REDUCTION PROGRAM FY 1997 BUDGET REQUEST  
                                 SUMMARY                                
                        [In millions of dollars]                        
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        FY 1996     FY 1997     FY 1997 
            ACCOUNT TITLE              Estimate     Request      Auth.  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Emergency Management Agency.      19.93      18.825      18.825 
United States Geological Survey.....      46.13       46.13       46.13 
National Science Foundation.........       27.1        28.4        28.4 
National Institute of Standards and                                     
 Technology.........................      1.932       1.932       1.932 
                                                                        
TOTAL...............................     95.092      95.287      95.287 
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Chairman. And, the Chair would begin with an opening 
statement. The Committee has before it today the Omnibus 
Civilian Science Authorization Act of 1996, a bill providing 
Fiscal Year 1997 authorizations for the National Science 
Foundation, NASA, the U.S. Fire Administration, NOAA, the 
research programs of EPA, the National Institute of Standards 
and Technology, the research programs of the FAA and the 
Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program.
    This bill, drafted and presented with the subcommittee 
Chairs, is a sound and responsible approach to the funding of 
our nation's federal civilian research and development efforts. 
It authorizes $19.7 billion for Fiscal Year 1997. The 
President's request for these programs is $20.9 billion.
    The difference is largely reflected in reductions to NIST's 
Industrial Technology Services, NASA's Mission to Planet Earth 
and some areas of NOAA and EPA.
    We are fulfilling our commitment to basic research by 
providing a $250 million increase in basic research, a 5 
percent increase. NSF research grants are up by $66 million 
over 1996.
    NASA's Space Science and Life and Microgravity research are 
up by $145 million. NOAA Climate and Air Quality Research 
Coastal Ocean Science, Sea Grant Research and Marine Research 
are up by $14 million. And, NIST core Scientific and Technical 
Research is up by $21 million.
    NASA's space science account is $310 million over the 
President's request which, when aggregated with Life and 
Microgravity Research, achieves the number one recommendation 
of the Augustine Commission, a 20 percent share of the NASA 
budget. NIST's core is $10 million above the President's 
request. And, the President's $170 million in oceanic and 
atmospheric basic research is matched.
    This bill also makes tremendous progress with regard to the 
budget limitations for Fiscal Year 1997 that were delineated in 
last year's balanced budget resolution. As Chairman of the 
Science Committee, I am recommending, and as Vice Chairman of 
the Budget Committee, I am seeking, a $430 million net 
adjustment in our overall Fiscal Year 1997 cap in regard to the 
subject matter of this bill.
    That is represented by a Fiscal Year 1997 NASA number that 
is adjusted upward of $230 million from the $13.265 up to $13.5 
billion. NOAA is adjusted up $116 million to $1.8 billion.
    NSF is raised $77 million for basic research grants and 
South Pole environmental restoration, while NIST is raised $37 
million in order to build a much needed Advanced Lab for use as 
soon as possible. FAA and EPA R&D; are maintained at or close to 
current funding levels.
    The U.S. Fire Administration and earthquake programs are 
authorized at the President's request.
    All of this is on top of a $350 million upward adjustment 
to the 1997 cap that we, as the authorizing committee, already 
made on the House Floor last year for DOE programs--$170 
million for Energy Supply R&D; to $2.6 billion, $95 million for 
Conservation R&D; to $230 million and $86 million for Fossil R&D; 
to $221 million.
    I am also seeking this adjustment in the 1997 budget 
resolution. Furthermore, although we do not repeat the DOE 
authorization in this measure, it is my expectation that the 
Energy and Environment Subcommittee could take this measure up 
for authorization in the coming weeks if that is the desire of 
the Subcommittee Chairman and the membership.
    Some members have questioned why we are proceeding 
immediately to Full Committee rather than going to subcommittee 
markups. The answer is that we have Floor time in early May, 
giving us the opportunity to pass an authorization bill in the 
House before the appropriations subcommittees begin their 
markups.
    We have held authorization hearings in every subcommittee. 
And, the policy statements in the bill reflect both last year's 
work and this year's oversight.
    There has been a great deal of name-calling in the media 
over the past couple of months, with Republicans being accused 
of all sorts of nefarious intentions with regard to science 
funding. This legislation speaks for itself.
    There are at least 70 programs which are funded at higher 
levels than current funding and 40 programs that are funded 
above the President's request.
    What we have done in the remainder of the bill is make 
tough choices necessary for this Committee's priorities to be 
seriously considered. Yes, it would have been easy to pump up 
every account to accommodate every proposal.
    But, as I said last year, I don't believe that our role as 
authorizers is to act as cheerleaders for all of the programs 
under our jurisdiction. Cultivating public recognition and 
support for science is an important role.
    And, all of us have a responsibility to get that message 
out. We are also here to evaluate the effectiveness of these 
programs and, in conjunction with the budget realities, make 
choices about funding levels.
