```

[House Report 106-99]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

106th Congress                                             Rept. 106-99
 1st Session            HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES              Part 1

=======================================================================

 
         EARTHQUAKE HAZARDS REDUCTION AUTHORIZATION ACT OF 1999

                                _______
                                

 April 19, 1999.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

    Mr. Sensenbrenner, from the Committee on Sceince, submitted the 
                               following

                              R E P O R T

                        [To accompany H.R. 1184]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on Science, to whom was referred the bill 
(H.R. 1184) to authorize appropriations for carrying out the 
Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 for fiscal years 2000 
and 2001, and for other purposes, having considered the same, 
report favorably thereon with an amendment and recommend that 
the bill as amended do pass.

                                Contents

                                                                   Page
   I. Amendment.......................................................2
  II. Purpose of the Bill.............................................4
 III. Background and Need for Legislation.............................5
  IV. Summary of Hearings.............................................6
   V. Committee Actions...............................................8
  VI. Summary of Major Provisions of the Bill........................10
 VII. Section-By-Section Analysis....................................12
VIII. Committee Views................................................15
  IX. Cost Estimate..................................................20
   X. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate......................21
  XI. Compliance with Public Law 104-4...............................23
 XII. Committee Oversight Findings and Recommendations...............23
XIII. Oversight Findings and Recommendations by the Committee on 
      Government Reform and Oversight................................23
 XIV. Constitutional Authority Statement.............................23
  XV. Federal Advisory Committee Statement...........................23
 XVI. Congressional Accountability Act...............................24
XVII. Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, As Reported..........24
XVIII.Committee Recommendations......................................31

 XIX. Committee Correspondence.......................................31
  XX. Proceedings of Full Committee Markup...........................31

  The amendment is as follows:
  Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert in lieu 
thereof the following:

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

  This Act may be cited as the ``Earthquake Hazards Reduction 
Authorization Act of 1999''.

SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

  (a) Federal Emergency Management Agency.--Section 12(a) of the 
Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 (42 U.S.C. 7706(a)) is 
amended--
          (1) by striking ``(1) General.--'' and all that follows 
        through ``(7) There'' and inserting ``General.--There'';
          (2) by striking ``1998, and'' and inserting ``1998,''; and
          (3) by inserting ``, $19,800,000 for the fiscal year ending 
        September 30, 2000, and $20,400,000 for the fiscal year ending 
        September 30, 2001'' after ``September 30, 1999''.
  (b) United States Geological Survey.--(1) Section 12(b) of the 
Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 (42 U.S.C. 7706(b)) is 
amended--
          (A) by inserting ``There are authorized to be appropriated to 
        the Secretary of the Interior for purposes of carrying out, 
        through the Director of the United States Geological Survey, 
        the responsibilities that may be assigned to the Director under 
        this Act $46,100,000 for fiscal year 2000, of which $3,500,000 
        shall be used for the Global Seismic Network and $100,000 shall 
        be used for the Scientific Earthquake Studies Advisory 
        Committee established under section 6 of the Earthquake Hazards 
        Reduction Authorization Act of 1999; and $47,500,000 for fiscal 
        year 2001, of which $3,600,000 shall be used for the Global 
        Seismic Network and $100,000 shall be used for the Scientific 
        Earthquake Studies Advisory Committee established under section 
        6 of the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Authorization Act of 
        1999.'' after ``operated by the Agency.'';
          (B) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (1);
          (C) by striking the comma at the end of paragraph (2) and 
        inserting a semicolon; and
          (D) by inserting after paragraph (2) the following new 
        paragraphs:
          ``(3) $9,000,000 of the amount authorized to be appropriated 
        for fiscal year 2000; and
          ``(4) $9,500,000 of the amount authorized to be appropriated 
        for fiscal year 2001,''.
  (2) Section 2(a)(7) of the Act entitled ``An Act to authorize 
appropriations for carrying out the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 
1977 for fiscal years 1998 and 1999, and for other purposes'' is 
amended by inserting ``, $1,600,000 for fiscal year 2000, and 
$1,650,000 for fiscal year 2001'' after ``1998 and 1999''.
  (c) National Science Foundation.--Section 12(c) of the Earthquake 
Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 (42 U.S.C. 7706(c)) is amended--
          (1) by striking ``1998, and'' and inserting ``1998,''; and
          (2) by striking the period at the end and inserting ``, and 
        (5) $19,000,000 for engineering research and $10,900,000 for 
        geosciences research for the fiscal year ending September 30, 
        2000. There are authorized to be appropriated to the National 
        Science Foundation $19,600,000 for engineering research and 
        $11,200,000 for geosciences research for fiscal year 2001.''.
  (d) National Institute of Standards and Technology.--Section 12(d) of 
the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 (42 U.S.C. 7706(d)) is 
amended--
          (1) by striking ``1998, and''; and inserting ``1998,''; and
          (2) by inserting ``, $2,200,000 for fiscal year 2000, and 
        $2,265,000 for fiscal year 2001'' after ``September 30, 1999''.

SEC. 3. REPEALS.

  Section 10 and subsections (e) and (f) of section 12 of the 
Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 (42 U.S.C. 7705d and 7706 (e) 
and (f)) are repealed.

SEC. 4. ADVANCED NATIONAL SEISMIC RESEARCH AND MONITORING SYSTEM.

  The Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 (42 U.S.C. 7701 et seq.) 
is amended by adding at the end the following new section:

``SEC. 13. ADVANCED NATIONAL SEISMIC RESEARCH AND MONITORING SYSTEM.

  ``(a) Establishment.--The Director of the United States Geological 
Survey shall establish and operate an Advanced National Seismic 
Research and Monitoring System. The purpose of such system shall be to 
organize, modernize, standardize, and stabilize the national, regional, 
and urban seismic monitoring systems in the United States, including 
sensors, recorders, and data analysis centers, into a coordinated 
system that will measure and record the full range of frequencies and 
amplitudes exhibited by seismic waves, in order to enhance earthquake 
research and warning capabilities.
  ``(b) Management Plan.--Not later than 120 days after the date of the 
enactment of the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Authorization Act of 
1999, the Director of the United States Geological Survey shall 
transmit to the Congress a 5-year management plan for establishing and 
operating the Advanced National Seismic Research and Monitoring System. 
The plan shall include annual cost estimates for both modernization and 
operation, milestones, standards, and performance goals, as well as 
plans for securing the participation of all existing networks in the 
Advanced National Seismic Research and Monitoring System and for 
establishing new, or enhancing existing, partnerships to leverage 
resources.
  ``(c) Authorization of Appropriations.--
          ``(1) Expansion and modernization.--In addition to amounts 
        appropriated under section 12(b), there are authorized to be 
        appropriated to the Secretary of the Interior, to be used by 
        the Director of the United States Geological Survey to 
        establish the Advanced National Seismic Research and Monitoring 
        System--
                  ``(A) $33,500,000 for fiscal year 2000;
                  ``(B) $33,700,000 for fiscal year 2001;
                  ``(C) $35,100,000 for fiscal year 2002;
                  ``(D) $35,000,000 for fiscal year 2003; and
                  ``(E) $33,500,000 for fiscal year 2004.
          ``(2) Operation.--In addition to amounts appropriated under 
        section 12(b), there are authorized to be appropriated to the 
        Secretary of the Interior, to be used by the Director of the 
        United States Geological Survey to operate the Advanced 
        National Seismic Research and Monitoring System--
                  ``(A) $4,500,000 for fiscal year 2000; and
                  ``(B) $10,300,000 for fiscal year 2001.''.

SEC. 5. NETWORK FOR EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING SIMULATION.

  The Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 (42 U.S.C. 7701 et seq.) 
is amended by adding at the end the following new section:

``SEC. 14. NETWORK FOR EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING SIMULATION.

  ``(a) Establishment.--The Director of the National Science Foundation 
shall establish a Network for Earthquake Engineering Simulation that 
will upgrade, link, and integrate a system of geographically 
distributed experimental facilities for earthquake engineering testing 
of full-sized structures and their components and partial-scale 
physical models. The system shall be integrated through networking 
software so that integrated models and databases can be used to create 
model-based simulation, and the components of the system shall be 
interconnected with a computer network and allow for remote access, 
information sharing, and collaborative research.
  ``(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--In addition to amounts 
appropriated under section 12(c), there are authorized to be 
appropriated, out of funds otherwise authorized to be appropriated to 
the National Science Foundation, $7,700,000 for fiscal year 2000 for 
the Network for Earthquake Engineering Simulation. In addition to 
amounts appropriated under section 12(c), there are authorized to be 
appropriated to the National Science Foundation for the Network for 
Earthquake Engineering Simulation--
          ``(1) $28,200,000 for fiscal year 2001;
          ``(2) $24,400,000 for fiscal year 2002;
          ``(3) $4,500,000 for fiscal year 2003; and
          ``(4) $17,000,000 for fiscal year 2004.''.

SEC. 6. SCIENTIFIC EARTHQUAKE STUDIES ADVISORY COMMITTEE.

  (a) Establishment.--The Director of the United States Geological 
Survey shall establish a Scientific Earthquake Studies Advisory 
Committee.
  (b) Organization.--The Director shall establish procedures for 
selection of individuals not employed by the Federal Government who are 
qualified in the seismic sciences and other appropriate fields and may, 
pursuant to such procedures, select up to ten individuals, one of whom 
shall be designated Chairman, to serve on the Advisory Committee. 
Selection of individuals for the Advisory Committee shall be based 
solely on established records of distinguished service, and the 
Director shall ensure that a reasonable cross-section of views and 
expertise is represented. In selecting individuals to serve on the 
Advisory Committee, the Director shall seek and give due consideration 
to recommendations from the National Academy of Sciences, professional 
societies, and other appropriate organizations.
  (c) Meetings.--The Advisory Committee shall meet at such times and 
places as may be designated by the Chairman in consultation with the 
Director.
  (d) Duties.--The Advisory Committee shall advise the Director on 
matters relating to the United States Geological Survey's participation 
in the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program, including the 
United States Geological Survey's roles, goals, and objectives within 
that Program, its capabilities and research needs, guidance on 
achieving major objectives, and establishing and measuring performance 
goals. The Advisory Committee shall issue an annual report to the 
Director for submission to Congress on or before September 30 of each 
year. The report shall describe the Advisory Committee's activities and 
address policy issues or matters that affect the United States 
Geological Survey's participation in the National Earthquake Hazards 
Reduction Program.

SEC. 7. BUDGET COORDINATION.

  Section 5 of the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 (42 U.S.C. 
7704) is amended--
          (1) in subsection (b)(1)--
                  (A) by striking subparagraph (A) and redesignating 
                subparagraphs (B) through (F) as subparagraphs (A) 
                through (E), respectively; and
                  (B) by moving subparagraph (E), as so redesignated by 
                subparagraph (A) of this paragraph, so as to appear 
                immediately after subparagraph (D), as so redesignated; 
                and
          (2) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
  ``(c) Budget Coordination.--
          ``(1) Guidance.--The Agency shall each year provide guidance 
        to the other Program agencies concerning the preparation of 
        requests for appropriations for activities related to the 
        Program, and shall prepare, in conjunction with the other 
        Program agencies, an annual Program budget to be submitted to 
        the Office of Management and Budget.
          ``(2) Reports.--Each Program agency shall include with its 
        annual request for appropriations submitted to the Office of 
        Management and Budget a report that--
                  ``(A) identifies each element of the proposed Program 
                activities of the agency;
                  ``(B) specifies how each of these activities 
                contributes to the Program; and
                  ``(C) states the portion of its request for 
                appropriations allocated to each element of the 
                Program.''.

SEC. 8. REPORT ON AT-RISK POPULATIONS.

  Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act, 
and after a period for public comment, the Director of the Federal 
Emergency Management Agency shall transmit to the Congress a report 
describing the elements of the Program that specifically address the 
needs of at-risk populations, including the elderly, persons with 
disabilities, non-English-speaking families, single-parent households, 
and the poor. Such report shall also identify additional actions that 
could be taken to address those needs, and make recommendations for any 
additional legislative authority required to take such actions.

SEC. 9. PUBLIC ACCESS TO EARTHQUAKE INFORMATION.

  Section 5(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 
1977 (42 U.S.C. 7704(b)(2)(A)(ii)) is amended by inserting ``, and 
development of means of increasing public access to available locality-
specific information that may assist the public in preparing for or 
responding to earthquakes'' after ``and the general public''.

SEC. 10. LIFELINES.

  Section 4(6) of the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 (42 
U.S.C. 7703(6)) is amended by inserting ``and infrastructure'' after 
``communication facilities''.

                        II. Purpose of the Bill

    The purpose of the bill is to authorize appropriations for 
Fiscal Years 2000 and 2001 for the National Earthquake Hazards 
Reduction Program, a multi-agency program involving the Federal 
Emergency Management Agency, U.S. Geological Survey, National 
Science Foundation, and National Institute of Standards and 
Technology. In addition, it provides five-year authorizations 
for the Advanced National Seismic Research and Monitoring 
System and the Network for Earthquake Engineering Simulation. 
The bill authorizes: $145.3 million for Fiscal Year 2000; 
$174.815 million for Fiscal Year 2001; $59.5 million for Fiscal 
Year 2002; $39.5 million for Fiscal Year 2003; and $50.5 
million for Fiscal Year 2004.

                III. Background and Need for Legislation

    Congress created the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction 
Program (NEHRP) in P.L. 95-124, the Earthquake Hazards 
Reduction Act of 1977, in response to a recognized national 
threat posed by earthquakes and to reduce losses in life and 
property from seismic events. Over the years, NEHRP activities 
have led to significant advances in our knowledge of the 
geologic and engineering aspects of earthquake risk reduction.
    Since its inception, NEHRP has focused on seismic research, 
engineering research, and mitigation through various 
activities. NEHRP is executed by four separate federal 
agencies--the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), U.S. 
Geological Survey (USGS), National Science Foundation (NSF), 
and National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST).
    As the designated lead agency for NEHRP, FEMA is charged 
with the responsibility of coordinating the activities of the 
other principal agencies, conducting planning for and managing 
of federal responses to earthquakes, and funding state and 
local preparedness activities. USGS conducts and supports earth 
science investigations to understand the origins of 
earthquakes, characterize earthquake hazards, and predict the 
geologic effects of earthquakes. USGS also operates, through 
partnerships, seismic monitoring networks. NSF funds earthquake 
engineering research, basic earth sciences research, and 
earthquake-related social sciences research. Earthquake 
engineering research includes assessing the impact of 
earthquakes on buildings and lifelines. NIST conducts and 
supports engineering studies to improve seismic provisions of 
standards, codes, and practices for buildings and lifelines. 
(Additional federal agencies contribute to NEHRP through 
research activities consistent with their primary missions. For 
example, the Department of Energy has studied the seismic 
safety of nuclear reactor designs as part of their nuclear 
energy research program.)
    In the 103rd Congress, NEHRP was authorized for Fiscal 
Years 1996 and 1997 (P.L. 103-374). In addition to 
authorizations of $103 million for Fiscal Year 1995 and $106 
million for Fiscal Year 1996, this Act directed the President 
to conduct an assessment of earthquake engineering research and 
testing facilities in the United States. NSF and NIST 
commissioned the Earthquake Engineering Research Institute 
(EERI) to conduct the assessment. A report released by EERI 
made findings and recommendations regarding the state of the 
nation's earthquake engineering testing facilities. Chief among 
these was a recommendation advocating a comprehensive plan for 
upgrading existing earthquake engineering research and testing 
facilities be developed and implemented.
