89–006 

116TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 1st Session 116–85 

TO REQUIRE A REPORT ON THE EFFECTS OF CLIMATE 

CHANGE ON THE COAST GUARD, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES 

MAY 24, 2019.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of 

the Union and ordered to be printed 

Mr. DEFAZIO, from the Committee on Transportation and 

Infrastructure, submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany H.R. 1322] 

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office] 

The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, to whom 

was referred the bill (H.R. 1322) to require a report on the effects 

of climate change on the Coast Guard, and for other purposes, having considered the same, report favorably thereon without amendment and recommend that the bill do pass. 

CONTENTS 

Page 

Purpose of Legislation ............................................................................................. 2 

Background and Need for Legislation .................................................................... 2 

Hearings ................................................................................................................... 2 

Legislative History and Consideration .................................................................. 2 

Committee Votes ...................................................................................................... 3 

Committee Oversight Findings ............................................................................... 4 

New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures ...................................................... 4 

Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate .......................................................... 4 

Performance Goals and Objectives ......................................................................... 5 

Duplication of Federal Programs ............................................................................ 5 

Congressional Earmarks, Limited Tax Benefits, and Limited Tariff Benefits ... 5 

Federal Mandates Statement ................................................................................. 5 

Preemption Clarification ......................................................................................... 5 

Advisory Committee Statement .............................................................................. 6 

Applicability to Legislative Branch ........................................................................ 6 

Section-by-Section Analysis of the Legislation ...................................................... 6 

Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported ..................................... 6 


dlhill on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with HEARING
2 

PURPOSE OF LEGISLATION

The purpose of H.R. 1322 is to direct the Coast guard to submit 

a report on vulnerabilities of Coast Guard installations and mission 

capabilities resulting from the impacts of climate change over the 

next 20 years. 

BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

The impacts of change on near coastal areas is a major concern 

for the Coast Guard, which has hundreds of properties and units 

located along the water’s edge. Some of these facilities may be directly affected by the impacts of climate change, such as sea level 

rise, storm surge, high winds, and severe flooding. It is important 

for the Coast Guard and Congress to understand the Coast Guard’s 

climate change vulnerabilities. 

HEARINGS

Pursuant to section 103(i) of H. Res. 6, 116th Cong. (2019), the 

Full Committee held the following hearing to develop or consider 

H.R. 1322: 

On February 26, 2018, the Committee held a hearing entitled 

‘‘Examining How Federal Infrastructure Policy Could Help Mitigate 

and Adapt to Climate Change.’’ Witnesses included: Dr. Daniel 

Sperling, Board Member, California Air Resources Board; Mr. Ben 

Prochazka, Vice President, Electrification Coalition; Ms. Vicki Arroyo, Executive Director, Georgetown Climate Center; Mr. James 

M. Proctor, II, Senior Vice President and General Counsel, 

McWane, Inc., testifying on behalf of the Build Strong Coalition; 

Mr. Kevin DeGood, Director, Infrastructure Policy, Center for 

American Progress; Ms. Lynn Scarlett, Vice President, Policy and 

Government Affairs, The Nature Conservancy; and Dr. Whitley J. 

Saumweber, Director, Stephenson Ocean Security (SOS) Project, 

Center for Strategic and International Studies. Topics discussed included impacts of climate change on Coast Guard facilities and operations in the Arctic. 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY AND CONSIDERATION

H.R. 1322 was introduced in the House on February 22, 2019, by 

Mr. Sean Patrick Maloney of New York and Mr. Anthony Brown 

of Maryland, and referred to the Committee on Transportation and 

Infrastructure. Within the Committee, H.R. 1322 was referred to 

the Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation. 

The Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation 

was discharged from further consideration of H.R. 1322 on March 

27, 2019. 

The Full Committee met in open session to consider H.R. 1322 

on March 27, 2019, and ordered the measure to be reported favorably to the House without amendment by voice vote, with a 

quorum present. 

The Committee took the following actions: 

An amendment offered by Mr. Perry, (#1); At the end of section 1, add a new subsection entitled ‘‘(d) Use of Products From 

the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.’’; was NOT 

AGREED TO by a record vote of 22 yeas and 33 nays (Roll Call 

Vote No. 1). 


dlhill on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with HEARING
3 

COMMITTEE VOTES

Clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives requires each committee report to include the total number of 

votes cast for and against on each record vote on a motion to report 

and on any amendment offered to the measure or matter, and the 

names of those members voting for and against. 