    I make no apologies for the approach this Committee has 
taken to science during my tenure as Chairman. Because of our 
responsible work, this Committee has been able to work closely, 
credibly and effectively with the Budget and Appropriations 
Committees on funding levels to achieve Committee priorities 
and balance the budget.
    The tenor of the policy debate has changed within the 
Congress and the science community, as the focus has shifted 
from industrial policy to basic research and from status quo 
subsidies to new knowledge. Quite simply, we have proven to our 
colleagues and to the science community that this Committee is 
serious about its responsibilities.
    I know that there are honest disagreements about the 
direction of science policy. I welcome that discussion as it 
will occur today.
    I hope that we can keep the quality of the debate high and 
focused on the legislation.
    [The opening statement of Chairman Walker follows:]
          OPENING STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE ROBERT S. WALKER,
     MARK-UP OF OMNIBUS CIVILIAN SCIENCE AUTHORIZATION ACT OF 1996
    The Committee has before it today the Omnibus Civilian Science 
Authorization Act of 1996, a bill providing FY 1997 authorizations for 
the National Science Foundation, NASA, the U.S. Fire Administration, 
NOAA, the research programs of EPA, the National Institute of Standards 
and Technology, the research programs of the Federal Aviation 
Administration and the earthquake hazards reduction program.
    This bill, drafted and presented with the subcommittee chairs, is a 
sound and responsible approach to the funding of our nation's federal 
civilian research and development efforts. It authorizes $19.7 billion 
for FY 1997; the President's request for these programs is $20.9 
billion. The difference is largely reflected in reductions to NIST's 
Industrial Technology Services, NASA's Mission to Planet Earth, some 
areas of NOAA, and EPA.
    We are fulfilling our commitment to basic research by providing a 
$250 million increase in basic research, a five percent increase. NSF 
research grants are up $66 million over FY 1996. NASA Space Science and 
Life and Microgravity research are up $145 million. NOAA Climate and 
Air Quality Research, Coastal Ocean Science, Sea Grant Research, and 
Marine Research are up $14 million, and NIST ``core'' Scientific and 
Technical Research is up $21 million.
    NASA's space science account is $310 million over the President's 
request, which when aggregated with Life and Microgravity Research, 
achieves the number one recommendation of the Augustine Commission--a 
20 percent share of the NASA budget. NIST's core is $10 million above 
the President's request. The President's $170 million in oceanic and 
atmospheric basic research is matched.
    This bill also makes tremendous progress with regard to the budget 
limitations for FY 1997 that were delineated in last year's balanced 
budget resolution. As Chairman of the Science Committee, I am 
recommending, and as Vice Chairman of the Budget Committee, I am 
seeking, a $430 million net adjustment in our overall FY 1997 cap in 
regard to the subject matter of this bill. That is represented by an FY 
1997 NASA number that is adjusted upward $230 million, from $13.265 to 
$13.5 billion. NOAA is adjusted up $116 million to $1.8 billion. NSF is 
raised $77 million for basic research grants and South Pole 
environmental restoration, while NIST is raised $37 million in order to 
build a much-needed Advanced Metrology Lab for use as soon as possible. 
FAA and EPA R&D; are maintained at or close to current funding levels. 
The U.S. Fire Administration and earthquake programs are authorized at 
the President's request.
    All of this is on top of a $350 million upward adjustment to the 
1997 cap that we, as the authorizing committee, already made on the 
House Floor last year for DOE programs ($170 million for Energy Supply 
R&D; to $2.6 billion; $95 million for Conservation R&D; to $230 million; 
and $86 million for Fossil R&D; to $221 million). I am also seeking this 
adjustment in the FY 1997 budget resolution. Furthermore, although we 
do not repeat the DOE authorization in this measure, it is my 
expectation that the Energy and Environment Subcommittee could take up 
this measure for authorization in the coming weeks, if that is the 
desire of the Chairman and his membership.
    Some members have questioned why we are proceeding immediately to 
full Committee, rather than going through subcommittee mark-ups. The 
answer is that we have Floor time in early May, giving us the 
opportunity to pass an authorization bill in the House before the 
appropriations subcommittees begin their mark-ups. We have held 
authorization hearings in every subcommittee, and the policy statements 
in the bill reflect both last year's work and this year's oversight.
    There has been a great deal of name-calling in the media over the 
past couple of months, with Republicans being accused of all sorts of 
nefarious intentions with regard to science funding. This legislation 
speaks for itself; there are at least 70 programs which are funded at 
higher levels than current funding; and 40 programs are funded above 
the President's request.