    NEHRP was last authorized in the 105th Congress and was 
signed into law on October 1, 1997. P.L. 105-47 provides 
authorizations totaling $108.8 million for Fiscal Year 1998 and 
$111.9 million for Fiscal Year 1999. It also authorizes the 
development of real-time seismic hazard warning systems through 
the use of prototypes, requests an assessment of regional 
seismic networks in the United States, and requires NSF, 
working with the other Program agencies, to develop a plan to 
upgrade and integrate earthquake engineering research 
facilities. The authorizations for appropriations for NEHRP 
expire at the end of Fiscal Year 1999.

                        IV. Summary of Hearings

    The Subcommittee on Basic Research of the Committee on 
Science held a hearing on February 23, 1999 to heart testimony 
on the Administration's Fiscal Year 2000 budget request for 
NEHRP and to examine issues related to a two-year authorization 
for the Program. Appearing as witnesses before the Subcommittee 
were: Michael J. Armstrong, Associate Director, Mitigation 
Directorate, FEMA; P. Patrick Leahy, Chief Geologist, USGS; 
Joseph Bordogna, Acting Deputy Director, NSF; Raymond G. 
Kammer, Director, NIST; Daniel P. Abrams, Hanson Engineers 
Professor of Civil Engineering, University of Illinois at 
Urbana-Champaign and Director, Mid-America Earthquake Center; 
and Christopher Arnold, President, Earthquake Engineering 
Research Institute.
    Mr. Armstrong began his testimony by stating that FEMA, in 
concert with the other NEHRP agencies, has developed a draft 
strategic plan. Informing this plan is a vision of a future in 
which all seismically-vulnerable regions of the United States 
shall have practices and policies in place that minimize the 
impact of earthquakes. Four specific goals are part of the 
plan: They are: (1) to accelerate the implementation of 
earthquake loss-reduction practices and policies; (2) to 
improve techniques to reduce seismic vulnerability at 
facilities and systems; (3) to improve the quality and use of 
seismic hazard identification and risk-assessment methods; and 
(4) to improve the understanding of earthquakes and their 
effects.
    Mr. Armstrong mentioned many of the successes of the 
Program over the past two years and highlighted the interagency 
cooperation that made them possible. The creation of the NEHRP 
strategic plan, he said, was another good example of 
interagency cooperation and participation.
    Regarding FEMA, Mr. Armstrong noted its work in 
establishing code guidelines for new and existing buildings 
through the uniform and model code organizations, 
rehabilitation and retrofitting guidelines, the steel moment 
frame study, the wood frame study, the lifelines initiative, 
the hazards U.S. loss estimation methodology, and other 
activities.
    USGS's Dr. Leahy reprised the three roles that his agency 
plays in NEHRP: (1) to produce products for earthquake-loss 
reduction, such as earthquake hazards assessments, national 
seismic hazard maps, and ``getting the geology into the 
codes''; (2) to provide timely and accurate notifications of 
earthquakes and information on their location, size, and damage 
potential; and (3) to conduct and support research on the 
occurrence and effects of earthquakes. USGS also plays an 
important role in the Global Seismograph Network, maintaining 
71 of the 107 stations comprising the system.
    Dr. Leahy's testimony also included a discussion of three 
areas of concern. First, although the 1998 NEHRP bill 
authorized $3.0 million in each of Fiscal Years 1998 and 1999 
for real-time seismic warning system development, 
appropriations matching these authorizations did not 
materialize. Nevertheless, USGS has continued to push ahead 
with the Tri-Net pilot project inSouthern California and for 
Fiscal Year 2000 requests $1.6 million to initiate similar projects in 
San Francisco, Seattle, and Salt Lake City. Second, USGS is nearing 
completion of an assessment of the U.S. seismic monitoring system. The 
current system is based on 1960s technology and was developed ad hoc. 
It is USGS's view that the entire seismic monitoring infrastructure is 
in need of attention. Third, because of the scientific complexity of 
the technical issues involved in fulfilling USGS's role within NEHRP, 
USGS would benefit from the advice of an external advisory committee.
    Dr. Bordogna discussed NSF'S NEHRP-related research 
activities, highlighting two of them. The first is NSF's 
proposal for a Network for Earthquake Engineering Simulation--
or NEES--which grew out of the 1998 NEHRP language calling for 
modernization of the Nation's earthquake engineering research 
facilities. The National Science Board gave NSF approval to 
include the costs for initiating this five-year, $81.8 million 
project in its Fiscal year 2000 budget. When completed, the 
Network will be an integrated system of new and upgraded 
experimental research facilities for testing full-size 
structures and their components in partial-scale physical 
models. The components of the system will be distributed at 
various sites across the country and include such items as 
shake tables, large-reaction walls for psuedo-dynamic testing, 
centrifuges for testing soils and earthquake loads, and new 
testing facilities (e.g., mobile shakers). These components 
will be inter-connected with a computer network allowing for 
remote access, data-sharing, and collaborative research.
    The second is NSF's support for the Incorporated Research 
Institutes in Seismology (IRIS), a consortium of universities 
conducting seismological research. NSF's support provides 
facilities necessary to monitor earthquakes worldwide, study 
the tectonic structure of active seismic zones, and provide 
rapid response to after-shock of major earthquakes. IRIS, in 
cooperation with USGS, operates the Global Seismic Network, the 
primary means of locating and characterizing, in near real 
time, seismic events around the world. Dr. Bordogna also noted 
that tests are being conducted on the deep ocean floor to 
determine the best technology for monitoring ocean areas.
    Mr. Kammer's testimony began with a discussion of NIST's 
role in the Program. Primarily, NIST conducts research to 
improve practices, codes, and standards for buildings and 
lifelines that, when in place, will allow a building or 
lifeline to survive an earthquake. Additionally, NIST: (1) 
promotes better building practices among architects and 
engineers; (2) works with national standards and model building 
code organizations to encourage implementation of research 
results; and (3) works with national standards organizations to 
develop seismic standards for new and existing lifelines.
    Mr. Kammer stated that, in support of the NEHRP Strategic 
Plan, NIST's activities would contribute principally to the 
goals of accelerating the implementation of earthquake loss-
reduction practices and improving techniques to reduce seismic 
vulnerability at facilities through three activities: (1) 
leadership and participation in the Interagency Committee on 
Seismic Safety in Construction; (2) problem-focused research to 
improve codes, standards, and practices; and (3) leadership and 
participation in standards and international activities.
    The focus of Dr. Abrams' testimony was on the engineering 
aspects of earthquake loss reduction. He argued that funding 
for earthquake research was justified, pointing to the 
difference in damage between the Armenia, Columbia earthquake, 
where damage was severe, and the Loma Prieta and Northridge 
earthquakes in California, where the damage was much less 
severe. He attributed the difference to the advanced seismic 
integrity of U.S. buildings, the result of earthquake 
engineering research. He also cited the accomplishments of 
NEHRP since 1977, particularly investigations that led to 
improvements in three areas: (1) knowledge of how constructed 
facilities respond to earthquakes; (2) national standards and 
practices for planning, design, and construction of earthquake 
resistant facilities and lifelines; and (3) methods for 
assessing vulnerability, retrofit, and repair of existing 
facilities to earthquakes. Looking to the future, Dr. Abrams 
stated that earthquake losses can be reduced greatly by 
adapting technologies from other disciplines. He said that 
research will follow new perspectives driven by the needs of 
the public and private sectors, new findings from future 
earthquakes, new systems-orientated approaches, and the 
occurrence of related natural hazards.
    Mr. Arnold also reviewed NEHRP accomplishments and 
commented that while we may be winning the war against death 
and injury, the war against destruction caused by earthquakes 
is far from over. Engineers have learned in the past few years 
that the process of building design and construction must 
undergo significant change. Performance-based design is 
intended to achieve this. He also suggested that the main 
threat remains the Nation's stock of existing buildings. This 
realization led to FEMA issuing a guidance document providing 
rehabilitation approaches to existing structures.
    Mr. Arnold also spoke in favor of NSF's NEES project. He 
further noted that while basic research provides knowledge, 
problem-focused research provides solutions. In the latter 
context, he mentioned the FEMA-led studies on steel-frame and 
wood-frame buildings, which in his view represent a new 
dimension for the Program. He also spoke to how social science 
research can promote loss reduction by improving our knowledge 
of the social and economic scope of the earthquake problem.

                          V. Committee Actions

    As summarized above, the Subcommittee on Basic Research of 
the Committee on Science heard testimony relevant to NEHRP at a 
hearing held on February 23, 1999.
    On March 18, 1999, Mr. Nick Smith, Chairman of the 
Subcommittee on Basic Research, joined by Mrs. Constance 
Morella, Chairwoman of the Subcommittee on Technology, 
introduced H.R. 1184, the Earthquake Hazards Reduction 
Authorization Act of 1999, a bill to authorize appropriations 
for NEHRP for Fiscal Years 2000 and 2001.
    The Full Science Committee met to consider H.R. 1184 on 
Thursday, March 25, 1999, and entertained the following 
amendments and report language.
    Amendment 1.--Mr. Wu (OR) offered an amendment to add to 
the authorizations for equipment for the Advanced National 
Seismic Research and Monitoring System an additional $1.4 
million for each of Fiscal Years 2003 and 2004 for portable 
seismic arrays. This amendment corrected a mistake in the 
equipment funding profile made available to the Committee by 
USGS. It was adopted by voice vote.
    Amendment 2.--Mr. Wu (OR) offered an amendment that would 
have authorized $15.9 million for Fiscal Year 2002, $22.6 
million for Fiscal Year 2003, and $28.9 million for Fiscal Year 
2004 for operating the Advanced National Seismic Research and 
Monitoring System. However, in offering the amendment Mr. Wu 
noted that fully funding the operation of the Advanced Seismic 
System would require extending the base USGS authorization an 
additional three years. He therefore withdrew his amendment 
and, in so doing, urged the Committee to include report 
language stating its intention to authorize full funding for 
the operation of the Advanced Seismic System in future 
authorization bills.
    Amendment 3.--Ms. Woolsey (CA) offered an amendment that 
would require FEMA to submit to Congress within one year a 
study on elements of NEHRP that address the needs of at-risk 
populations. The amendment was adopted by voice vote.
    Amendment 4.--Mr. Larson (CT) offered an amendment to 
require FEMA, as part of its responsibilities laid out in the 
1977 Act, to develop the means to increase public access to 
locality-specific information that may assist the public in 
preparing for earthquakes. The amendment was adopted by voice 
vote.
    Amendment 5.--Mr. Larson (CT) offered an amendment to add 
the phrase ``and infrastructure'' to that part of the 
definition of lifelines concerning ``electric power and 
communications facilities'' to make it clear that the Internet 
is considered a critical lifeline. The amendment was adopted by 
voice vote.
    Report Language.--Mr. Smith (MI) offered report language 
with respect to re-invigorating FEMA's coordination activities 
among NEHRP agencies, state and local governments, and research 
facilities. The language was agreed to by voice vote.
    Mr. Weldon (PA) also raised the issue of coordination 
between the Department of Defense and USGS earthquake 
monitoring programs, and Chairman Sensenbrenner instructed 
Committee staff to inquire as to the extent of coordination 
between the programs in these agencies.
    With a quorum present, Mr. Brown moved that the Committee 
report the bill, H.R. 1184, as amended, to the House, that the 
staff prepare the legislative report and make technical and 
conforming changes, and that the Chairman take all necessary 
steps to bring the bill before the House for consideration. The 
motion was approved by voice vote.
    Mr. Sensenbrenner asked and received unanimous consent that 
Committee Members have two subsequent calendar days in which to 
submit supplemental, minority or additional views on the 
measure, and that, pursuant to Clause 1 of Rule XX of the Rules 
of the House of Representatives, the Committee authorize the 
Chairman to offer such motions as may be necessary in the House 
to go to conference with the Senate on H.R. 1184 or a similar 
Senate bill.

              VI. Summary of Major Provisions of the Bill

    H.R. 1184 authorizes: $145.3 million for Fiscal Year 2000; 
$174.815 million for Fiscal Year 2001; $59.5 million for Fiscal 
Year 2002; $39.5 million for Fiscal Year 2003; and $50.5 
million for Fiscal Year 2004 (see Table 1). These 
authorizations include the Advanced National Seismic Research 
and Monitoring System and the Network for Earthquake 
Engineering Simulation, both of which are five-year projects.
    For Fiscal Year 2000, H.R. 1184 authorizes $99.6 million 
for the base earthquake programs at four agencies--the Federal 
Emergency Management Agency, U.S. Geological Survey, National 
Science Foundation, and National Institute of Standards and 
Technology--just slightly above the Administration request. 
This includes: $3.5 million for the Global Seismic Network; 
$100,000 for the USGS Scientific Earthquake Studies Advisory 
Committee; and $1.6 million for the Real-Time Seismic Warning 
System pilot program. At least $9.0 million of the funds 
authorized for Fiscal Year 2000 are to be used for external 
research at USGS.

                                     TABLE 1.--H.R. 1184, THE EARTHQUAKE HAZARDS REDUCTION AUTHORIZATION ACT OF 1999
                                                                [In thousands of dollars]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                FY 2000       FY 2000         FY 2001         FY 2002         FY 2003         FY 2004
                            Agency                              request    authorization   authorization   authorization   authorization   authorization
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FEMA\1\......................................................     19,800          19,800          20,400              NA              NA              NA
                                                              ==========================================================================================
USGS:
    General Activities \2\...................................     45,996          46,100          47,500              NA              NA              NA
    Real-Time Seismic Warning System.........................      1,600           1,600           1,650              NA              NA              NA
                                                              ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Adv. Nat'l Seismic Research & Monitoring System:
        Equipment............................................        0.0          33,500          33,700          35,100          35,000          33,500
        Operation............................................        0.0           4,500          10,300              NA              NA              NA
                                                              ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Adv. Nat'l Seismic Research & Monitoring            0.0          38,000          44,000          35,100          35,000          33,500
           System............................................
                                                              ==========================================================================================
          Total, USGS........................................     47,596          85,700          93,150          35,100          35,000          33,500
                                                              ==========================================================================================
NSF:
    Engineering & Geosciences Research.......................     29,900          29,900          30,800              NA              NA              NA
    Network for Earthquake Engineering Simulation............      7,700           7,700          28,200          24,400           4,500          17,000
                                                              ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, NSF.............................................     37,600          37,600          59,000          24,400           4,500          17,000
                                                              ==========================================================================================
NIST.........................................................      2,198           2,200           2,265              NA              NA              NA
                                                              ==========================================================================================
      Total, NEHRP...........................................    107,194         145,300         174,815          59,500          39,500          50,500
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Figures include $4.4 million for the NEHRP contribution to the Executive Direction for Emergency Management Performance Grant program.
\2\ For Fiscal Year 2000, the figure includes: $3.5 million for the Global Seismic Network; $100,000 for the Scientific Earthquake Studies Advisory
  Committee; and a minimum of $9.0 million for external research. For Fiscal Year 2001, the figure includes: $3.6 million for the Global Seismic
  network; $100,000 for the Scientific Earthquake Studies Advisory Committee; and a minimum of $9.5 million for external research.

    For Fiscal Year 2001, H.R. 1184 authorizes $102.615 million 
for the base earthquake programs, a three percent increase over 
the Fiscal Year 2000 authorization. This includes: $3.6 million 
for the Global Seismic Network; $100,000 for the USGS 
Scientific Earthquake Studies Advisory Committee; and $1.65 
million for the Real-Time Seismic Warning System pilot program. 
At least $9.5 million of the funds authorized for Fiscal Year 
2000 are to be used for external research at USGS.
    The bill also authorizes USGS to establish and operate an 
Advanced National Seismic Research and Monitoring System, 
providing a five-year authorization (Fiscal Years 2000-2004) 
totaling $170.8 million for the purchase of monitors and 
communications equipment and a two-year authorization (Fiscal 
Years 2000 and 2001) totaling $14.8 million to cover the 
incremental costs of operating the advanced system.