An amendment offered by Mr. Perry, (#1); At the end of section 

1, add a new subsection entitled ‘‘(d) Use of Products From the 

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.’’; was NOT AGREED 

TO by a record vote of 22 yeas and 33 nays (Roll Call Vote No. 1). 

The vote was as follows: 

ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS

ROLL CALL VOTE NO. 1

On agreeing to amendment #1 offered by Mr. Perry to H.R. 1322. 

Not Agreed to: 22 yeas and 33 nays. 

Representative Yea Nay Representative Yea Nay 

Mr. DeFazio, Chair ....................................... ......... X Mr. Graves of MO, Ranking Member .......... X .........

Ms. Norton ................................................... ......... X Mr. Young .................................................... X .........

Ms. Johnson of TX ....................................... ......... X Mr. Crawford ............................................... X .........

Mr. Cummings ............................................. ......... ......... Mr. Gibbs .................................................... X .........

Mr. Larsen of WA ........................................ ......... X Mr. Webster of FL ....................................... X .........

Mrs. Napolitano ........................................... ......... X Mr. Massie .................................................. X .........

Mr. Lipinski ................................................. ......... X Mr. Meadows ............................................... X .........

Mr. Cohen .................................................... ......... X Mr. Perry ...................................................... X .........

Mr. Sires ...................................................... ......... X Mr. Davis of IL ............................................ ......... .........

Mr. Garamendi ............................................ ......... ......... Mr. Woodall ................................................. ......... .........

Mr. Johnson of GA ....................................... ......... ......... Mr. Katko ..................................................... ......... X 

Mr. Carson of IN ......................................... ......... X Mr. Babin .................................................... X .........

Ms. Titus ..................................................... ......... X Mr. Graves of LA ......................................... ......... X 

Mr. Sean Patrick Maloney of NY ................. ......... X Mr. Rouzer ................................................... X .........

Mr. Huffman ................................................ ......... ......... Mr. Bost ...................................................... X .........

Ms. Brownley of CA ..................................... ......... X Mr. Weber of TX .......................................... X .........

Ms. Wilson of FL ......................................... ......... X Mr. LaMalfa ................................................. X .........

Mr. Payne .................................................... ......... ......... Mr. Westerman ............................................ X .........

Mr. Lowenthal .............................................. ......... X Mr. Smucker ................................................ X .........

Mr. DeSaulnier ............................................. ......... X Mr. Mitchell ................................................. X .........

Ms. Plaskett ................................................ ......... ......... Mr. Mast ...................................................... ......... X 

Mr. Lynch ..................................................... ......... ......... Mr. Gallagher .............................................. ......... X 

Mr. Carbajal ................................................ ......... X Mr. Palmer .................................................. X .........

Mr. Brown of MD ......................................... ......... X Mr. Fitzpatrick ............................................. ......... .........

Mr. Espaillat ................................................ ......... X Miss Gonza ́ lez-Colo ́n of PR ......................... ......... .........

Mr. Malinowski ............................................ ......... X Mr. Balderson .............................................. X .........

Mr. Stanton ................................................. ......... X Mr. Spano .................................................... X .........

Ms. Mucarsel-Powell ................................... ......... X Mr. Stauber ................................................. X .........

Mrs. Fletcher ............................................... ......... ......... Mrs. Miller ................................................... X .........

Mr. Allred ..................................................... ......... X Mr. Pence .................................................... X .........

Ms. Davids of KS ........................................ ......... X 

Ms. Finkenauer ............................................ ......... X 

Mr. Garcı ́a of IL ........................................... ......... X 

Mr. Delgado ................................................. ......... X 

Mr. Pappas .................................................. ......... X 

Mrs. Craig ................................................... ......... X 

Mr. Rouda .................................................... ......... X 

Vote Total: ................................................... 22 33 


dlhill on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with HEARING
4 

COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS

With respect to the requirements of clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII of 

the Rules of the House of Representatives, the Committee’s oversight findings and recommendations are reflected in this report. 