    What we have done in the remainder of the bill is make the tough 
choices necessary for this Committee's priorities to be seriously 
considered. Yes, it would have been easy to pump up every account to 
accommodate every proposal. But, as I said last year, I don't believe 
that our role as authorizers is to act as cheerleaders for all of the 
programs under our jurisdiction. Cultivating public recognition and 
support for science is an important role, and all of us have a 
responsibility to get that message out. We are also here to evaluate 
the effectiveness of these programs, and in conjunction with the budget 
realities, make choices about funding levels. 
    I make no apologies for the approach this Committee has taken to 
science during my tenure as Chairman. Because of our responsible work, 
this Committee has been able to work closely, credibly, and effectively 
with the Budget and Appropriations Committees on funding levels to 
achieve Committee priorities and balance the budget. The tenor of the 
policy debate has changed within the Congress and the science 
community, as the focus has shifted from industrial policy to basic 
research, and from status quo subsidies to new knowledge. Quite simply, 
we have proven to our colleagues and to the science community that this 
Committee is serious about its responsibility.
    I know that there are honest disagreements about the direction of 
science policy. I welcome the discussion that will occur today. I hope 
that we can keep the quality of the debate high and focused on the 
legislation. 

    The Chairman. I now recognize the Ranking Member for any 
statement that he might wish to make.
    Mr. Brown. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I would like 
to make a somewhat longer statement than I did on the previous 
bill.
    As the Chairman has noted, the processes of this Committee 
have changed radically after his tenure. Last year, we started 
with a process which devoted about 40 or 50 hours to markup in 
subcommittee and Full Committee before the bill was reported to 
the Floor. On the Floor, all the various bills for the first 
time--and I'm not criticizing this at all--were combined into 
one omnibus bill and taken up on the Floor as one bill and 
passed on the Floor.
    This year, at an even further refinement--and I trust an 
improvement--we are short-circuiting that 40 to 50 hours of 
markup. As the Chairman has indicated that there has been no 
subcommittee markup and that this is a Full Committee markup on 
all of the bills together, which again differs from last year, 
as I pointed out.
    Presumably, the bill will be reported out as an omnibus 
bill. There may be hearings that markup later on portions of 
the bill in the subcommittee. I'm not sure what the Chairman 
has in mind.
    But, this will bring the bill directly to the Floor in the 
fashion that I've described. Now, I don't know what you can do 
for an encore to that.
    Possibly, we won't have even Full Committee markups on all 
of the bills next year and we will take it directly to the 
Floor, as happened in the Committee on Agriculture this year 
when the Chair of that Committee was unable to get Committee 
approval of the authorization bill. So, it was removed from the 
Committee, taken up by the leadership of the Rules Committee 
and subsequently reported to the Floor.
    Now, that may be the epitome of streamlining and 
efficiency. And, pretty soon, we may be able to completely do 
away with the Committee and maybe even the Congress if this 
continues.
    But, I point out that this is the trend which we are 
following. Now, to get on with the specifics of the bill.
    I wish to state that, ``I am pleased to be here today, 
however, I am not pleased with the process that got us here.'' 
That is a direct quote from Mr. Walker's opening statement at 
our Committee markup for the National Energy Policy Act four 
years ago.
    He went on to say, ``What we have before us for markup is a 
bill that was purposely drafted without Minority input.'' Mr. 
Walker made his comments after my staff had spent almost four 
months trying to work with the Republican staff in drafting 
that bill.
    We shared drafts of our bill and sought perfecting language 
and advice on policy direction as we moved towards 
consideration. We were also working with the Bush 
Administration in shaping that bill.
    If that sort of collaboration provokes a charge of no 
Minority input, I shudder to think what Mr. Walker, as Ranking 
Minority Member today, would say about the process we have 
before us in which no Minority Member saw any version of the 
bill until 48 hours before markup. I suspect he might say 
something along the following lines:
    What a difference a year makes. Last year, members of this 
Committee met to markup authorization bills under the pressure 
of firm caps that had been brought back from the Budget 
Committee by Chairman Walker.
    We were constrained to respect those caps as if they were 
handed down from on high. Amendments which did not offer off-
setting cuts were opposed by the Republican leadership of this 
Committee as ``budget busters.'' That's a quote.
    This was, as I pointed out at the time, all a carefully 
crafted charade with no basis in Committee rules, House rules 
or law. There are no authorizing caps associated with the 
Budget Committee's work.
    That was a point that the Chairman disputed on many 
occasions. But, so long as his members found that fiction 
convenient cover for their actions, he could treat his tall 
tale as gospel.
    Of course, we watched the Chair's numbers change every time 
his red phone rang to let him know the appropriators had 
ignored Budget's advice and gone further in funding our 
programs than he had. This Committee had so much impact on the 
appropriators that our numbers almost came to match theirs by 
the time they had finished telling us what their numbers were 
going to be so we could alter ours.
    Some of you may be interested to know that the final 
appropriations numbers for FY-1996 were closer to the 
Democratic alternative numbers we offered in this Committee 
than to the original numbers in Mr. Walker's bill.