    In addition, H.R. 1184 authorizes NSF to establish a 
Network for Earthquake Engineering Simulation, which will 
interconnect earthquake engineering research facilities and 
upgrade and expand major earthquake testing facilities. The 
bill provides for a five-year authorization (Fiscal Years 2000-
2004) totaling $81.8 million.
    Finally, the bill: repeals obsolete provisions of the 1977 
Act; provides a two-year authorization for USGS to establish a 
Scientific Earthquake Studies Advisory Committee; requires 
greater coordination in the formulation and presentation of the 
NEHRP budget; directs FEMA to submit to Congress a study on how 
the Program serves at-risk populations; and directs FEMA to 
make publicly available locality-specific earthquake 
information.

                    VII. Section-by-Section Analysis

    H.R. 1184 authorizes appropriations for carrying out the 
Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 (Act of 1977) as 
follows:

Sec. 1. Short title

    Cites the Act as the ``Earthquake Hazards Reduction 
Authorization Act of 1999.''

Sec. 2. Authorization of appropriations

    Provides two-year authorizations for the agencies 
participating in the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction 
Program as follows:
    (a) Federal Emergency Management Agency.--Amends subsection 
12(a) of the Act of 1977 to authorize $19.8 million for Fiscal 
Year 2000 and $20.4 million for Fiscal Year 2001.
    (b) U.S. Geological Survey.--
    (1) Amends subsection 12(b) of the Act of 1977 to authorize 
$46.1 million for Fiscal Year 2000 (which includes $3.5 million 
for the Global Seismic Network and $100,000 for the Advisory 
Committee on External Earthquake Research) and $47.5 million 
for Fiscal Year 2001 (which includes $3.6 million for the 
Global Seismic Network and $100,000 for the Advisory Committee 
on External Earthquake Research). Of these amounts, $9.0 
million for Fiscal Year 2000 and $9.5 million for Fiscal Year 
2001 are to be used for external research;
    (2) Amends section 2(a)(7) of the Earthquake Hazards 
Reduction Act for Fiscal Years 1998 and 1999 to authorize $1.6 
million for Fiscal Year 2000 and $1.65 million for Fiscal Year 
2001 for the Seismic Hazard Warning System pilot program.
    (c) National Science Foundation.--Amends subsection 12(c) 
of the Act of 1977 to authorize out of sums otherwise 
authorized $29.9 million ($19.0 million for engineering and 
$10.9 million for geosciences research) for Fiscal Year 2000 
and to authorize without reference to existing authorizations 
$30.8 million ($19.6 million for engineering and $11.2 million 
for geosciences research) for Fiscal Year 2001.
    (d) National Institute of Standards and Technology.--Amends 
subsection 12(d) of the Act of 1977 to authorize out of sums 
otherwise authorized $2.2 million for Fiscal Year 2000 and 
$2.265 million for Fiscal Year 2001.

Sec. 3. Repeals

    Repeals section 10 and subsections 12(e) and (f) of the 
1977 Act, each of which is obsolete.

Sec. 4. Advanced National Seismic Research and Monitoring System

    Amends the Act of 1977 by adding the following Section:
    ``Sec. 13. Advanced National Seismic Research and 
Monitoring System.
    ``(a) Authorizes the Director of USGS to establish an 
Advanced National Seismic Research and Monitoring System.
    ``(b) Requires within 120 days of enactment a five-year 
management plan for deploying and operating the Advanced 
Seismic System.
    ``(c) Authorizes for USGS: $33.5 million for Fiscal Year 
2000; $33.7 million for Fiscal Year 2001; $35.1 million for 
Fiscal Year 2002; $35.0 million for Fiscal Year 2003; and $33.5 
million for Fiscal Year 2004 for expansion and modernization of 
the monitoring system.
    ``(d) Authorizes for USGS: $4.5 million for Fiscal Year 
2000 and $10.3 million for Fiscal Year 2001 for operating the 
Advanced Seismic System.

Sec. 5. Network for Earthquake Engineering Simulation

    Amends the Act of 1977 by adding the following section:
    ``Sec. 14. Network for Earthquake Engineering Simulation.
    ``(a) Defines terms and authorizes NSF to establish a 
Network for Earthquake Engineering Simulation that will 
upgrade, link, and integrate a complete system of test 
facilities in earthquake engineering.
    ``(b) Authorizes out of funds otherwise authorized to be 
appropriated to NSF $7.7 million for Fiscal Year 2000 and 
authorizes without reference to existing authorizations $28.2 
million for Fiscal Year2001; $24.4 million for Fiscal Year 
2002; $4.5 million for Fiscal Year 2003; and $17.0 million for 2004 for 
the Network for Earthquake Engineering Simulation.

Sec. 6. Scientific Earthquake Studies Advisory Committee

    (a) Authorizes the Director of USGS to establish a 
Scientific Earthquake Studies Advisory Committee to provide 
USGS with scientific advice regarding its participation in the 
National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program.
    (b) Directs the USGS Director to establish procedures for 
the selection of up to ten qualified individuals not employed 
by the Federal Government, one of whom shall be designated 
Chairman, to serve on the Advisory Committee. Individuals shall 
be selected solely on established records of distinguished 
service, and the Director shall ensure that the Advisory 
Committee represents a cross-section of views and expertise. 
The Director also shall seek and give due consideration to 
recommendations from the National Academy of Science, 
professional societies, and other appropriate organizations.
    (c) Establishes procedures for calling meetings of the 
Advisory Committee. The Advisory Committee shall meet at such 
times and places as may be designated by the Chairman in 
consultation with the Director.
    (d) Explains the duties of the Advisory Committee. It shall 
provide advice to the Director on matters relating to the USGS 
earthquake program--including USGS's roles, goals and 
objectives, capabilities and research needs, and performance 
goals--and shall issue an annual report to the Director for 
submission to Congress on or before September 30 of each year. 
The report shall describe the Advisory Committee's activities 
and address policy issues or matters that affect the Geological 
Survey's participation in the Program.

Sec. 7. Budget coordination

    Amends section 5 of the Act of 1977 by:
    (1) Striking the language on budget responsibilities in 
subjection 5(b)(1)(A) (which subsequently is incorporated in 
new subsection 5(c)).
    (2) Adding the following at the end of section 5:
    ``(c) Budget Coordination.--
          ``(1) Requires greater coordination on the budget for 
        the Program. Instructs FEMA, the lead agency, to 
        provide guidance to each Program agency in preparing 
        annual budget requests.
          ``(2) Requires FEMA, in conjunction with the other 
        Program agencies, to prepare an annual budget to submit 
        to OMB.''

Sec. 8. Report on at-risk populations

    Requires FEMA, within one year after the date of enactment, 
to transmit to Congress a report describing elements of the 
Program that specifically address the needs of at-risk 
populations, including the elderly, the disabled, non-English 
speaking people, single-parent households, and the poor. The 
report also shall identify additional actions to address these 
needs and recommend legislative language that may be needed.

Sec. 9. Public access to earthquake information

    Amends subsection 5(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the 1977 Act to require 
FEMA to develop the means to make available locality-specific 
information that may assist the public in preparing for 
earthquakes.

Sec. 10. Lifelines

    Amends subsection 4(6) of the 1977 Act to add the phrase 
``and infrastructure'' to that part of the definition of 
lifelines concerning ``electrical power and communications 
facilities.''

                         VIII. Committee Views

                                General

    In the report accompanying H.R. 2249, the Earthquake 
Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 Reauthorization, in the 105th 
Congress, the Committee voiced its concern about level or 
declining funding for NEHRP. The Committee is pleased to note 
that for Fiscal Year 2000, when changes in accounting structure 
are taken into account, the Administration has proposed an 
increase of $11.063 million over the amount enacted for Fiscal 
Year 1999.
    Details of the authorizations in H.R. 1184 are provided in 
Table 1. For the base earthquake programs, H.R. 1184 authorizes 
appropriations slightly above the Administration request. In 
addition, the bill provides authorizations for two new 
projects--the Advanced National Seismic Research and Monitoring 
System and the Network for Earthquake Engineering Simulation 
(NEES)--the former of which was not included in the 
Administration's Fiscal Year 2000 request for the Program. When 
these projects are included, total authorizations in H.R. 1184 
for Fiscal Year 2000 are 40.7 percent above the level enacted 
for Fiscal Year 1999 and 35.5 percent above the Administration 
request for Fiscal Year 2000 (see Table 2).
    For Fiscal Year 2001, H.R. 1184 authorizes a three percent 
increase in funding for the base program and additional funding 
for the Advanced Seismic System and NEES, consistent with the 
funding profiles for the two projects. In total, the Fiscal 
Year 2001 authorization is $29.515 million, or 20.3 percent, 
above the Fiscal Year 2000 authorization, largely because of 
increased authorizations for NEES and the Advanced Seismic 
System.
    The Committee supports increasing NEHRP funding by the 
amounts authorized in H.R. 1184. Its main concern is to reduce 
the loss of life associated with major earthquakes. The results 
of these events can be devastating. In 1976, and earthquake 
measuring 8.0 on the Richter scale struck the city of Tangshan, 
China, killing over 600,000 people. The Mexico City earthquake 
of 1985 killed an estimated 3,500 people, and, more recently, 
the Armenia, Columbia earthquake killed an estimated 1,000 
people. A strong earthquake in a heavily-populated area of the 
United States could result in catastrophic losses.

TABLE 2.--H.R. 1184, THE EARTHQUAKE HAZARDS REDUCTION AUTHORIZATION ACT OF 1999: COMPARISON OF FISCAL YEAR 1999 ENACTED, FISCAL YEAR 2000 REQUEST, AND FISCAL YEARS 2000 AND 2001 AUTHORIZATIONS
                                                                                    [in thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                            FY 2000 authorization change + or - from     FY 2001 authorization
                                                                                                                          --------------------------------------------    change (+ or - from
                               Agency                                 FY 1999    FY 2000       FY 2000         FY 2001                                                --------------------------
                                                                      enacted    request    authorization   authorization   FY 1999    Percent    FY 2000    Percent       FY 2000
                                                                                                                            enacted               request               authorization   Percent
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FEMA...............................................................     18,900     19,800          19,800          20,400        900        4.8          0        0.0             600        3.0
USGS...............................................................     52,391     47,596          85,700          93,150     33,309       63.6     41,585       94.3           7,450        8.7
NSF................................................................     29,900     37,600          37,600          59,000      7,700       25.8          0        0.0          21,400       56.9
NIST...............................................................      2,060      2,198           2,200           2,265        140        6.8          2        0.1              65        3.0
                                                                    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total........................................................    103,251    107,194         145,300         174,815     42,049       40.7     38,106       35.5          29,515       20.3
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The economic losses associated with earthquakes also 
provide ample justification for increased funding. Annually, 
the average loss from earthquakes in the United States is about 
$4.4 billion, but these losses can sometimes be much greater. 
For example, the Loma Prieta earthquake of 1989 and the 
Northridge earthquake of 1994 resulted in damages of $6 billion 
and $40 billion, respectively.
    If history is any guide, powerful earthquakes are in store 
for many parts of the country. Missouri (1811 and 1812), 
Southern California (1857), Hawaii (1868), South Carolina 
(1886), Alaska (1899), and Northern California (1906) all have 
experienced violent earthquakes that, if they occurred today, 
would be very destructive.
    It is the Committee's view that the Federal Government has 
an appropriate role in play in using science to protect lives 
and property. Through improved preparedness, NEHRP represents a 
long term investment that will pay for itself many times over 
in saved lives and reduced property losses. Earthquakes may be 
inevitable, but catastrophic losses in life and property need 
not be if we use science to help communities prepare.

                         global seismic network

    For the Global Seismic Network, H.R. 1184 includes 
authorizations of $3.5 million for Fiscal Year 2000, slightly 
above the requested level of $3.481, and $3.6 million for 
Fiscal Year 2001, an increase of 2.9 percent over the Fiscal 
Year 2000 authorization.

                            external grants

    The Committee recognizes that USGS has made a great 
progress in its external grants program. The Committee places a 
high priority on competitive external grants programs, which is 
the reason it placed in statute language establishing an 
external grants program at USGS in the 1997 earthquake bill 
(P.L. 105-47). For Fiscal Years 2000 and 2001, H.R. 1184 
requires a minimum of $9.0 million and $9.5 million, 
respectively, for external research. As USGS currently spends 
in excess of these amounts for external research, this 
requirement should not affect other programs at USGS, nor 
should it affect staffing levels. Indeed, the Committee expects 
that USGS will be able to maintain, if not increase, the amount 
currently going towards external research.

        advanced national seismic research and monitoring system

    The seismic monitoring system now in operation is comprised 
of 41 individual networks, which range in size from networks of 
three or four stations to networks of hundreds of seismographs. 
Most of the monitors used in these networks, the majority of 
which are based on outdated technology, are unable to capture 
the full range of frequencies and amplitudes of seismic waves. 
Indeed, modern broad-band instruments capable of recording both 
very small and fairly large earthquakes on-scale make up only 
about 6 percent of the instruments currently in operation. Many 
also lack digital recording capability. As seismic monitoring 
is the foundation upon which all earthquake warning and 
mitigation efforts are based, the importance of accurate, 
complete, and timely information cannot be overstated.
    Advances in electronics, computers, networking, and seismic 
sensors have made it possible to improve the collection and 
processing of earthquake data. Recognizing this, P.L. 105-47 
requiredUSGS to examine the status of current seismic 
monitoring systems and the need for upgrading them. This assessment was 
furnished in a recently-issued USGS report, An Assessment of Seismic 
Monitoring in the United States: Requirement for an Advanced Seismic 
System. In the Committee's view, the report makes a compelling case for 
an Advanced Seismic System. Such a system will improve warning times 
and provide a wealth of information to scientists and engineers. Direct 
applications of the Advanced Seismic System include: earthquake, 
volcano, and tsunami warning and emergency response; seismic hazard 
assessment; earthquake engineering; scientific research; and public 
information and education.
    H.R. 1184 authorizes for USGS $170.80 million over Fiscal 
Years 2000-2004 for equipment--including $2.8 million for 
portable seismic arrays--and a further $14.8 million over 
Fiscal Years 2000 and 2001 for the incremental costs of 
operating the system. It should be noted that the 
authorizations for Fiscal Years 2000 and 2001 for operating the 
Advanced Seismic System are in addition to the approximately 
$18 million USGS spends annually on systems operations (and 
which is included in USGS's base funding).
    While the Committee is reasonably comfortable with the out-
year figures for equipment, it has less confidence in the out-
year figures for operations. The Committee believes, therefore, 
that at this time it is premature to provide a five-year 
authorization for operating the system, which would require 
extending the authorization for USGS base funding for five-
years, as well. To avoid the need for separate authorizations 
for operations in future bills, the Committee expects USGS to 
roll together the operating funds for the old and new systems 
in its FY 2002 and subsequent budget requests.
    The Committee also would draw attention to the bill 
language requiring USGS, in its implementation plan, to 
establish new, or enhance existing, partnerships to leverage 
resources. It is the Committee's hope that operating costs can 
be reduced significantly through partnerships with industry and 
state and local governments, and it expects USGS to look for 
creative ways to reduce operating costs.
    While it is the Committee's intention to see that system 
operations are authorized in future authorizations, it believes 
the two-year authorization in H.R. 1184 is fiscally prudent and 
provides incentives to leverage resources and reduce costs. The 
Committee will re-examine operating costs for this system when 
NEHRP next comes up for reauthorization in two years.

             Network for Earthquake Engineering Simulation

    For the Network for Earthquake Engineering Simulation, H.R. 
1184 provides NSF a five-year authorization totaling $81.8 
million. NEES will interconnect earthquake engineering research 
facilities and upgrade and expand major earthquake testing 
facilities.