NEW BUDGET AUTHORITY AND TAX EXPENDITURES

Clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives does not apply where a cost estimate and comparison prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office under section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 has been timely 

submitted prior to the filing of the report and is included in the report. Such a cost estimate is included in this report. 

CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE COST ESTIMATE

With respect to the requirement of clause 3(c)(3) of rule XIII of 

the Rules of the House of Representatives and section 402 of the 

Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee has received the 

enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 1322 from the Director of the Congressional Budget Office: 

U.S. CONGRESS, CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE, 

Washington, DC, April 25, 2019. 

Hon. PETER A. DEFAZIO, 

Chairman, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, 

House of Representatives, Washington, DC. 

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The Congressional Budget Office has prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 1322, a bill to require a 

report on the effects of climate change on the Coast Guard, and for 

other purposes. 

If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be pleased 

to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Megan Carroll. 

Sincerely, KEITH HALL, 

Director. 

Enclosure. 


dlhill on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 7 HR85.001
5 

H.R. 1322 would require the Coast Guard (USCG) to report to 

the Congress, within one year, on the agency’s potential vulnerability to climate-related hazards. For example, the bill would require the USCG to identify the 10 installations that are most vulnerable to risks of rising sea tides, increased flooding, droughts, 

desertification, wildfires, thawing permafrost, or any other risks 

identified by the Commandant. The bill would require the USCG 

to report on potential means of mitigating such risks to those installations and, more broadly, to discuss how climate-related 

changes affect the agency’s operations, particularly with regard to 

humanitarian assistance. 

Using information from the USCG, CBO expects that implementing H.R. 1322 would not significantly affect the federal budget. Based on the historical cost of similar efforts, CBO estimates 

that any change in federal spending to complete the required report—which would be subject to appropriation—would not exceed 

$500,000. 

The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Megan Carroll. The estimate was reviewed by H. Samuel Papenfuss, Deputy Assistant 

Director for Budget Analysis. 

PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

With respect to the requirement of clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII of 

the Rules of the House of Representatives, the performance goal 

and objective of this legislation is to determine the Coast Guard installations most vulnerable to the impacts of climate change over 

the next 20 years. 

DUPLICATION OF FEDERAL PROGRAMS

Pursuant to clause 3(c)(5) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, the Committee finds that no provision of H.R. 

1322 establishes or reauthorizes a program of the federal government known to be duplicative of another federal program, a program that was included in any report from the Government Accountability Office to Congress pursuant to section 21 of Public 

Law 111–139, or a program related to a program identified in the 

most recent Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance. 

CONGRESSIONAL EARMARKS, LIMITED TAX BENEFITS, AND LIMITED

TARIFF BENEFITS

In compliance with clause 9 of rule XXI of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, this bill, as reported, contains no congressional 

earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined 

in clause 9(e), 9(f), or 9(g) of the rule XXI. 

FEDERAL MANDATES STATEMENT

The Committee adopts as its own the estimate of federal mandates prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office 

pursuant to section 423 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

(Public Law 104–4). 

PREEMPTION CLARIFICATION

Section 423 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 requires the 

report of any Committee on a bill or joint resolution to include a 


dlhill on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with HEARING
6 

statement on the extent to which the bill or joint resolution is intended to preempt state, local, or tribal law. The Committee finds 

that H.R. 1322 does not preempt any state, local, or tribal law. 

ADVISORY COMMITTEE STATEMENT

No advisory committees within the meaning of section 5(b) of the 

Federal Advisory Committee Act were created by this legislation. 

APPLICABILITY TO LEGISLATIVE BRANCH

The Committee finds that the legislation does not relate to the 

terms and conditions of employment or access to public services or 

accommodations within the meaning of section 102(b)(3) of the Congressional Accountability Act (Public Law 104–1). 

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS OF THE LEGISLATION

Sec. 1. Report on effects of climate change on Coast Guard 

This section requires the Commandant of the Coast Guard to 

submit a report to Congress on the vulnerabilities of Coast Guard 

installations and requirements resulting from climate change over 

the next 20 years. Section 335 of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2018 (Pub. L. 115–91) includes a similar requirement 

for the four other Armed Forces. 

CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED

As reported by the Committee, H.R. 1322 makes no changes in 

existing law. 

Æ 


dlhill on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with HEARING