    This year's fiction is going to be hard to reconcile with 
last year's best seller. Last year, members were led to be 
believe that they couldn't move an authorization at all until 
the Budget Committee had finished its work and once that work 
was finished, the numbers were carved in stone.
    This year, we are told that if we want to have an impact on 
the Budget Committee's process, we need to move early. Isn't 
this standing last year's fiction on its head?
    Of course, there is a constant between last year's bill and 
this year's Omnibus proposal. Members are again told they have 
to respect the caps in each title of the bill.
    What caps? Where have they come from? Who established them?
    If, as the Chairman explained last year, the caps came from 
the Budget Committee, how can we possibly have caps this year 
before the Budget Committee has even acted? Perhaps the 
Chairman's red phone has been ringing again with secret 
information on what the Budget Committee is going to do.
    An area where broad discussion among all the members would 
seem fruitful and necessary is the authorization for the 
Department of Energy. The bill before us today does not include 
DOE authorization numbers or language.
    This is interesting, because it is my understanding that 
the Chair had intended to include a DOE title. And, you know, 
the Chair isn't the only one with a red phone.
    Mine rang on Friday and, lo and behold, I was faxed a copy 
of the Chair's anticipated numbers for the Department of Energy 
which included this statement for the broadest possible 
distribution. Only the Chair can explain why a title he 
expected to offer on Friday had disappeared by Monday. But, I 
bet it makes for a great story.
    Instead of tackling an authorization for the Department of 
Energy, we've been told that the DOE Fiscal Year 1997 
authorization numbers have already been settled in a little 
debated or noted amendment Mr. Walker offered on the Floor last 
year to the 1995 Omnibus Civilian Science Authorization Act. 
However, those numbers are at the crudest level of detail and 
there is virtually no policy guidance.
    I think that the existing authorization constitutes an 
uncontrolled spending plan of lump sum authorizations conceding 
all specifics and project decisions to the appropriators. I 
believe this is an abdication of our responsibilities as 
policymakers.
    And, the answer to any appropriation porker's dream--``I 
cannot agree to lump sum authorizations that set no priorities 
and make no real choices.'' That's a quotation.
    And, those last words were not mine, though I think they 
are more accurate today than when they were first spoken. 
Again, they come from Mr. Walker's opening statement of four 
years ago on the National Energy Policy Act markup.
    Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. So, I hope the 
Chair will be duly flattered by my weak efforts to imitate the 
role he played so well as Ranking Minority Member.
    And, I yield back the balance of my time.
    [The opening statement and attachments of Mr. Brown 
follow:]
Opening Statement of the Honorable George E. Brown, Jr. on the Omnibus 
               Civilian Science Authorization Act of 1996
    Mr. Chairman,
    ``I am pleased to be here today, however, I am not pleased with the 
process that got us here.'' That is a direct quote from Mr. Walker's 
opening statement at our Committee's markup of the National Energy 
Policy Act four years ago. He went on to say, ``What we have before us 
for markup is a bill that was purposely drafted without Minority 
input...''
    Mr. Walker made his comments after my staff had spent almost four 
months trying to work with Republican Committee staff in drafting that 
bill. We shared drafts of our bill and sought perfecting language and 
advice on policy direction as we moved towards consideration. We were 
also working with the Bush Administration in shaping that bill.
    If that is what provokes a charge of no Minority input, I shudder 
to think what Mr. Walker as Minority ranking Member would say about a 
process in which no Minority Member sees any version of the bill until 
forty-eight hours before markup. I suspect he might say something along 
the following lines:
    What a difference a year makes. Last year, Members of this 
Committee met to mark-up authorization bills under the pressure of firm 
caps that had been brought back from the Budget Committee by Chairman 
Walker. We were constrained to respect those caps as if they were 
handed down from on high. Amendments which did not offer off-setting 
cuts were opposed by the Republican leadership of this Committee as 
``budget busters.''
    This was, as I pointed out at the time, all a carefully crafted 
charade with no basis in Committee rules, House rules or law. There are 
no authorizing caps associated with the Budget Committee's work. That 
was a point that the Chairman disputed on many occasions with me, but 
so long as his Members found that fiction convenient cover for their 
actions, he could treat his tall tale as gospel.
    Of course we watched the Chair's numbers change every time his 
``red phone'' rang to let him know the Appropriators had ignored 
Budget's numbers and gone further in funding our programs than he had. 
This Committee had so much impact on the Appropriators that our numbers 
almost came to match theirs by the time they had finished telling us 
what their numbers were going to be so we could alter ours. Some of you 
may be interested to know that the final appropriations numbers for 
FY1996 were closer to the Democratic alternative numbers we offered in 
this Committee than to the original numbers in Mr. Walker's bills.