    The idea for NEES developed from provisions in P.L. 105-47, 
which required NSF to work with the other NEHRP agencies to 
develop a comprehensive plan for earthquake engineering 
research,

including upgrades of existing facilities and equipment and 
integration of new, innovative testing approaches to the 
research infrastructure. More than 30 institutions operate 
earthquake engineering facilities. NEES funds will be used to: 
purchase new and upgrade existing shaketables; build 
centrifuges and tsunami testing tanks; build new reaction 
walls, load simulators, and response modifiers; and create 
field test facilities, such as mobile equipment, field sites, 
and post-earthquake laboratories. In addition, using existing 
software and high-speed networking infrastructure, NEES will 
provide remote access and make available to the earthquake 
engineering community a complete, integrated system of testing 
and experimental facilities.
    The Committee supports full funding for NEES. Once 
completed, NEES should revolutionize the way earthquake 
engineering research is conducted and advance our understanding 
and capabilities considerably.

                          Budget Coordination

    The Committee is concerned at the seeming inability to get 
timely, accurate budget figures from some of the agencies 
participating in NEHRP; in some cases, elements of the Program 
were not even apparent in the detailed budget justifications 
submitted to Congress by the agencies. The Committee expects a 
greater degree of interagency coordination in preparing the 
Program's budget and more information than is currently 
available in budget justifications. H.R. 1184 contains language 
that would make FEMA, the Lead Agency, responsible for 
preparing a NEHRP budget for submission to the Office of 
Management and Budget. The Committee expects that future agency 
budget submissions will lay out clearly the elements of the 
Program, and it will look to FEMA to provide the necessary 
coordination.

            Scientific Earthquake Studies Advisory Committee

    H.R. 1184 provides authorizations of $100,000 for each of 
Fiscal Years 2000 and 2001 for a Scientific Earthquake Studies 
Advisory Committee at USGS. The Advisory Committee was sought 
by USGS, which would benefit from the perspectives, advice, and 
guidance of a standing panel of external experts. H.R. 1184 
provides authorizations of $100 thousand for each of Fiscal 
Years 2000 and 2001. When NEHRP is considered for 
reauthorization in two years, the Committee will revisit this 
issue and assess the need to extend the authorization of the 
Advisory Committee beyond the two years provided in the bill.

   Coordination Activities of the Federal Emergency Management Agency

    The Committee expects FEMA to reinvigorate its coordination 
activities among NEHRP agencies. Additionally, FEMA, as the 
lead agency shall identify a list of federal, state, and local 
agencies and research institutions that have earthquake-related 
programs that contribute towards the goals of NEHRP. An 
associate agency would be defined as a Federal agency other 
than a NEHRP agency that administers program(s) that either 
perform earthquake-related research or develop standards, codes 
or other material related earthquake losses. FEMA will convene 
a series of meetings of senior level officials (Assistant 
Secretary or equivalent level), establish points of contact, 
and determine avenues of mutual cooperation with respective 
associate agencies. If agreeable to the parties, the NEHRP 
``core'' will be expanded to include broader participation by 
associate agencies. These agencies will participate, at a 
minimum, at the Interagency Coordination Committee level as set 
forth in the statute.

      coordination of defense and usgs seismic monitoring programs

    The Committee is aware that the Department of Defense (DOD) 
operates seismic monitoring systems as part of its mission to 
ensure compliance with the provisions of the Comprehensive Test 
Ban Treaty. The Committee fully supports this mission and 
recognizes its importance to our national security. However, 
the Committee also is mindful of the potential for overlap 
between DOD and USGS monitoring programs.
    The seismic monitoring programs at DOD and USGS should be 
coordinated to the greatest extent possible and should 
complement, not duplicate, each other. The Committee believes 
that the Memorandum of Agreement between DOD and USGS, 
``Concerning Cooperation on Matters Pertaining to the 
Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty,'' which was signed by the 
agencies in September 1997, provides a good framework for 
reaffirming the roles and responsibilities of DOD and USGS in 
carrying out their respective missions. For USGS, these 
responsibilities include monitoring, analyzing, and reporting 
on seismic events in the United States and overseas, in 
accordance with P.L. 95-124, as amended.
    The Committee will conduct oversight and work with the 
Armed Services Committee to ensure that DOD and USGS observe 
the particular roles and responsibilities laid out for each 
agency in the Memorandum of Agreement.

                      IX. Committee Cost Estimate

    Rule XIII, clause 3(d)(2) of the House of Representatives 
requires each committee report accompanying each bill or joint 
resolution of a public character to contain: (1) an estimate, 
made by such committee, of the costs which would be incurred in 
carrying out such bill or joint resolution in the fiscal year 
in which it is reported, and in each of the five fiscal years 
following such fiscal year (or for the authorized duration of 
any program authorized by such bill or joint resolution, if 
less than five years); (2) a comparison of the estimate of 
costs described in subparagraph (1) of this paragraph made by 
such committee with an estimate of such costs made by any 
Government agency and submitted to such committee; and (3) when 
practicable, a comparison of the total estimated funding level 
for the relevant program (or programs) with the appropriate 
levels under current law. However, House Rule XIII, clause 
3(d)(3)(B) provides that this requirement does not apply when a 
cost estimate and comparison prepared by the Director of the 
Congressional Budget Office under section 403 of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974 has been timely submitted 
prior to the filing of the report and included in the report 
pursuant to House Rule XIII, clause 3(c)(3). A cost estimate 
and comparison prepared by the Director of the Congressional 
Budget Office under section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act 
of 1974 has been timely submitted prior to the filing of this 
report and is included in Section IX of this report pursuant to 
House Rule XIII, clause 3(c)(3).
    Rule XIII, clause 3(c)(2) of the House of Representatives 
requires each committee report that accompanies a measure 
providing new budget authority (other than continuing 
appropriations), new spending authority, or new credit 
authority, or changes in revenues or tax expenditures to 
contain a cost estimate, as required by section 308(a)(1) of 
the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 and, when practicable with 
respect to estimates of new budget authority, a comparison of 
the total estimated funding level for the relevant program (or 
programs) to the appropriate levels under current law. H.R. 
1184 does not contain any new budget authority, credit 
authority, or changes in revenues or tax expenditures. Assuming 
that the sums authorized under the bill are appropriated, H.R. 
1184 does authorize additional discretionary spending, as 
described in the Congressional Budget Office report on the 
bill, which is contained in Section IX of this report.

              X. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate

                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                    Washington, DC, April 12, 1999.
Hon. F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr.,
Chairman, Committee on Science,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 1184, the 
Earthquake Hazards Reduction Authorization Act of 1999.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contacts for federal 
costs are Megan Carroll, Gary Brown, Kathy Gramp, and Mark 
Hadley. The contact for the state and local impact is Lisa Cash 
Driskill.
            Sincerely,
                                          Barry B. Anderson
                                    (For Dan L. Crippen, Director).
    Enclosure.

H.R. 1184--Earthquake Hazards Reduction Authorization Act of 1999

    Summary: H.R. 1184 would authorize the appropriation of 
$537 million over the 2000-2004 period (including $38 million 
that is already authorized under current law) for programs 
aimed at the potential reduction of earthquake hazards. 
Assuming appropriation of the authorized amounts, CBO estimates 
that the bill would result in additional discretionary spending 
of $477 million over the 2000-2004 period. The bill would not 
affect direct spending or receipts; therefore, pay-as-you-go 
procedures would not apply. H.R. 1184 contains no 
intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the 
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) and would impose no costs 
on state, local, or tribal governments.
    H.R. 1184 would authorize appropriations totaling $202 
million over the 2000-2001 period for the Federal Emergency 
Management Agency (FEMA), the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), 
the National Science Foundation (NSF), and the National 
Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) to carry out 
provisions of the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 
(Public Law 95-124). In addition, the bill would authorize a 
total of $253 million over the 2000-2004 period for a new 
system of seismic research and monitoring to be administered by 
USGS. H.R. 1184 also would authorize appropriations totaling 
$82 million over the 2000-2004 period for NSF to establish a 
network for engineering simulations of earthquakes. The amounts 
authorized for NSF include $38 million that was previously 
authorized in Public Law 105-207 for fiscal year 2000. (H.R. 
1184 would amend that existing authorization to earmark $38 
million for reducing earthquake hazards.)
    Estimated cost to the Federal Government: For the purposes 
of this estimate, CBO assumes that all amounts authorized in 
H.R. 1184 will be appropriated by the start of each fiscal year 
and that outlays will follow the historical spending patterns 
for these and similar programs. The estimated cost of the bill 
is shown in the following table. The costs of this legislation 
fall within budget functions 250 (general science, space, and 
technology), 300 (natural resources and environment), 370 
(commerce and housing credit), and 450 (community and regional 
development).

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                By fiscal year, in millions of dollars
                                                     -----------------------------------------------------------
                                                        1999      2000      2001      2002      2003      2004
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATIONS

Spending Under Current Law:
    Budget Authority/Authorization Level \1\........       103        38         0         0         0         0
    Estimated Outlays...............................        69        32        25         8         2         1
Proposed Changes:
    FEMA:
        Authorization Level.........................         0        20        20         0         0         0
        Estimated Outlays...........................         0        11        17         8         3         1
    USGS:
        Authorization Level.........................         0        86        93        51        58        62
        Estimated Outlays...........................         0        76        98        53        57        62
    NSF:
        Authorization Level.........................         0         0        59        24         5        17
        Estimated Outlays...........................         0         0        13        34        25        14
    NIST:
        Authorization Level.........................         0         2         2         0         0         0
        Estimated Outlays...........................         0         2         2         1     (\2\)         0
    Total:
        Authorization Level.........................         0       108       174        75        63        79
        Estimated Outlays...........................         0        89       130        96        85        77
Spending Under H.R. 1184:
    Authorization Level.............................       103       146       174        75        63        79
    Estimated Outlays...............................        69       121       155       104        87        78
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The 1999 level is the amount appropriated for that year. The amount for 2000 is part of an NSF authorization
  under Public Law 105-207. H.R. 1184 would amend that law to earmark $30 million specifically for the
  Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program and $8 million for Earthquakes Engineering Simulation.
\2\ Less than $500,000.

    Pay-as-you-go considerations: None.
    Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: H.R. 1184 
contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as 
defined in UMRA and would impose no costs on state, local, or 
tribal governments. The bill would authorize funds to USGS, 
FEMA, NIST, and NSF, some of which would fund earthquake 
research grants to public universities. It also would set aside 
$18.5 million of funds authorized for USGS over the next two 
fiscal years for grants that could go to state and local 
governments. Finally, state and local governments would benefit 
from technical assistance and hazard mitigation planning grants 
provided by FEMA.
    Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Megan Carroll, Gary 
Brown, Kathy Gramp, Mark Hadley; Impact on State, Local, and 
Tribal Governments: Lisa Cash Driskill.
    Estimate approved by: Paul N. Va de Water, Assistant 
Director for Budget Analysis.

                  XI. Compliance With Public Law 104-4

    H.R. 1184 contains no unfunded mandates.

         XII. Committee Oversight Findings and Recommendations

    Rule XIII, clause 3(c)(1) of the House of Representatives 
requires each committee report to include oversight findings 
and recommendations required pursuant to clause 2(b)(1) of rule 
X. The Committee has no oversight findings.

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

    Rule XIII, clause 3(c)(4) of the House of Representatives 
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 and recommendations 
have been submitted to the Committee in a timely fashion. The 
Committee on Science has received no such findings or 
recommendations from the Committee on Government Reform and 
Oversight.

                XIV. Constitutional Authority Statement

    Rule XIII, clause 3(d)(1) of the House of Representatives 
requires each report of a committee on a bill or joint 
resolution of a public character to include a statement citing 
the specific powers granted to the Congress in the Constitution 
to enact the law proposed by the bill or joint resolution. 
Article I, section 8 of the Constitution of the United States 
grants Congress the authority to enact H.R. 1184.

                XV. Federal Advisory Committee Statement

    The functions of the advisory committee, Scientific 
Earthquake Studies Advisory Committee, authorized in H.R. 1184, 
are not currently being nor could they be performed by one or 
more agencies or by enlarging the mandate of another existing 
advisory committee.

                 XVI. Congressional Accountability Act

    The Committee finds that H.R. 1184 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).

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

  In compliance with clause 3(e) 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 italic, existing law in which no change is 
proposed is shown in roman):

EARTHQUAKE HAZARDS REDUCTION ACT OF 1977

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

SEC. 4. DEFINITIONS.

  As used in this Act, unless the context otherwise requires:
          (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          (6) The term ``lifelines'' means public works and 
        utilities, including transportation facilities and 
        infrastructure, oil and gas pipelines, electrical power 
        and communication facilities and infrastructure, and 
        water supply and sewage treatment facilities.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

SEC. 5. NATIONAL EARTHQUAKE HAZARDS REDUCTION PROGRAM.

  (a) Establishment.--There is established a National 
Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program.
  (b) Responsibilities of Program Agencies.--
          (1) Lead agency.--The Federal Emergency Management 
        Agency (hereafter in this Act referred to as the 
        ``Agency'') shall have the primary responsibility for 
        planning and coordinating the Program. In carrying out 
        this paragraph, the Director of the Agency shall--
                  [(A) prepare, in conjunction with the other 
                Program agencies, an annual budget for the 
                Program to be submitted to the Office of 
                Management and Budget;]
                  [(B)] (A) ensure that the Program includes 
                the necessary steps to promote the 
                implementation of earthquake hazard reduction 
                measures by Federal, State, and local 
                governments, national standards and model 
                building code organizations, architects and 
                engineers, and others with a role in planning 
                and constructing buildings and lifelines;
                  [(C)] (B) prepare, in conjunction with the 
                other Program agencies, a written plan for the 
                Program, which shall include specific tasks and 
                milestones for each Program agency, and which 
                shall be submitted to the Congress and updated 
                at such times as may be required by significant 
                Program events, but in no event less frequently 
                than every 3 years;
                  [(D)] (C) prepare, in conjunction with the 
                other Program agencies, a biennial report, to 
                be submitted to the Congress within 90 days 
                after the end of each even-numbered fiscal 
                year, which shall describe the activities and 
                achievements of the Program during the 
                preceding two fiscal years;
                  [(E)] (D) request the assistance of Federal 
                agencies other than the Program agencies, as 
                necessary to assist in carrying out this Act; 
                and
                  [(F)] (E) work with the National Science 
                Foundation, the National Institute of Standards 
                and Technology, and the United States 
                Geological Survey, to develop a comprehensive 
                plan for earthquake engineering research to 
                effectively use existing testing facilities and 
                laboratories (existing at the time of the 
                development of the plan), upgrade facilities 
                and equipment as needed, and integrate new, 
                innovative testing approaches to the research 
                infrastructure in a systematic manner.
        The principal official carrying out the 
        responsibilities described in this paragraph shall be 
        at a level no lower than that of Associate Director.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (c) Budget Coordination.--
          (1) Guidance.--The Agency shall each year provide 
        guidance to the other Program agencies concerning the 
        preparation of requests for appropriations for 
        activities related to the Program, and shall prepare, 
        in conjunction with the other Program agencies, an 
        annual Program budget to be submitted to the Office of 
        Management and Budget.
          (2) Reports.--Each Program agency shall include with 
        its annual request for appropriations submitted to the 
        Office of Management and Budget a report that--
                  (A) identifies each element of the proposed 
                Program activities of the agency;
                  (B) specifies how each of these activities 
                contributes to the Program; and
                  (C) states the portion of its request for 
                appropriations allocated to each element of the 
                Program.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

[SEC. 10. NON-FEDERAL COST SHARING FOR SUPPLEMENTAL FUNDS.