    This year's best seller is going to be hard to reconcile with last 
year's fiction. Last year, Members were led to believe that they 
couldn't move an authorization at all until the Budget Committee had 
finished its work and once that work was finished, the numbers were 
carved in stone. This year, we are told that if we want to have an 
impact on the Budget Committee's process, we need to move early. Isn't 
this standing last year's fiction on its head?
    Of course there is a constant between last year's bills and this 
year's Omnibus proposal: Members are again told they have to respect 
the caps in each title of the bill? What caps? Where have they come 
from? Who established them? If, as the Chairman explained last year, 
the caps come from the Budget Committee, how can we possibly have caps 
this year before the Budget Committee has even acted? Perhaps the 
Chairman's red phone has been ringing again with secret information on 
what the Budget Committee is going to do, but if the Chairman already 
knows what the Budget Committee is going to do, who are we fooling in 
claiming that we are acting to influence the Budget Committee?
    I also want to express my disappointment in a process that 
continues to exclude Minority Members from discussion and drafting of 
these bills. Perhaps no Members on the Chairman's side of the aisle 
feel as if the process by which these bills are drafted and numbers 
arrived at is arbitrary and capricious. Some accounts get plussed up 
based on no testimony or record before the Committee. Other accounts 
are cut or terminated with extreme prejudice, again with no Committee 
record.
    We on the Democratic side feel that this is an undemocratic and 
irresponsible way to make policy. We would like it if the Chairman 
would find a way to work with us in those areas where he can, to take 
advantage of the expertise and interest that lies on our side of the 
aisle, even as we understand that the demands of ideological purity on 
particular issues ban compromise or even meaningful dialogue.
    An area where broad discussion among all the Members would seem 
fruitful and necessary is authorizing the Department of Energy 
accounts. The bill before us today does not include DOE authorization 
numbers or language. This is interesting because it is my understanding 
that the Chair had intended to include a DOE title. And you know, the 
Chair isn't the only one with a red phone. Mine rang on Friday and, low 
and behold, I was faxed a copy of the Chair's anticipated numbers for 
DOE which I include with this statement for the broadest possible 
distribution. Only the Chair can explain why a title he expected to 
offer on Friday had disappeared by Monday, but I bet it makes for a 
great story.
    Instead of tackling an authorization for the Department of Energy, 
the Republican Chief of Staff claims that the Chair's attitude is that 
the DOE FY1997 authorization numbers have already been settled in a 
little debated or noted amendment Mr. Walker offered on the Floor last 
year to the 1995 Omnibus Civilian Science Authorization act. However, 
those numbers are at the crudest level of detail and there is virtually 
no policy guidance. Further, there were no hearings held before those 
numbers were developed by the Chair, again, without consultation with 
any Members on our side.
    I think that this constitutes an ``uncontrolled spending plan of 
lump sum authorizations conceding all specifics and project decisions 
to the appropriators. I believe this is an abdication of our 
responsibilities as policymakers. And the answer to any appropriation 
porker's dream....I cannot agree to... lump-sum authorizations that set 
no priorities and make no real choices.''
    Those last words were not mine, though I think they are more 
accurate today than when they were first spoken. Again, they come from 
Mr. Walker's opening statement of four years ago at the National Energy 
Policy Act markup. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, so I 
hope the Chair will be duly flattered by my weak efforts to imitate the 
role he played so well as ranking Minority Member.
    Let me close by encouraging Members who care about setting to join 
me in supporting the Democratic alternative to the Chairman's bill. 
That alternative is based on the President's request which takes the 
next step towards responsibly balancing the budget while protecting 
programs that are vital to our Nation's future. Unlike the Walker bill, 
it is a true Omnibus Civilian Science act because it provides 
authorization details for the Department of Energy as well as all the 
other programs under our jurisdiction and I know many Members on both 
sides of the aisle care deeply about this issue.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    
    
    The Chairman. Well, the Chair is flattered.
    [Laughter.]
    The Chairman. And, the Chair is just absolutely stunned 
that the Minority has kept all of those speeches of mine for so 
long.
    [Laughter.]
    The Chairman. I had no idea that I was such a historic 
figure who has all of these great statements hanging around for 
use to read back.
    Mr. Volkmer. Would the gentleman yield?
    The Chairman. It's a wonderful piece of history that we 
have.
    Mr. Volkmer. Would the gentleman yield? Would the gentleman 
yield?
    The Chairman. Sure, I will be happy to yield to the 
gentleman.
    Mr. Volkmer. There is no question in my mind that the 
process that has taken place in the last two years in this 
Committee under your leadership will go down in history.
    The Chairman. Well, I thank the gentleman. And, the Chair 
tends to agree with him.
    But, I hope that the Reporter will note that coming from 
the gentleman from Missouri.
    Now, I think what we need to do is get unanimous consent--
--
    Mr. Hall. Would the gentleman yield?
    The Chairman. Yes, sure, I would be happy to yield to the 
gentleman.
    Mr. Hall. I think the gentleman would be surprised what 
good background your speeches and other of our speeches make 
for dart boards.
    [Laughter.]
    Mr. Hall. And, we keep all of them.
    The Chairman. I thank the gentleman. Are there any further 
opening statements?
    Mr. Volkmer. Yes, I would like to, if I may, Mr. Chairman.
    The Chairman. Sure. Why not?
    [Laughter.]
    Mr. Volkmer. Well, I think it's, you know, interesting, 
very interesting, to me, to follow the processes that have been 
followed in the last year and a half in regard to environmental 
concerns of many of the Members of the Congress. Yesterday, we 
had on the Floor two bills having to do with environmental 
concerns.
    And, I heard every member from your side that spoke speak 
in support of those two bills. One is the Ocean Coastal 
Management Program and the other is the Cooperative Fisheries 
Management Act.
    Everybody stood up and said how great these programs were 
and how much they meant for the environment, how much they 
meant for the coast of California and the Florida coast and up 
and down the coast of both of our oceans. And, yet, today, we 
have before us right here in this bill large reductions in the 
funds in NOAA in order to implement those programs.
    So, to me, I just can't figure you people out. On one side, 
you say you want these things. And, the other side says, no, we 
are going to cut the money out so you can't implement them.
    You will find that there are severe cuts in the NOAA budget 
for both of these programs. So, how do the states get their 
money when they want to request a grant under the legislation 
that was passed yesterday when there is nobody in NOAA in order 
to handle them?
    I just don't understand your processes that you go through. 
I would think that you would want to make sure that there are 
people there in order to implement the programs that you are so 
fond of.
    But, it appears to me that you are going to say, no, we are 
for all these environmental concerns, and then turn around and 
cut the money to provide for the program implementation.
    And, then I find in this bill in regard to environmental 
concerns the large cuts in programs that are necessary for us 
to determine what is actually happening to our climate and to 
our environment. You have a 92 percent cut in EPA's Global 
Climate Change Research program. You have a 27 percent cut 
below the Administration's request, anyway, to the Mission to 
Plant Earth program.
    I just don't understand whether you are really for clean 
air, clean water, environmental concerns or you are not. And, 
to be honest with you, I come down on the side that you really 
are not in favor of those things, that you really are--in your 
legislative process in the last year and continuing this year, 
you say one thing but your actions in the Congress tell me 
otherwise.
    I would appreciate it, Mr. Chairman, if you would see fit 
to at least restore sufficient funds in order for NOAA to be 
able to implement the Ocean and Coastal Management and the 
Cooperative Fisheries and Management Act.
    I yield back the balance of my time.
    The Chairman. Well, I thank the gentleman. Setting 
priorities really is a tough process.
    I recognize the gentleman from Tennessee, Mr. Wamp.
    Mr. Wamp. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. In light of the fact 
that this is Earth Week and there are so many people in this 
room today and we will be here for a lengthy period of time, I 
would ask unanimous consent that all persons in this room be 
refrained from smoking in this room for the entire time we have 
this Committee hearing today, please.
    Mr. Weldon. Mr. Chairman, I would like to second that 
request and just state, as a physician who has studied the 
scientific literature on the adverse effects of secondhand 
smoke, I would encourage all of our colleagues to support this 
unanimous consent request, especially in light of the 
environmental issues associated with this for this group of 
people here in this room.
    The Chairman. Well, has the gentleman made a unanimous 
consent request?
    Mr. Wamp. Yes.
    The Chairman. Is there objection?
    Mr. Volkmer. Reserving the right to object.
    [Laughter.]
    Mr. Brown. Would the gentleman yield?
    Mr. Volkmer. Is this another environmental speech?
    [Laughter.]
    Mr. Volkmer. Or, are we going to just contemplate this 
little unanimous consent request for a little while?
    The Chairman. Well, I----
    Mr. Volkmer. I reserve the right to object. I would like to 
again hear the request of the gentleman from Tennessee.
    The Chairman. He requested that everybody not smoke during 
the remainder of the hearing.
    Mr. Volkmer. And, that's just merely a simple request.
    The Chairman. Well, I guess.
    Mr. Wamp. A unanimous consent request that everyone refrain 
from smoking until this Committee markup is complete.
    Mr. Volkmer. Well, gentlemen, I may or may not abide by 
your request. I will just let you know that.
    I yield to the gentleman from California.
    Mr. Brown. If the Committee were to act on this as a 
motion, the question I have of the author is would this 
constitute the Republican environmental program on which he 
would----
    [Laughter.]
    Mr. Brown [continuing]. --run for election in 1996 or is 
this just the first stage?
    [Laughter.]
    The Chairman. I would simply suggest to the gentleman that 
at least it would be doing something real rather than simply 
throwing money at things.
    So, is there objection?
    Mr. Doggett. Reserving the right to object.