  [A grant under this Act to a State from the Agency that is 
made with funds appropriated under the Fiscal Year 1990 Dire 
Emergency Supplemental to Meet the Needs of Natural Disasters 
of National Significance (Public Law 101-130; 103 Stat. 775) 
shall not include a requirement for cost sharing in an amount 
greater than 25 percent of the cost of the project for which 
the grant is made, and any cost sharing requirement may be 
satisfied through in-kind contributions.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

SEC. 12. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

  (a)[(1) General.--There are authorized to be appropriated to 
the President to carry out the provisions of section 5 and 6 of 
this Act (in addition to any authorizations for similar 
purposes included in other Acts and the authorizations set 
forth in subsections (b) and (c) of this section), not to 
exceed $1,000,000 for the fiscal year ending September 30, 
1978, not to exceed $2,000,000 for the fiscalyear ending 
September 30, 1979, and not to exceed $2,000,000 for the fiscal year 
ending September 30, 1980.
  [(2) There are authorized to be appropriated to the Director 
to carry out the provisions of sections 5 and 6 of this Act for 
the fiscal year ending September 30, 1981--
          [(A) $1,000,000 for continuation of the Interagency 
        Committee on Seismic Safety in Construction and the 
        Building Seismic Safety Council programs,
          [(B) $1,500,000 for plans and preparedness for 
        earthquake disasters,
          [(C) $500,000 for prediction response planning,
          [(D) $600,000 for architectural and engineering 
        planning and practice programs,
          [(E) $1,000,000 for development and application of a 
        public education program,
          [(F) $3,000,000 for use by the National Science 
        Foundation in addition to the amount authorized to be 
        appropriated under subsection (c), which amount 
        includes $2,400,000 for earthquake policy research and 
        $600,000 for the strong ground motion element of the 
        siting program, and
          [(G) $1,000,000 for use by the Center for Building 
        Technology, National Bureau of Standards in addition to 
        the amount authorized to be appropriated under 
        subsection (d) for earthquake activities in the Center.
  [(3) There are authorized to be appropriated to the Director 
for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1982, $2,000,000 to 
carry out the provisions of section 5 and 6 of this Act.
  [(4) There are authorized to be appropriated to the Director, 
to carry out the provisions of section 5 and 6 of this Act, 
$1,281,000 for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1983.
  [(5) There are authorized to be appropriated to the Director, 
to carry out the provisions of section 5 and 6 of this Act, for 
the fiscal year ending September 30, 1984, $3,705,000 and for 
the fiscal year ending September 30, 1985, $6,096,000.
  [(6) There are authorized to be appropriated to the Director, 
to carry out the provisions of section 5 and 6 of this Act, for 
the fiscal year ending September 30, 1986, $5,596,000, and for 
the fiscal year ending September 30, 1987, $5,848,000.
  [(7) There] General.--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, 
$25,750,000 for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1996, 
$20,900,000 for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1998, 
[and] $21,500,000 for the fiscal year ending September 30, 
1999, $19,800,000 for the fiscal year ending September 30, 
2000, and $20,400,000 for the fiscal year ending September 30, 
2001.
  (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; $50,676,000 for the fiscal year ending September 30, 
1996; $52,565,000 for the fiscal year ending September 30, 
1998, of which $3,800,000 shall be used for the Global Seismic 
Network operated by the Agency; and $54,052,000 for the fiscal 
year ending September 30, 1999, of which $3,800,000 shall be 
used for the Global Seismic Network operated by the Agency. 
There are authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary of the 
Interior for purposes of carrying out, through the Director of 
the United States Geological Survey, the responsibilities that 
may be assigned to the Director under this Act $46,100,000 for 
fiscal year 2000, of which $3,500,000 shall be used for the 
Global Seismic Network and $100,000 shall be used for the 
Scientific Earthquake Studies Advisory Committee established 
under section 6 of the Earthquake Hazards Reduction 
Authorization Act of 1999; and $47,500,000 for fiscal year 
2001, of which $3,600,000 shall be used for the Global Seismic 
Network and $100,000 shall be used for the Scientific 
Earthquake Studies Advisory Committee established under section 
6 of the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Authorization Act of 
1999. Of the amounts authorized to be appropriated under this 
subsection, at least--
          (1) $8,000,000 of the amount authorized to be 
        appropriated for the fiscal year ending September 30, 
        1998; [and]
          (2) $8,250,000 of the amount authorized for the 
        fiscal year ending September 30, 1999[,];
          (3) $9,000,000 of the amount authorized to be 
        appropriated for fiscal year 2000; and
          (4) $9,500,000 of the amount authorized to be 
        appropriated for fiscal year 2001,
shall be used for carrying out a competitive, peer-reviewed 
program under which the Director, in close coordination with 
and as a complement to related activities of the United States 
Geological Survey, awards grants to, or enters into cooperative 
agreements with, State and local governments and persons or 
entities from the academic community and the private sector.
  (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, (2) $16,686,000 for engineering research and $11,227,000 
for geosciences research for the fiscal year ending September 
30, 1996, (3) $18,450,000 for engineering research and 
$11,920,000 for geosciences research for the fiscal year ending 
September 30, 1998, [and] (4) $19,000,000 for engineering 
research and $12,280,000 for geosciences research for the 
fiscal year ending September 30, 1999[.], and (5) $19,000,000 
for engineering research and $10,900,000 for geosciences 
research for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2000. There 
are authorized to be appropriated to the National Science 
Foundation $19,600,000 for engineering research and $11,200,000 
for geosciences research for fiscal year 2001.
  (d) National Institute 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, $1,957,000 for the 
fiscal year ending September 30, 1996, $2,000,000 for the 
fiscal year ending September 30, 1998, [and] $2,060,000 for the 
fiscal year ending September 30, 1999, $2,200,000 for fiscal 
year 2000, and $2,265,000 for fiscal year 2001.
  [(e) Funds for Certain Required Adjustments.--For each of the 
fiscal years ending September 30, 1982, September 30, 1983, 
September 30, 1984, and September 30, 1985, there are 
authorized to be appropriated such further sums as may be 
necessary for adjustments required by law in salaries, pay, 
retirement, and employee benefits incurred in the conduct of 
activities for which funds are authorized by the preceding 
provisions of this section.
  [(f) Availability of Funds.--Funds appropriated for fiscal 
years 1991, 1992, and 1993 pursuant to this section shall 
remain available until expended.]

SEC. 13. ADVANCED NATIONAL SEISMIC RESEARCH AND MONITORING SYSTEM.

  (a) Establishment.--The Director of the United States 
Geological Survey shall establish and operate an Advanced 
National Seismic Research and Monitoring System. The purpose of 
such system shall be to organize, modernize, standardize, and 
stabilize the national, regional, and urban seismic monitoring 
systems in the United States, including sensors, recorders, and 
data analysis centers, into a coordinated system that will 
measure and record the full range of frequencies and amplitudes 
exhibited by seismic waves, in order to enhance earthquake 
research and warning capabilities.
  (b) Management Plan.--Not later than 120 days after the date 
of the enactment of the Earthquake Hazards Reduction 
Authorization Act of 1999, the Director of the United States 
Geological Survey shall transmit to the Congress a 5-year 
management plan for establishing and operating the Advanced 
National Seismic Research and Monitoring System. The plan shall 
include annual cost estimates for both modernization and 
operation, milestones, standards, and performance goals, as 
well as plans for securing the participation of all existing 
networks in the Advanced National Seismic Research and 
Monitoring System and for establishing new, or enhancing 
existing, partnerships to leverage resources.
  (c) Authorization of Appropriations.--
          (1) Expansion and modernization.--In addition to 
        amounts appropriated under section 12(b), there are 
        authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary of the 
        Interior, to be used by the Director of the United 
        States Geological Survey toestablish the Advanced 
National Seismic Research and Monitoring System--
                  (A) $33,500,000 for fiscal year 2000;
                  (B) $33,700,000 for fiscal year 2001;
                  (C) $35,100,000 for fiscal year 2002;
                  (D) $35,000,000 for fiscal year 2003; and
                  (E) $33,500,000 for fiscal year 2004.
          (2) Operation.--In addition to amounts appropriated 
        under section 12(b), there are authorized to be 
        appropriated to the Secretary of the Interior, to be 
        used by the Director of the United States Geological 
        Survey to operate the Advanced National Seismic 
        Research and Monitoring System--
                  (A) $4,500,000 for fiscal year 2000; and
                  (B) $10,300,000 for fiscal year 2001.

SEC. 14. NETWORK FOR EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING SIMULATION.

  (a) Establishment.--The Director of the National Science 
Foundation shall establish a Network for Earthquake Engineering 
Simulation that will upgrade, link, and integrate a system of 
geographically distributed experimental facilities for 
earthquake engineering testing of full-sized structures and 
their components and partial-scale physical models. The system 
shall be integrated through networking software so that 
integrated models and databases can be used to create model-
based simulation, and the components of the system shall be 
interconnected with a computer network and allow for remote 
access, information sharing, and collaborative research.
  (b) Authorization of Appropriations.--In addition to amounts 
appropriated under section 12(c), there are authorized to be 
appropriated, out of funds otherwise authorized to be 
appropriated to the National Science Foundation, $7,700,000 for 
fiscal year 2000 for the Network for Earthquake Engineering 
Simulation. In addition to amounts appropriated under section 
12(c), there are authorized to be appropriated to the National 
Science Foundation for the Network for Earthquake Engineering 
Simulation--
          (1) $28,200,000 for fiscal year 2001;
          (2) $24,400,000 for fiscal year 2002;
          (3) $4,500,000 for fiscal year 2003; and
          (4) $17,000,000 for fiscal year 2004.
                              ----------                              

                SECTION 2 OF THE ACT OF OCTOBER 1, 1997

  AN ACT To authorize appropriations for carrying out the Earthquake 
 Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 for fiscal years 1998 and 1999, and for 
                            other purposes.

SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION OF REAL-TIME SEISMIC HAZARD WARNING SYSTEM 
                    DEVELOPMENT, AND OTHER ACTIVITIES.

  (a) Automatic Seismic Warning System Development.--
          (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          (7) Authorization of appropriations.--In addition to 
        the amounts made available to the Director under 
        section 12(b) of the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act 
        of 1977 (42 U.S.C. 7706(b)), there are authorized to be 
        appropriated to the Department of the Interior, to be 
        used by the Director to carry out paragraph (2), 
        $3,000,000 for each of fiscal years 1998 and 1999, 
        $1,600,000 for fiscal year 2000, and $1,650,000 for 
        fiscal year 2001.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                    XVIII. Committee Recommendations

    On March 25, 1999, a quorum being present, the Committee 
favorably reported H.R. 1184, the Earthquake Hazards Reduction 
Authorization Act of 1999, by a voice vote, and recommended its 
enactment.

                     XIX. Committee Correspondence

                                    Committee on Resources,
                                    Washington, DC, April 16, 1999.
Hon. F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr.,
Chairman, Committee on Science,
Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: H.R. 1184, to authorize appropriations 
for carrying out the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1997 
for fiscal years 2000 and 2001, was referred to the Committee 
on Science and additionally to the Committee on Resources. The 
Committee on Resources has jurisdiction over the ``Geological 
Survey'' under Rule X of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives, and major portions of the Earthquake Hazards 
Reduction Act are implemented by the Director of the United 
States Geological Survey (USGS).
    I have reviewed the bill as ordered reported from the 
Committee on Science on March 25, 1999, and have no objection 
to the provisions affecting USGS. Therefore, I would be happy 
to waive the Committee on Resources' jurisdiction over H.R. 
1184 to allow it to be scheduled for Floor consideration as 
soon as possible. Representing a State that has been devastated 
by earthquakes in the past, I know first hand the need for this 
program.
    This waiver of Committee jurisdiction should not be 
construed to affect any future referrals of bills dealing with 
the same subject matter. I also receive the right to request 
that the Committee on Resources be represented on any 
conference on this bill or related legislation if a conference 
becomes necessary. Finally, I ask that this letter be made part 
of the report on the bill.
    Thank you for keeping me and my staff apprised of the 
progress on H.R. 1184 and I look forward to its enactment.
            Sincerely,
                                               Don Young, Chairman.

                XX. Proceedings of Full Committee Markup

                        Thursday, March 25, 1999

    Chairman Sensenbrenner. The next bill on the agenda is H.R. 
1184, the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1999. Briefly, 
this bill authorizes the existing earthquake programs at FEMA, 
USGS, NSF, and NIST for Fiscal Years 2000 and 2001, and 
authorizes two new projects, the Advanced National Seismic 
Research and Monitoring Network, and the Network for Earthquake 
Engineering Simulation. I believe this is an excellent bill 
that will revolutionize earthquake and engineering research.
    I yield to the gentleman from California for whatever 
opening statement he would like to make.
    Mr. Brown. Mr. Chairman, I think I will waive an opening 
statement right at this point.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. The Subcommittee Chair, the 
gentleman from Michigan.
    Mr. Smith of Michigan. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. 
The Ranking Member noted earlier the possibility that we are 
moving quickly ahead. Because of the importance of the 
California delegation, we thought it was appropriate to move 
speedily with the earthquake reduction bill. This bill, H.R. 
1184, authorizes $145.3 million for Fiscal Year 2000, an 
increase over the President's request, and $174.8 million for 
2001 for the National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program.
    In addition, it provides authorization for three additional 
years for two new projects. Four agencies participate in NEHRP: 
the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the U.S. Geological 
Survey, and the National Science Foundation, and the National 
Institute for Standards and Technology. For the year 2000, this 
bill authorizes $99.6 million for the base earthquake program, 
slightly above the requested level. This authorization includes 
a $3.5 million for the operation of the global seismic network, 
$1.6 million for the real-time seismic warning system pilot 
program, and $100,000 for the advisory committee at the U.S. 
Geological Survey.
    The bill promotes external research, authorizing at least 
$9 million for USGS external grants program, and for Fiscal 
2001, the bill authorizes a 3 percent increase in base funding. 
That would be $102.6 million.
    As the Chairman mentioned, the bill also includes multi-
year authorization for what we are calling the Advanced 
National Seismic Research and Monitoring System, and the 
Network for Earthquake Engineering Simulation, both of which 
were started in the 1998 NEHRP bill. The case for Advanced 
National Seismic Research and Monitoring System was laid out in 
the USGS report that was required by the Committee two years 
ago. It will improve warning times, replace some 30-year old 
equipment, and provide a wealth of information to scientists 
and engineers. The bill authorizes $168 million to USGA over 
five years.
    For the Network for Earthquake Engineering Simulation, the 
bill provides NSF a five-year authorization totaling $81.8 
million. The NEES will interconnect earthquake engineering 
research facilities and upgrade and expand earthquake testing 
the facilities. Once completed, it should advance our 
earthquake engineering capabilities considerably.
    Finally, the bill authorizes the establishment of a 
scientific earthquake studies advisory committee at the U.S. 
Geological Survey. It requires greater coordination in the 
formulation of NEHRP budget, and repeals obsolete provisions of 
the law. Using science to protect lives and property is one of 
the most important things this Committee does. With 
earthquakes, it is not a question of if, but as I have learned 
starting low on the learning curve for the problem of 
earthquakes in this country, the question is when the next one 
will strike and where, in what part of the country it might 
happen.
    Though its emphasis on monitoring research and mitigation, 
H.R. 1184 will help the Nation prepare for the inevitable. I 
would like to thank the Chairman for his efforts in preparing 
this bill, certainly our Subcommittee staff that has done a 
great deal of work, and I recommend it to my colleagues for 
their approval.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. The gentleman yields back the 
balance of his time.
    Does the gentlewoman from Texas, Ms. Johnson, have an 
opening statement? The gentleman from California will make an 
opening statement by proxy.
    Mr. Brown. I would feel greatly remiss if I didn't say 
something about an earthquake bill. [Laughter.]