    The Chairman. Oh, the gentleman from Texas wants to reserve 
the right to object to this motion.
    Mr. Doggett. Yes. This is important to any tobacco 
legislation.
    Has it been cleared with the Chairman of the Commerce 
Committee, Mr. Bliley?
    [Laughter.]
    The Chairman. Mr. Bliley is not a member of this Committee. 
Does the gentleman object?
    Mr. Doggett. Oh, certainly. It may be the only anti-tobacco 
legislation we get through this year.
    The Chairman. Hearing no objection, the Chair will honor 
the gentleman's request.
    The gentleman from Texas is recognized.
    Mr. Hall. Mr. Chairman, thank you. Since we have a long day 
ahead of us, I will try to be as brief as possible.
    Mr. Brown has already indicated somewhat his interest in 
the overall bill. And, I will focus my remarks on the NASA 
authorization.
    Mr. Volkmer had problems with the process. And, sometimes I 
think we have more problems with the process than sometimes we 
do with the content.
    And, I will address that further, because I have to confess 
that there are a number of things troubling me about this bill. 
First, as the Chairman knows, I would have preferred that the 
NASA authorization be marked up by the Space Subcommittee 
before coming to the Full Committee.
    The Chairman has indicated that it was not possible to do 
that. But, I think a review of the proposed legislation by the 
subcommittee of jurisdiction is always beneficial. And, it 
would have been beneficial in this situation.
    Second, I am troubled by a number of the funding cuts 
included in this bill. I don't normally object to funding cuts 
or any type of cut.
    I almost never saw a cut that I didn't like. But, for 
example, this bill would cut almost 20 percent from NASA's 
Advanced Subsonic Aeronautics Research Program.
    And, for those of you who don't already know, the Advanced 
Subsonic Program is an R&D; initiative that would lead to 
quieter, more efficient and fuel efficient aircraft. It would 
address aging aircraft safety, which is of some concern to us 
today.
    It will help provide a safer air traffic management system. 
And, the list goes on and on.
    I think it's important to remember that the R&D; conducted 
under this program does more than just advance knowledge. It 
helps U.S. aerospace maintain its competitive advantage in the 
world, something that is very important to us, creating jobs 
for American workers.
    As another example, the bill cuts the Mission to Planet 
Earth by almost $375 million. And, while my highest priority is 
not the Mission to Plant Earth, as the Chairman well knows, it 
is a priority of others on this Committee.
    Ms. Harman has done a super job of setting forth the best 
aspects of it. And, we all have different priorities.
    And, I think we all have to have some give and take.
     But, I recognize that there are other strong supporters of 
Mission to Plant Earth.
    Cuts of the magnitude proposed in this bill were rejected 
by the Appropriations Conference and by our counterparts in the 
Senate last year. I'm afraid that insisting on such large cuts 
probably would ensure that this bill never becomes law.
    Finally, Mr. Chairman, and most importantly, I'm troubled 
by the message that the NASA authorization sends to the rest of 
the House of Representatives, namely, that it's okay to cut 
NASA's request by more than $300 million in Fiscal Year 1997. 
It's just not okay to do that.
    I believe it's a bad message. And, I think it's a bad 
policy.
    Over the past several years, the Administration and 
Congress challenged NASA to cut its cost and streamline its 
programs. NASA stepped up to that challenge.
    And, I believe that the NASA Administrator and all the fine 
NASA employees should be congratulated and not forced to 
swallow even more cuts before they have had a chance to fully 
absorb the existing cuts. I think it sets back--I don't believe 
there has been another administrative entity since I've been in 
Congress that has stepped forward and accepted the cuts that 
the Congress has asked them to take and the President has asked 
them to take, this Committee has asked them to take.
    They've stepped forth and done it. We didn't have to do it 
with a club. They did it with a surgeon's knife.
     They have made those cuts.
    It seems to me that NASA needs some budgetary stability. 
NASA has been cut enough.
    It is time to hold the line on NASA's budget. Mr. Chairman, 
I thank you.
    [The opening statement of Mr. Hall follows:]
                OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. RALPH M. HALL
    Good morning. Since we have a long day ahead of us, I will be 
brief. Mr. Brown has already spoken about the overall bill, so I will 
focus my remarks on the NASA authorization.
    I have to confess that a number of things trouble me about this 
bill. First, as the Chairman knows, I would have preferred that the 
NASA authorization be marked up by the Space Subcommittee before coming 
before the Full Committee. The Chairman has indicated that it was not 
possible to do so, but I think that a review of the proposed 
legislation by the subcommittee of jurisdiction would have been very 
beneficial.
    Second, I'm troubled by a number of the funding cuts included in 
this bill. For example, the bill would cut almost 20% from NASA's 
advanced subsonics aeronautics research program. For those of you who 
don't already know, the advanced subsonics program is an R&D; initiative 
that will lead to quieter, more fuel-efficient aircraft, will address 
aging aircraft safety concerns, will help provide a safer air traffic 
management system--the list goes on and on. It's important to remember 
that the R&D; conducted under this program does more than just advance 
knowledge, it helps U.S. aerospace maintain its competitive advantage 
in the world, creating jobs for American workers.