    This is a legislation again, that moved through the 
Congress back in the mid-1970's, in which I and Senator 
Cranston were the primary authors, as I recall. The legislation 
has--the value of the legislation has been borne out from the 
progress that has been made in saving lives and reducing damage 
from earthquakes over this quarter of a century. I had that 
called to my attention last Friday when I attended the opening 
of a new $600 million advanced technology hospital in my 
district, just a few miles from where I live, and of course 
just a few miles from the San Andreas fault. This is built and 
designed with the latest state-of-the-art equipment. It is a 
county hospital, not a federal structure. It has gone far 
further that the Federal Government has in using base 
isolation, for example, and other divides to reduce damage and 
save lives in the event of an earthquake.
    We need to follow that kind of an example, and the Federal 
Government needs to follow it. It hasn't been doing as well as 
it should. Private builders of all kinds, particularly high 
rise buildings, reinforced concrete buildings and so on, need 
to put into practice what we now know about safe earthquake-
resistant construction.
    We still don't know enough about the incidents of 
earthquakes. For that reason, this bill is particularly 
valuable because it provides for the funding Earthquake 
Advanced Seismic Monitoring System, which I want to thank the 
Chairman for including. It is something that will give us a 
base of knowledge necessary to pinpoint the location of 
earthquake faults. Whether you can believe it or not, we are 
still discovering new faults in the southern California region 
that we didn't even know existed before. We need to identify 
these and to make sure that in the most serious cases, we 
provide adequate zoning so that there is some protection from 
the very start in terms of the type of buildings that can be 
placed in certain locations to protect our communities.
    So this bill is actually an extremely good bill. If 
continues for another several years this very important 
program. As I say, we continue both to develop scientific 
knowledge about what is going on, and we continue to improve 
the practice of siting and constructing buildings in such a 
fashion that we gain many times more than the cost of this bill 
in terms of damage to lives and structures.
    So I am very commendatory of all those who worked on it, 
and the Chairman's cooperation in moving this bill through 
promptly.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. Does the gentleman yield back the 
balance of his time?
    Mr. Brown. I yield back the balance of my time.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. Without objection, further opening 
statements will be placed in the record at this point.
    [The information follows:]
Opening Statement of Congresswoman Debbie Stabenow of the 8th District, 
                           State of Michigan
    Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Brown, thank you for holding today's 
markup and addressing this legislation. The bills before us today build 
on recent House priorities concerning disaster mitigation, the 
commercialization of federal research, and easing the regulatory burden 
for business. I support all of these concepts and applaud the Committee 
for its efforts.
    Representing a district in Michigan which relies on the auto 
industry, I am particularly interested in H.R. 1183, The Fastener 
Quality Act Amendment of 1999. I have been monitoring the discussions 
between the Committee staffs and the Fastener Reform Coalition, and am 
pleased that all sides agree that the bill before us today and the 
anticipated amendments are an important step forward. I understand that 
the Commerce Committee still has some concerns with this legislation, 
and I look forward to continuing our work to reach a final agreement. 
While safety must always be our foremost concern, wherever possible we 
must endeavor to give U.S. industries the most flexible environment to 
work in to ensure global competitiveness.
    The other bills for before us, H.R. 209, The Technology Transfer 
Commercialization Act, and H.R. 1184, The Earthquake Hazards Reduction 
Act of 1999, are also important. Michigan State University is located 
in the heart of my district and conducts a great deal of federally-
funded research. The health of the U.S. economy is greatly improved 
when we take full advantage of the innovations fostered at our national 
labs and universities, and H.R. 209 will help us optimize the 
commercialization of these ideas. H.R. 1184 will reauthorize the 
National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program, which will help mitigate 
future damage from these natural disasters. This program also places a 
focus on developing earth science teaching materials for elementary and 
secondary schools, which fits nicely with the emphasis the Committee 
places on science and math education.
    Mr. Chairman, thank you again for addressing these issues today. I 
am sure we will have a productive session.

    Chairman Sensenbrenner. I ask unanimous consent that the 
bill be considered as read, and open to amendment at any point.
    [The information follows:]
  A Bill to authorize appropriations for carrying out the Earthquake 
 Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 for fiscal years 2000 and 2001, 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. SHORT TITLE.

  This Act may be cited as the ``Earthquake Hazards Reduction 
Authorization Act of 1999''.

SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

  (a) Federal Emergency Management Agency.--Section 12(a) of the 
Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 (42 U.S.C. 7706(a)) is 
amended--
          (1) by striking ``(1) General.--'' and all that follows 
        through ``(7) There'' and inserting ``General.--There'';
          (2) by striking ``1998, and'' and inserting ``1998,''; and
          (3) by inserting ``, $19,800,000 for the fiscal year ending 
        September 30, 2000, and $20,400,000 for the fiscal year ending 
        September 30, 2001'' after ``September 30, 1999''.
  (b) United States Geological Survey.--(1) Section 12(b) of the 
Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 (42 U.S.C. 7706(b)) is 
amended--
          (A) by inserting ``There are authorized to be appropriated to 
        the Secretary of the Interior for purposes of carrying out, 
        through the Director of the United States Geological Survey, 
        the responsibilities that may be assigned to the Director under 
        this Act $46,100,000 for fiscal year 2000, of which $3,500,000 
        shall be used for the Global Seismic Network and $100,000 shall 
        be used for the Scientific Earthquake Studies Advisory 
        Committee established under section 6 of the Earthquake Hazards 
        Reduction Authorization Act of 1999; and $47,500,000 for fiscal 
        year 2001, of which $3,600,000 shall be used for the Global 
        Seismic Network and $100,000 shall be used for the Scientific 
        Earthquake Studies Advisory Committee established under section 
        6 of the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Authorization Act of 
        1999.'' after ``operated by the Agency.'';
          (B) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (1);
          (C) by striking the comma at the end of paragraph (2) and 
        inserting a semicolon; and
          (D) by inserting after paragraph (2) the following new 
        paragraphs:
          ``(3) $9,000,000 of the amount authorized to be appropriated 
        for fiscal year 2000; and
          ``(4) $9,500,000 of the amount authorized to be appropriated 
        for fiscal year 2001,''.
  (2) Section 2(a)(7) of the Act entitled ``An Act to authorize 
appropriations for carrying out the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 
1977 for fiscal years 1998 and 1999, and for other purposes'' is 
amended by inserting ``, $1,600,000 for fiscal year 2000, and 
$1,650,000 for fiscal year 2001'' after ``1998 and 1999''.
  (c) National Science Foundation.--Section 12(c) of the Earthquake 
Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 (42 U.S.C. 7706(c)) is amended--
          (1) by striking ``1998, and'' and inserting ``1998,''; and
          (2) by striking the period at the end and inserting ``, and 
        (5) $19,000,000 for engineering research and $10,900,000 for 
        geosciences research for the fiscal year ending September 30, 
        2000. There are authorized to be appropriated to the National 
        Science Foundation $19,600,000 for engineering research and 
        $11,200,000 for geosciences research for fiscal year 2001.''.
  (d) National Institute of Standards and Technology.--Section 12(d) of 
the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 (42 U.S.C. 7706(d)) is 
amended--
          (1) by striking ``1998, and''; and
          (2) by inserting ``, $2,200,000 for fiscal year 2000, and 
        $2,265,000 for fiscal year 2001'' after ``September 30, 1999''.

SEC. 3. REPEALS.

  Section 10 and subsections (e) and (f) of section 12 of the 
Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 (42 U.S.C. 7705d and 7706 (e) 
and (f)) are repealed.

SEC. 4. ADVANCED NATIONAL SEISMIC RESEARCH AND MONITORING SYSTEM.

  The Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 (42 U.S.C. 7701 et seq.) 
is amended by adding at the end the following new section:

``SEC. 13. ADVANCED NATIONAL SEISMIC RESEARCH AND MONITORING SYSTEM.

  ``(a) Establishment.--The Director of the United States Geological 
Survey shall establish and operate an Advanced National Seismic 
Research and Monitoring System. The purpose of such system shall be to 
organize, modernize, standardize, and stabilize the national, regional, 
and urban seismic monitoring systems in the United States, including 
sensors, recorders, and data analysis centers, into a coordinated 
system that will measure and record the full range of frequencies and 
amplitudes exhibited by seismic waves, in order to enhance earthquake 
research and warning capabilities.
  ``(b) Management Plan.--Not later than 120 days after the date of the 
enactment of the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Authorization Act of 
1999, the Director of the United States Geological Survey shall 
transmit to the Congress a 5-year management plan for establishing and 
operating the Advanced National Seismic Research and Monitoring System. 
The plan shall include annual cost estimates for both modernization and 
operation, milestones,standards, and performance goals, as well as 
plans for securing the participation of all existing networks in the 
Advanced National Seismic Research and Monitoring System and for 
establishing new, or enhancing existing, partnerships to leverage 
resources.
  ``(c) Authorization of Appropriations.--
          ``(1) Expansion and modernization.--In addition to amounts 
        appropriated under section 12(b), there are authorized to be 
        appropriated to the Secretary of the Interior, to be used by 
        the Director of the United States Geological Survey to 
        establish the Advanced National Seismic Research and Monitoring 
        System--
                  ``(A) $33,500,000 for fiscal year 2000;
                  ``(B) $33,700,000 for fiscal year 2001;
                  ``(C) $33,700,000 for fiscal year 2002;
                  ``(D) $33,600,000 for fiscal year 2003; and
                  ``(E) $33,500,000 for fiscal year 2004.
          ``(2) Operation.--In addition to amounts appropriated under 
        section 12(b), there are authorized to be appropriated to the 
        Secretary of the Interior, to be used by the Director of the 
        United States Geological Survey to operate the Advanced 
        National Seismic Research and Monitoring System--
                  ``(A) $4,500,000 for fiscal year 2000; and
                  ``(B) $10,300,000 for fiscal year 2001.''.

SEC. 5. NETWORK FOR EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING SIMULATION.

  The Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 (42 U.S.C. 7701 et seq.) 
is amended by adding at the end the following new section:

``SEC. 14. NETWORK FOR EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING SIMULATION.

  ``(a) Establishment.--The Director of the National Science Foundation 
shall establish a Network for Earthquake Engineering Simulation that 
will upgrade, link, and integrate a system of geographically 
distributed experimental facilities for earthquake engineering testing 
of full-sized structures and their components and partial-scale 
physical models. The system shall be integrated through networking 
software so that integrated models and databases can be used to create 
model-based simulation, and the components of the system shall be 
interconnected with a computer network and allow for remote access, 
information sharing, and collaborative research.
  ``(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--In addition to amounts 
appropriated under section 12(c), there are authorized to be 
appropriated, out of funds otherwise authorized to be appropriated to 
the National Science Foundation, $7,700,000 for fiscal year 2000 for 
the Network for Earthquake Engineering Simulation. In addition to 
amounts appropriated under section 12(c), there are authorized to be 
appropriated to the National Science Foundation for the Network for 
Earthquake Engineering Simulation--
          ``(1) $28,200,000 for fiscal year 2001;
          ``(2) $24,400,000 for fiscal year 2002;
          ``(3) $4,500,000 for fiscal year 2003; and
          ``(4) $17,000,000 for fiscal year 2004.''.

SEC. 6. SCIENTIFIC EARTHQUAKE STUDIES ADVISORY COMMITTEE.

  (a) Establishment.--The Director of the United States Geological 
Survey shall establish a Scientific Earthquake Studies Advisory 
Committee.
  (b) Organization.--The Director shall establish procedures for 
selection of individuals not employed by the Federal Government who are 
qualified in the seismic sciences and other appropriate fields and may, 
pursuant to such procedures, select up to ten individuals, one of whom 
shall be designated Chairman, to serve on the Advisory Committee. 
Selection of individuals for the Advisory Committee shall be based 
solely on established records of distinguished service, and the 
Director shall ensure that a reasonable cross-section of views and 
expertise is represented. In selecting individuals to serve on the 
Advisory Committee, the Director shall seek and give due consideration 
to recommendations from the National Academy of Sciences, professional 
societies, and other appropriate organizations.
  (c) Meetings.--The Advisory Committee shall meet at such times and 
places as may be designated by the Chairman in consultation with the 
Director.
  (d) Duties.--The Advisory Committee shall advise the Director on 
matters relating to the United States Geological Survey's participation 
in the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program, including the 
United States Geological Survey's roles, goals, and objectives within 
that Program, its capabilities and research needs, guidance on 
achieving major objectives, and establishing and measuring performance 
goals. The Advisory Committee shall issue an annual report to the 
Director for submission to Congress on or before September 30 of each 
year. The report shall describe the Advisory Committee's activities and 
address policy issues or matters that affect the United States 
Geological Survey's participation in the National Earthquake Hazards 
Reduction Program.

SEC. 7. BUDGET COORDINATION.

  Section 5 of the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 (42 U.S.C. 
7704) is amended--
          (1) in subsection (b)(1)--
                  (A) by striking subparagraph (A) and redesignating 
                subparagraphs (B) through (F) as subparagraphs (A) 
                through (E), respectively; and
                  (B) by moving subparagraph (E), as so redesignated by 
                subparagraph (A) of this paragraph, so as to appear 
                immediately after subparagraph (D), as so redesignated; 
                and
          (2) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
  ``(c) Budget Coordination.--
          ``(1) Guidance.--The Agency shall each year provide guidance 
        to the other Program agencies concerning the preparation of 
        requests for appropriations for activities related to the 
        Program, and shall prepare, in conjunction with the other 
        Program agencies, an annual Program budget to be submitted to 
        the Office of Management and Budget.
          ``(2) Reports.--Each Program agency shall include with its 
        annual request for appropriations submitted to the Office of 
        Management and Budget a report that--
                  ``(A) identifies each element of the proposed Program 
                activities of the agency;
                  ``(B) specifies how each of these activities 
                contributes to the Program; and
                  ``(C) states the portion of its request for 
                appropriations allocated to each element of the 
                Program.''.
                                 ______
                                 
H.R. 1184--The Earthquake Hazards Reduction Authorization Act of 1999: 
                       Section-by-Section Summary
Sec. 1 Short title
    Cities the Act as the ``Earthquake Hazards Reduction Authorization 
Act of 1999.''
Sec. 2. Authorization of appropriations
    Provides two-year authorizations for the agencies participating in 
the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program as follows:
    (a) Federal Emergency Management Agency.--Amends Act of 1977 to 
authorize $19.8 million for FY 2000 and $20.4 million for FY 2001.
    (b) U.S. Geological Survey.--
    (1) Amends Act of 1977 to authorize $46.1 million for FY 2000, 
which includes $3.5 million for the Global Seismic System and $100,000 
for the Advisory Committee on External Earthquake Research, and $47.5 
million for FY 2001, which includes $3.6 million for the Global Seismic 
System and $100,000 for the Advisory Committee on External Earthquake 
Research. Of these amounts, $9.0 million for FY 2000 and $9.5 million 
for FY 2001 are to be used for external research.
    (2) Amends the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act for FYs 1998 and 
1999 to authorize $1.6 million for FY 2000 and $1.65 million for FY 
2001 for the Seismic Hazard Warning System pilot program.
    (c) National Science Foundation.--Amends Act of 1977 to authorize 
out of sums otherwise authorized $29.9 million ($19 million for 
engineering and $10.9 million for geosciences research) for FY 2000 and 
to authorize without reference to other authorizations $30.8 ($19.6 
million for engineering and $11.2 million for geosciences research) for 
FY 2001.
    (d) National Institute for Standards and Technology.--Amends Act of 
1977 to authorize out of sums otherwise authorized $2.2 million for FY 
2000 and $2.265 million for FY 2001.
Sec. 3. Repeals
    Repeals Section 10 and subsections 12(e) and (f) of the 1977 Act, 
each of which is obsolete.
Sec. 4. Advanced National Seismic Research and Monitoring System
    Amends the 1977 Act by adding the following Section:
    ``Sec. 13. Advanced National Seismic Research and Monitoring 
System.
    ``(a) Authorizes the Director of USGS to establish an Advanced 
National Seismic Research and Monitoring System (ANSRMS).
    ``(b) Requires within 120 days of enactment a five-year management 
plan for deploying and operating ANSRMS.
    ``(c) Authorizes in addition to sums authorized for USGS in section 
12(b) of the 1977 Act: $33.5 million for FY 2000; $33.7 million for FY 
2001; $33.7 million for FY 2002; $33.6 million for FY 2003; and $33.5 
million for FY 2004 for expansion and modernization of the monitoring 
system.
    ``(d) Authorizes in addition to sums authorized for USGS in Section 
1 (Section 12(b)): $4.5 million for FY 2000 and $10.3 million for FY 
2001 for operating the ANSRMS.''
Sec. 5. Network for earthquake engineering simulation
    Amends the 1977 Act by adding the following section:
    ``Sec. 14. Network for Earthquake Engineering Simulation.
    ``(a) Defines terms and authorize NSF to establish a Network for 
Earthquake Engineering Simulation that will upgrade, link, and 
integrate a complete system of test facilities in earthquake 
engineering.
    ``(b) Authorizes out of funds otherwise authorized to be 
appropriated to NSF $7.7 million for FY 2000 and authorize without 
reference to other authorizations $28.2 for FY 2001; $24.4 million for 
FY 2002; $4.5 million for FY 2003; and $17.0 million for 2004 for the 
Network for Earthquake Engineering Simulation.''
Sec. 6. Scientific Earthquake Studies Advisory Committee
    (a) Authorizes the Director of USGS to establish a Scientific 
Earthquake Studies Advisory Committee to provide USGS with scientific 
advice regarding its participation in the National Earthquake Hazards 
Reduction Program.
    (b) Directs the USGS Director to establish procedures for the 
selection of up to ten qualified individuals not employed by the 
Federal Government, one of whom shall be designated Chairman, to serve 
on the Advisory Committee. Individuals shall be selected solely on 
established records of distinguished service, and the Director shall 
ensure that the Advisory Committee represent a cross-section of views 
and expertise. The Director also shall seek and give due consideration 
to recommendations from the National Academy of Science, professional 
societies, and other appropriate organizations.
    (c) Establishes procedures for calling meetings of the Advisory 
Committee. The Advisory Committee shall meet at such times and places 
as may be designated by the Chairman in consultation with the Director.
    (d) Explains the duties of the Advisory Committee.--It shall 
provide advice to the Director on matters relating to the USGS 
earthquake program--including USGS's roles, goals, and objectives, 
capabilities and research needs, and performance goals--and shall issue 
an annual report to the Director for submission to Congress on or 
before September 30 of each year. The report shall describe the 
Advisory Committee's activities and address policy issues or matters 
that affect the Geological Survey's participation in the Program.
Sec. 7. Budget coordination
    Amends the 1977 Act by:
    (1) Striking some language on budget responsibilities (which is 
moved to new Section 5(c)) and by moving some stray language in the 
law.
    (2) Adding the following at the end of the Section 5:
    ``(c) Budget Coordination.--
          ``(1) Requires greater co-ordinance on the budget for the 
        Program. Instructs FEMA, the lead agency, to provide guidance 
        to each Program agency in preparing annual budget requests.
         ``(2) Requires FEMA, in conjunction with the other Program 
        agencies, to prepare an annual budget to submit to OMB.''

                                          TABLE 1.--THE EARTHQUAKE HAZARDS REDUCTION AUTHORIZATION ACT OF 1999
                                                                [In millions of dollars]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                FY 2000       FY 2000         FY 2001         FY 2002         FY 2003         FY 2004
                           Agency                               request    authorization   authorization   authorization   authorization   authorization
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FEMA........................................................      19.8              19.8          20.4                NA              NA              NA
                                                             ===========================================================================================
USGS:
    General Activities \1\..................................      45.996            46.1          47.5                NA              NA              NA
    Real-Time Seismic Warning System........................       1.6               1.6           1.65               NA              NA              NA
    Advanced National Seismic Monitoring System.............       0.0              38.0          44.0              33.7            33.6            33.5
          Equipment.........................................       0.0              33.5          33.7              33.7            33.6            33.5
          Operation.........................................       0.0               4.5          10.3                NA              NA              NA
          Total, USGS.......................................      47.596            85.7          93.15             33.7            33.6            33.5
                                                             ===========================================================================================
NSF:
    Engineering & Geosciences Research......................    29,9                29,9          30.8                NA              NA              NA
    Network for Earthquake Engineering Simulation...........       7.7               7.7          28.2              24.4             4.5            17.0
                                                             -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, NSF............................................      37.6              37.6          59.0              24.4             4.5            17.0
                                                             ===========================================================================================
NIST........................................................       2.198             2.2           2.265              NA              NA              NA
                                                             ===========================================================================================
      Total, NEHRP..........................................     107.194           145.3         174.815            58.1            38.1            50.5
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Figure includes: (1) for FY 2000 authorization, $3.5 million for the Global Seismic Network, $100,000 for the Scientific Earthquake Studies Advisory
  Committee, and a minimum of $9.0 million for external research; and (2) for FY 2001 authorization, $3.6 million for the Global Seismic Network,
  $100,000 for the Scientific Earthquake Studies Advisory Committee, and a minimum of $9.5 million for external research.

                         TABLE 2.--THE EARTHQUAKE HAZARDS REDUCTION AUTHORIZATION ACT OF 1999: FY 1999 ENACTED, FY 2000 REQUEST, AND FY 2000 AND FY 2001 AUTHORIZATIONS
                                                                                    [In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                             FY 2000 authorization change (+ or --)      FY 2001 authorization
                                                                                                                          --------------------------------------------      change (+ or --)
                               Agency                                 FY 1999    FY 2000       FY 2000         FY 2001                                                --------------------------
                                                                      enacted    request    authorization   authorization   FY 1999    Percent    FY 2000    Percent       FY 2000
                                                                                                                            enacted               request               authorization   Percent
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FEMA...............................................................     18,900     19,800          19,800          20,400        900        4.8          0        0.0             600        3.0
USGS...............................................................     52,391     47,596          85,700          93,150     33,309       63.6     41,585       94.3           7,450        8.7
NSF................................................................     29,900     37,600          37,600          59,000      7,700       25.8          0        0.0          21,400       56.9
NIST...............................................................      2,060      2,198           2,200           2,265        140        6.8          2        0.1              65        3.0
                                                                    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total........................................................    103,251    107,194         145,300         174,815     42,049       40.7     38,106       35.5          29,515       20.3
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Chairman Sensenbrenner. I ask that the members proceed with 
amendments in their order on the roster.
    The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Oregon, who has the 
first amendment.
    Mr. Wu. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have an amendment at the 
desk.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. The clerk will report the 
amendment.
    The Clerk. ``Amendment to H.R. 1184''----
    Mr. Wu. I ask unanimous consent that the amendment be 
considered as read.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. Without objection.
    [The information follows:]

 AMENDMENT ROSTER--H.R. 1184, EARTHQUAKE HAZARDS REDUCTION AUTHORIZATION
                               ACT OF 1999
------------------------------------------------------------------------
       No.                 Sponsor                   Description
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1................  Mr. Wu.................  Funding amendment
2................  M4. Wu.................  Out-year funding amendment
3................  Ms. Woolsey............  Amendment to insert a new
                                             section titled ``Report on
                                             At-Risk Populations''
4................  Mr. Larson.............  Amendment to insert a new
                                             section titled ``Public
                                             Access to Earthquake
                                             Information''
5................  Mr. Larson.............  Amendment to amend the
                                             definition of ``Lifeline''
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                Amendment to H.R. 1184 Offered by Mr. Wu
    Page 6, line 16, strike ``$33,700,000'' and insert ``35,100,000''.
    Page 6, line 17, strike ``$33,600,000'' and insert ``$35,000,000''.
                                 ______
                                 
                Amendment to H.R. 1184 Offered by Mr. Wu
    Page 7, line 1, strike ``and''.
    Page 7, line 2, strike the period, close quotation marks, and 
period at the end and insert a semicolon.
    Page 7, after line 2, insert the following new subparagraphs:
                  ``(C) $15,900,000 for fiscal year 2002;
                  ``(D) $22,600,000 for fiscal year 2003; and
                  ``(E) $28,900,000 for fiscal year 2004.''.
                                 ______
                                 
             Amendment to H.R. 1184 Offered by Ms. Woolsey
    Page 11, after line 5, insert the following new section:

SEC. 8. REPORT ON AT-RISK POPULATIONS.

    Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this 
Act, and after a period for public comment, the Director of the Federal 
Emergency Management Agency shall transmit to the Congress a report 
describing the elements of the Program that specifically address the 
needs of at-risk populations, including the elderly, persons with 
disabilities, non-English-speaking families, single-parent households, 
and the poor. Such report shall also identify additional actions that 
could be taken to address those needs, and make recommendations for any 
additional legislative authority required to take such actions.
                                 ______
                                 
              Amendment to H.R. 1184 Offered by Mr. Larson
    Page 11, after line 5, insert the following new section:

SEC. 8. PUBLIC ACCESS TO EARTHQUAKE INFORMATION.

    Section 5(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 
1966 (42 U.S.C. 7704(b)(2)(A)(ii) is amended by inserting ``, and 
development of means of increasing public access to available locality-
specific information that may assist the public in preparing for or 
responding to earthquakes'' after ``and the general public''.
                                 ______
                                 
              Amendment to H.R. 1184 Offered by Mr. Larson
    Page 11, after line 5, insert the following new section:

SEC. 8. LIFELINES.

    Section 4(6) of the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 (42 
U.S.C. 7703(6)) is amended by inserting ``and infrastructure'' after 
``communication facilities''.

    Chairman Sensenbrenner. The gentleman is recognized for 
five minutes.
    Mr. Wu. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. First, let me 
indicate my strong support for H.R. 1184. I particularly 
applaud the Chairman's farsightedness in authorizing $168 
million over the next five years for expansion and 
modernization of the seismic monitoring infrastructure of the 
United States.
    Unfortunately, Oregon is at great risk from major 
earthquakes. I am looking forward to the benefits that will 
flow from such a modernization effort, both in Oregon and 
nationwide. It is not just my colleagues in California who 
suffer from this problem of earthquakes. In fact, I might like 
to add at this point that I think as--I would like to thank my 
colleagues from California because the first I did upon 
arriving in Oregon was take a geology class. One of the things 
I found, if you look at a map of Oregon, you see a rectangle. 
The part of the rectangle, there is a little part of it that 
goes up. There is a bump in the upper left hand corner of the 
State of Oregon. That is a bend in the Columbia River. That is 
the First Congressional District occupies that bend and that 
bump. That bend in the Columbia River was actually created by 
California ramming Oregon from the south over the last 20 
million years. [Laughter.]
    I would like to thank my colleagues from California for 
their efforts in creating my Congressional district. 
[Laughter.]
    But like so many other things that start in California, 
there are unintended side effects. [Laughter.]
    One of them is that periodically every say 300 to 400 
years, the recent research shows that we may have up to 
magnitude 9.5 or magnitude 10 earthquakes, very, very 
significant earthquakes. So I will be introducing two 
amendments to the bill, both of which relate to the proposed 
Advanced National Seismic Research and Monitoring System. The 
first amendment, which is now before us, would add an 
additional $2.8 million over two years to the seismic network 
to procure two portable seismograph networks. Seismologists 
routinely deploy temporary portable networks to monitor after 
shocks or to better understand the impact of an earthquake in a 
particular region. The two networks supported by my amendment 
would be a natural supplement to the permanent monitoring 
networks.
    The Chairman has been conscientious in authorizing the 
elements of a seismic monitoring system. That will be contained 
in a plan that will be forwarded to us shortly by the 
Administration. I believe these portable networks will also be 
part of that plan. These portable networks are very necessary 
to a comprehensive capability for post-earthquake monitoring 
and assessment of damage. I would hate to see any delay in 
developing them. I urge adoption.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. Will the gentleman yield?
    Mr. Wu. Yes, Mr. Chairman.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. I am pleased to accept this 
amendment. I want to commend the gentleman from Oregon for 
spotting the fact that the U.S. Geological Survey sent us the 
wrong numbers when they asked us to draft this bill. The 
numbers sent by the USGS omitted this very vital piece of 
equipment which is necessary to make the new earthquake 
monitoring system work the way it is planned. So I think that 
he has spotted an omission. I think that it is a good 
amendment, and I am pleased to support it.
    Mr. Wu. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. The gentleman yields back the 
balance of his time. Is there further discussion on the 
amendment by the gentleman from Oregon, Mr. Wu?
    Mr. Smith of Michigan. Mr. Chairman?
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. The gentleman from Michigan, Mr. 
Smith.
    Mr. Smith of Michigan. I would just also like to comment on 
what appeared to be somewhat of a scolding for USGS. Since we 
just heard of this mistake from USGS in the last few days, I 
would just publicly hope that since we had the first hearing on 
this bill back in February, that maybe it would be good to be 
more timely, but I appreciate Mr. Wu's correction of this 
mistake. Thank you.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. The gentleman yields back the 
balance of his time. Is there further discussion on the 
amendment?
    [No response.]
    If not, the question is on the adoption of the amendment 
proposed by the gentleman from Oregon, Mr. Wu.
    All those in favor will signify by saying aye.
    Opposed, no.
    The ayes appear to have it. The ayes have it, and the 
amendment is agreed to.
    The second amendment is also by Mr. Wu. The Chair 
recognizes the gentleman from Oregon.
    Mr. Wu. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Again, I salute you for 
including authorization.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. Will the gentleman from Oregon 
offer his amendment, and have the clerk report it. Then I will 
recognize you.
    Mr. Wu. Thank you very much. Mr. Chairman, I have an 
amendment at the desk.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. The clerk will report the 
amendment.
    Mr. Wu. I ask unanimous consent that the amendment be 
considered as read.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. Without objection, so ordered.
    The gentleman is recognized for five minutes.
    Mr. Wu. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Again, I salute you for 
including authorization for an Advanced Seismic Monitoring 
System in this bill. I think that this initiative deserves this 
level of funding. I would go one step further to say that it 
deserves additional funds for operations for the same five-year 
period for which modernization and expansion have been 
authorized.
    The underlying bill supports operations for two years, 
Fiscal Year 2000 and Fiscal Year 2001. The amendment before us 
would extend the operational funds for the Advanced Seismic 
Monitoring System by three additional years. Specifically, this 
amendment would authorize an additional $67.4 million to cover 
increased operational costs for the research and monitoring 
system for Fiscal Years 2002, 2003, and 2004.
    However, I recognize that this would mean extending by 
three years the base program authorization for USGS as well, 
which may be a problem for you in this Committee. Therefore, I 
will ask that my amendment be withdrawn. In so doing, however, 
I would ask that you include report language stating the 
Committee's intention to authorize system operations in future 
legislation.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. Will the gentleman yield?
    Mr. Wu. Yes, Mr. Chairman.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. First of all, let me say I believe 
that the gentleman's amendment is very well intentioned. The 
problem that I have is not with seeing this system through to 
completion. I do support that. But the USGS has not been all 
that firm in its numbers, as we found out with the necessity 
for the previous amendment that you offered. As you know, I am 
very strong on oversight. This Committee has established a very 
good record on oversight. I would like to make sure before we 
go ask our colleagues to approve the rest of the money for this 
system, that the USGS is able to have some firm numbers which 
they don't have now.
    So I believe the report language that is suggested by the 
gentleman from Oregon is very constructive and very 
meritorious, and I appreciate his offer to withdraw his 
amendment, I know that we will be revisiting this in the 
future, and I fully anticipate that when we do this bill two 
years from now, we will have some much better numbers, and we 
can have an authorization of this program through its 
completion.
    Mr. Wu. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would yield back the 
balance of my time.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. Without objection, the amendment is 
withdrawn.