    As another example, the bill cuts the Mission to Planet Earth by 
almost $375 million. While my highest priority is the Space Station 
program and the biomedical research that it will make possible, I 
recognize that others are strong supporters of Mission to Planet Earth. 
Cuts of the magnitude proposed in this bill were rejected by the 
Appropriations conference and by our counterparts in the Senate last 
year. I'm afraid that insisting on such large cuts may only ensure that 
this bill never becomes law.   
    Finally, and most importantly, I'm troubled by the message that 
this NASA authorization sends to the rest of the House of 
Representatives--namely, that it's okay to cut NASA's request by more 
than $300 million in Fiscal Year 1997. I believe that is a bad message, 
and a bad policy. Over the past several years, the Administration and 
Congress challenged NASA to cut its costs and streamline its programs. 
NASA stepped up to that challenge, and I believe that the NASA 
Administrator and all of the fine NASA employees should be 
congratulated, not forced to swallow even more cuts before they have 
had a chance to fully absorb the existing cuts.
    NASA needs some budgetary stability. NASA has been cut enough--it 
is time to hold the line on NASA's budget.
    Thank you.

    Mr. Volkmer. Would the gentleman yield?
    Mr. Sensenbrenner. Would the gentleman yield?
    Mr. Volkmer. Would the gentleman yield?
    Mr. Hall. I do yield, sir.
    Mr. Volkmer. I would just like to comment. You made one 
statement about this bill, that because of the extreme nature 
of the cuts, et cetera, in NASA and other parts that it would, 
in all probability, not become law.
    Well, it's very apparent to me that the bill, the extreme 
radical bill, that came out of this Committee last year, 
Senator Dole took it and put it in File 13. I anticipate that 
probably the same thing will happen, wouldn't you agree, to 
this bill?
    Mr. Hall. I hope not, but it seems headed in that 
direction. Thank you.
    I yield back my time.
    Mr. Sensenbrenner. Mr. Chairman.
    The Chairman. The gentleman from Wisconsin.
    Mr. Sensenbrenner. Mr. Chairman, we are hearing a lot of 
squealing from the animals on the right of the Chairman about 
the timing of this piece of legislation. And, I think it's 
important that we put all of this in proper perspective.
    First of all, if we want to have an impact before the 
appropriators meet, we are going to have to work on this 
legislation now, because the appropriations will start coming 
up at the end of May, so that they aren't dragged out and we 
end up having the fiscal year expire without appropriation 
bills being passed and sent up to the White House. And, if we 
are to eliminate the mistakes of last year, we've got to get 
working on the appropriations and the authorizations earlier 
this year.
    Secondly, the reason we are six weeks behind schedule, 
folks, is the fact that your President did not submit his 
budget until March 18th. That was due on February 6th.
    And, as far as the Space and Aeronautics Subcommittee is 
concerned, we were specifically asked by Administrator Goldin 
not to have the NASA posture hearing where he could testify to 
the Administration's budget until after the Administration 
budget was submitted. And, we did so promptly when that 
happened.
    Then, we took two weeks off for Easter, as we usually do. 
Last week, we had a marathon hearing where there were a lot of 
witnesses that came and testified, both from public and private 
sectors. And, we are here this week.
    Now, you know, if we want to be a player in the processes 
of setting the appropriations, not just for NASA but for the 
other agencies, we had better get a bill out on the Floor and 
get members on record on some of these issues before the 
appropriations bills come up. And, this is the only time to do 
it.
    Now, with respect to the whining and crying that I hear 
relative to the NASA budget, had the members on the other side 
of the aisle been listening at the posture hearing, there have 
been some pretty disturbing changes that have been made in the 
OMB on the NASA budget. Two years ago, on a bipartisan basis, 
we all decided that the science programs were a part of NASA's 
core budget.
    I support that. Most Democrats support that as well.
    What happened this year is that Mission to Planet Earth 
replaced science as a part of NASA's core budget. And, given 
the further cuts that had been ordered by OMB in the outyears 
and specifically in Fiscal 1998 and Fiscal 1999, unless we make 
some changes there is not going to be a science program in 
NASA.
    And, that would be a tremendous step backward, in my 
opinion. And, I am certain that there is support on that on a 
bipartisan basis.
    Now, we are living within a budget cap. And, an 
authorization bill, if it's to mean anything, can't be a wish 
list for everybody to put their programs in.
    This bill pluses up science. But, it's at the expense of 
Mission to Planet Earth.
    And, in fact, what happens is what we do, is we reverse the 
priorities of OMB and go back to what this Committee supported 
stron