    The third amendment on the list is by the gentlewoman from 
California, Ms. Woolsey.
    Ms. Woolsey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have an amendment 
at the desk.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. The clerk will report the 
amendment.
    The Clerk. ``Amendment to H.R. 1184 offered by Ms. 
Woolsey''----
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. Without objection, the amendment is 
considered as read and open for amendment at any point.
    The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California for 
five minutes.
    Ms. Woolsey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I ask unanimous 
consent to consider the bill as read.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. Already done.
    Ms. Woolsey. Oh, that's right. I wasn't listening. I'm 
sorry.
    First of all, I want to indicate my strong support for H.R. 
1148. You do know that my district is directly north of San 
Francisco, across the Golden Gate Bridge. I have the San 
Andreas fault running through the western portion of my 
district. We have earthquakes.
    My amendment, however, goes in a little bit different 
direction than talking totally about earthquakes. I would like 
to talk about FEMA and directing FEMA to report on the elements 
of the National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Programs that 
address the needs of at-risk populations: the elderly, the 
disabled, the non-English speaking, and single parent 
households, those that often times are overlooked in times of 
great need.
    Since its inception in 1977 and particularly in the last 
decade, NEHRP has done a superb job in reaching out to State 
and local officials and improving building codes, and in 
general, assessing the level of seismic risk across the 
country. But there are other risk feature dealing with 
thesocial, cultural, and economic situation of individuals and 
individual groups that I suggest we consider in this bill.
    I am aware of NSF supporting social science research, but 
the extent of the research efforts and the findings of the 
research in relationship to at-risk population must be 
addressed, I believe, more clearly. Not only will this report 
provide valuable information on what has been done to date, it 
will bring into focus what we must do in the future to reach 
those populations that incur more damage in a disaster due to 
age, due to economic status or physical limitation.
    This is an issue that I believe the Science Committee and 
the Congress as a whole must have interest in. Therefore, I ask 
for your support of this amendment.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. Will the gentlewoman yield?
    Ms. Woolsey. Yes, Mr. Chairman.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. I am prepared to accept this 
amendment with a caveat. That is, is that FEMA is not within 
the jurisdiction of the Science Committee. The adoption of this 
amendment may provoke a sequential referral of this legislation 
to the committee that does have jurisdiction over FEMA.
    I do think that your proposal, again, has merit. I think 
that the more information that is passed around relative to 
these problems to at-risk population and others, we will be 
able to mitigate the damage that earthquakes cause when they do 
hit. So again, I am prepared to accept the amendment. But just 
remember, if the bill goes off to another committee and we have 
to get our crow-bars out to pry it out of there, I told you so.
    Ms. Woolsey. All right. I promise to follow it and go to 
that committee with my same pleas.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. The gentlewoman yields back the 
balance of her time. Is there further discussion on the 
amendment by the gentlewoman from California?
    [No response.]
    Hearing none, all those in favor will signify by saying 
aye.
    Opposed, no.
    The ayes appear to have it. The ayes have it, and the 
amendment is agreed to.
    The next amendment is by the gentleman from Connecticut.
    Mr. Larson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have an amendment at 
the desk.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. The clerk will report the 
amendment.
    The Clerk. ``Amendment to H.R. 1184 offered by Mr. 
Larson.''----
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. Without objection, the amendment is 
considered as read, and open for amendment at any point.
    The gentleman from Connecticut is recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Larson. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I request 
permission to summarize and proceed.
    I want to start by also indicating my strong support for 
H.R. 1184, and also indicate that based on listening to my 
colleague David Wu, that I know of nothing that California has 
done to the State of Connecticut. [Laughter.]
    But do also offer this amendment in the spirit of the 
gentlewoman from California, recognizing that this also relates 
to the dissemination of data. It calls for FEMA to develop a 
means of increasing public access to locality-specific 
information, that they may assist in preparing for and 
responding to earthquakes. The bill should reflect our current 
capabilities. We now have the ability to generate detailed 
seismic maps in specific geographical regions. The maps are now 
used for determining sites for increased monitoring, seismic 
zoning, emergency response planning, and placement of 
lifelines. But additionally, they can be used by the general 
public to help them prepare and respond to earthquakes.
    The Committee is supporting a 40-percent increase in the 
NEHRP and also 93 of which is for modernization and expansion 
of our earthquake infrastructure. This effort will undoubtedly 
enhance our current ability to generate hazard maps which show 
the severity of the expected shaking of ground and response to 
earthquakes. These maps of course can be a great help to an 
increasingly sophisticated public, but only if people are aware 
of the resource. This amendment would ensure that FEMA would 
aggressively make this information available to all Americans. 
I understand the chairman's previous admonition with respect to 
FEMA and its jurisdiction. I urge adoption of the amendment.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. Will the gentleman yield?
    Mr. Larson. Yes.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. First of all, I am prepared to 
accept the amendment. It's a good one. This one does not 
trigger a sequential referral because the Earthquake Hazards 
Reduction Act is in the jurisdiction of this Committee. So you 
don't have the same problem as the gentlewoman from 
Connecticut.
    Is there further discussion on the Larson amendment?
    Mr. Weldon of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman?
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. The gentleman from Pennsylvania.
    Mr. Weldon of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, thank you. I will 
be brief.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. You are recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Weldon of Pennsylvania. I do support the bill, and Ido 
support the effort to include this amendment, as well as the other 
amendments. I just want to raise a point that I think has been alluded 
to. That is, that this bill is very laudable. I applaud the Committee 
Chairman and Ranking Member for their leadership in this area. But it 
reminds me that in the markup of our defense authorization bill in the 
R&D account lines, we have at least $58 million for very similar 
initiatives that are primarily--and much of this work, by the way, is 
being done is California.
    Our specific purpose from a security standpoint is not just 
earthquakes, but seismic events like the illegal testing of 
nuclear weapons underground, such as we saw in the past couple 
of years reportedly at Novaya Zemlya in Russia.
    I just want to make sure that we are coordinating the 
activities of the various agencies because as you look at the 
funding level here, which probably is not totally adequate, 
maybe it is. But I look at the Defense budget, and we are 
spending, to my best recollection off the top of my head, at 
least $58 million of additional research money which is 
designed to provide cutting-edge technology for quickly 
detecting seismic activities around the world. We ought to have 
some way of making sure that there is coordination between what 
DOD is doing, such as you are referring with the FEMA 
jurisdictional issue here, and the work that is being done by 
the science agencies.
    Mr. Weldon of Florida. Would the gentleman yield for a 
question?
    Mr. Weldon of Pennsylvania. I would be happy to yield.
    Mr. Weldon of Florida. I was under the impression that for 
national security reasons, a lot of the information that is 
gathered by DOD is not shared with the scientific community. I 
don't know if the Chairman can comment on that, but the 
understanding that I had is that some of the information 
gathered by DOD is not shared.
    Mr. Weldon of Pennsylvania. The gentleman's point is well 
taken. I am only referring to the public unclassified amount of 
money that we spend on systems that are available. In fact, 
when I was out in California, I visited the research facility 
where we are funding. There is another category of black budget 
program work that is underway that is also in this area. What I 
want to make sure of is that since the Science Committee has a 
legitimate leadership role on the issue of preparing for and 
dealing with earthquakes, that we ought to make sure that DOD 
is in fact supporting and coordinating that effort with 
research work that they are doing, with a very sizable amount 
of money in the same technology area to make sure there is 
coordination.
    My fear is that, and maybe staff can comment on this, my 
fear is that there is not coordination, and that in fact, we 
are spending money in DOD and in the science agencies, that not 
in fact is being fully understood.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. Would the gentleman yield?
    Mr. Weldon of Pennsylvania. I would be happy to yield.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. I would hope that the staff would 
be able to make inquiry to see what type of coordination there 
is relative to the sharing and coordination of the unclassified 
part of the DOD work.
    Mr. Weldon of Pennsylvania. That's fine. Thank you. I thank 
the gentleman.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. The gentleman yields back the 
balance of his time.
    Mr. Brown. Mr. Chairman?
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. Further discussion on the Larson 
amendment number 1?
    Mr. Brown. Mr. Chairman?
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. The gentleman from California.
    Mr. Brown. Mr. Chairman, I am----
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. Is recognized for five minutes.
    Mr. Brown. I am in full support of the Larson amendment. 
Let me point out some aspects of the amendment which I think 
perhaps haven't been adequately elaborated on. This amendment 
not only calls for the dissemination of earthquake data, which 
is very important and we can do that, but it also calls for the 
development of means of increasing public access to locality-
specific real time and other locality-specific information that 
may assist them.
    The point I am trying to make is in trying to evaluate the 
consequences of an earthquake, you have to know both the 
severity and location of the earthquake, which is available 
from our seismic network. But you also need to know certain 
geological information, which may or may not be readily 
available, but is becoming increasingly available, and also 
soil conditions.
    We all know that the impact of an earthquake is accentuated 
if you have liquefaction occurring, and that certain soils are 
prime to liquefaction. I happen to live in a beautiful city 
which has an ample supply of water located about two feet below 
the surface. Any time there is an earthquake, that is likely to 
cause a considerable amplification of the effects of the 
earthquake itself.
    We have a major problem now in trying to get rid of that 
underground water, which I hope that we can ship to some desert 
that needs it very badly. But the real trick here, and one that 
we are very capable of resolving, is combining information from 
different fields and calculating risk factors based upon that 
combination of different kinds of knowledge.
    This amendment speaks to that problem. I think it is very 
important that we consider it fully.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. The gentleman yields back the 
balance of his time. Further discussion on Larson amendment 
number 1?
    [No response.]
    Hearing none, all those in favor signify by saying aye.
    Opposed, no.
    The ayes appear to have it. The ayes have it, and the 
amendment is agreed to.
    The last amendment on the roster is also by the gentleman 
from Connecticut, who is recognized to offer it.
    Mr. Larson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have an amendment at 
the desk.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. The clerk will report the 
amendment.
    The Clerk. ``Amendment to H.R. 1184''----
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. Without objection, the amendment is 
considered as read, and open for amendment at any point.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. The gentleman from Connecticut is 
recognized for five minutes.
    Mr. Larson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The second amendment, 
which is now before us, would change the definition of 
lifelines in the Earthquake Act to make it clear that in 
today's society, the Internet is a critical lifeline. This may 
not have been true in 1977, as Mr. Brown pointed out earlier, 
when the law was first enacted, but it is certainly true today. 
The original law cites communications facilities as a lifeline, 
but not communications infrastructure. Today there are fiber 
optic links dedicated solely to the transfer of information 
over the Internet because data traffic is now currently 
increasing at about 10 times the rate of phone traffic. This 
makes this change necessary.
    We also are concerned with the routers and servers managing 
and storing this traffic. Disaster recovery plans must account 
for restoring high speed links and for backup data bases. This 
increasingly critical data infrastructure should be recognized 
in the bill language. Therefore, I call for the changes of 
definition of lifelines to refer to communication facilities 
and infrastructure, just as the bill currently refers to 
transportation facilities and infrastructure. I urge its 
adoption.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. Will the gentleman yield?
    Mr. Larson. Yes. Mr. Chairman.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. I am pleased to accept the 
gentleman's amendment.
    Mr. Larson. Thank you.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. The gentleman yields back the 
balance of his time.
    Is there further discussion on the Larson amendment number 
2?
    [No response.]
    Hearing none, all those in favor signify by saying aye.
    Opposed, no.
    The ayes appear to have it. The ayes have it, and the 
amendment is agreed to.
    Are there further amendments to the bill?
    Mr. Smith of Michigan. Mr. Chairman, I have report language 
at the desk.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. Amendments first. Further amendment 
to the bill?
    [No response.]
    If there are no further amendments, the gentleman from 
Michigan, Mr. Smith, is recognized for report language.
    Mr. Smith of Michigan. I have report language at the desk.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. The clerk will report the proposed 
report language.
    The Clerk. ``Report language submitted by Mr. Nick Smith. 
To address this issue''----
    Mr. Smith of Michigan. Mr. Chairman, I move that the report 
language be considered read.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. Without objection.
    [The information follows:]

          Report Language Offered by the Honorable Nick Smith

    The Committee expects FEMA to reinvigorate its coordination 
activities among NEHRP agencies. Additionally, FEMA, as the 
lead agency shall identify a list of Federal agencies that 
contain earthquake-related programs that contribute towards the 
goals of the NEHRP. An associate agency would be defined as a 
Federal agency other than a NEHRP agency that administers 
program(s) that either perform earthquake-related research or 
develop standards, codes or other material related to reducing 
earthquake losses. FEMA will convene a series of meetings of 
senior level officials (Assistant Secretary or equivalent 
level), establish points of contact, and determine avenues of 
mutual cooperation with respective associate agencies. If 
agreeable to the parties, the NEHRP ``core'' will be expanded 
to include broader participation by associate agencies. These 
agencies will participate at a minimum at the Interagency 
Coordination Committee level as set forth in the statute.

    Chairman. Sensenbrenner. The gentleman is recognized for 
five minutes.
    Mr. Smith of Michigan. This report language stems from some 
of the agencies reporting a lack of coordination and 
cooperation. We worked with Mr. James Lee Whit, the Director of 
FEMA, in developing this language that calls for more 
coordination between local, State, and Federal agencies that 
have earthquake programs. In general, it better identifies the 
gaps where Federal Government should be taking up a larger 
role, and it provides a level of legitimacy to the respective 
earthquake related work of their agency.
    Taking the earthquake bill up in our Committee, one area 
that is not addressed in this report language, and by the way, 
this report language has been concurred with by the minority, 
other areas that we'll be exploring over the next two years is 
why insurance companies aren't willing to reduce the cost of 
their insurance to those builders, home owners, commercial, 
that have complied with the new engineering standards that will 
better protect those facilities, those buildings, from damages 
from earthquakes. So we are looking for more cooperation also 
from the insurance industry, and we'll be pursuing that over 
the next couple years. The report language, Mr. Chairman, I 
think should not be objectionable, cleared by FEMA and the 
minority staff as well as the majority.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. The gentleman yields back the 
balance of his time.
    Is there further discussion on the gentleman from 
Michigan's proposed report language?
    [No response.]
    Hearing none, all those in favor will signify by saying 
aye.
    Opposed, no.
    The ayes appear to have it. The ayes have it, and the 
report language is agreed to.
    Further proposals for report language?
    [No response.]
    Hearing none, the question is on the bill. Those in favor 
will signify by saying aye.
    Opposed, no.
    The ayes appear to have it. The ayes have it. The bill is 
agreed to.
    To make the motion to report the bill, the Chair recognizes 
the gentleman from California, Mr. Brown.
    Mr. Brown. I am doing this in lieu of--because of the 
absence of the Ranking Subcommittee Member. Mr. Chairman, I 
move that the Committee report the bill H.R. 1184 as amended. 
Furthermore, I move to instruct the staff to prepare the 
legislative report, make technical and conforming amendments, 
and that the Chairman take all necessary steps to bring the 
bill before the House for consideration.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. The question is on reporting the 
bill favorably. The Chair notes the presence of a reporting 
quorum. Those in favor will signify by saying aye.
    Those opposed, no.
    The ayes appear to have it. The ayes have it. The bill is 
reported favorably.
    All members will have two subsequent calendar days in which 
to submit supplemental, minority, or additional views on this 
measure. Furthermore, without objection, pursuant to the clause 
1 of rule 22 of the rules of the House of Representatives, the 
Committee authorizes the Chairman to offer such motions as may 
be necessary in the House to go to conference with the Senate 
on the bill. Without objection, so ordered.
    Furthermore, without objection, the Chair requests 
unanimous consent that H.R. 1184 and H.R. 209 be reported as a 
single amendment in the nature of a substitute, reflecting the 
amendments that have been agreed to heretofore. Hearing none, 
so ordered.

                                

```