89–006 

111TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 2d Session 111–392 

OCEAN, COASTAL, AND WATERSHED EDUCATION ACT 

JANUARY 12, 2010.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State 

of the Union and ordered to be printed 

Mr. RAHALL, from the Committee on Natural Resources, 

submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

together with 

ADDITIONAL VIEWS 

[To accompany H.R. 3644] 

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office] 

The Committee on Natural Resources, to whom was referred the 

bill (H.R. 3644) to direct the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to establish education and watershed programs which 

advance environmental literacy, including preparedness and adaptability for the likely impacts of climate change in coastal watershed 

regions, having considered the same, report favorably thereon with 

an amendment and recommend that the bill as amended do pass. 

The amendment is as follows: 

Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the following: 

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Ocean, Coastal, and Watershed Education Act’’. 

SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE. 

(a) FINDINGS.—The Congress finds the following: 

(1) The United States faces major challenges, such as mitigating and adapting 

to the impacts of climate change, stewarding critical coastal and marine resources including fish and wildlife habitat while sustaining the commercial and 

recreational activities that depend on these resources, and improving resilience 

to natural disasters, that collectively threaten human health, economic development, environmental quality, and national security. 

(2) Communities in coastal watersheds are particularly vulnerable to these increasingly urgent, interconnected, and complex challenges and need support for 

teacher professional development and experiential learning among students of 

all ages. 


dcolon on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with REPORTS
2 

(3) These challenges can be met with the help of comprehensive programs 

specifically targeted to engage coastal watershed communities, schoolchildren, 

and the general public to develop engaged and environmentally literate citizens 

who are better able to understand complex environmental issues, assess risk, 

evaluate proposed plans, and understand how individual decisions affect the environment at local, regional, national, and global scales. 

(4) The intrinsic social and conservation values of wildlife-dependent and 

other outdoor recreation can play an important role in outdoor educational programs that address the myriad of coastal and ocean concerns, as well as instill 

a sustainable conservation ethic that will enable them to face those challenges 

to the betterment of both the environment and coastal communities. 

(b) PURPOSE.—The purpose of this Act is to advance environmental literacy, develop public awareness and appreciation of the economic, social, recreational, and 

environmental benefits of coastal watersheds, and emphasize stewardship of critical 

coastal and marine resources, including an understanding of how climate change is 

impacting those resources, through the establishment of— 

(1) an Environmental Literacy Grant Program; and 

(2) regional programs under the B-WET Program. 

SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS. 

In this Act: 

(1) ADMINISTRATOR.—The term ‘‘Administrator’’ means the Administrator of 

the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 

(2) BAY-WATERSHED EDUCATION.—The term ‘‘bay-watershed education’’ means 

environmental education focused on watersheds, with an emphasis on stewardship of critical coastal and marine resources, including an understanding of how 

climate change is impacting those resources. 

(3) B-WET PROGRAM.—The term ‘‘B-WET Program’’ means the Bay-Watershed Education and Training Program of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration, as in effect immediately before the enactment of this Act and 

modified under this Act or any subsequently enacted Act. 

(4) ELIGIBLE ENTITY.—The term ‘‘eligible entity’’ means a State agency, local 

agency, school district, institution of higher education, or for-profit or non-profit 

nongovernmental organization, consortium, or other entity that the Administrator finds has demonstrated expertise and experience in the development of 

the institutional, intellectual, or policy resources to help environmental education become more effective and widely practiced. 

(5) ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION.—The term ‘‘environmental education’’ means 

interdisciplinary formal and informal learning about the relevant interrelationships between dynamic environmental and human systems, and which results 

in increasing the learner’s capacity for decisionmaking and stewardship regarding natural and community resources. 

(6) ENVIRONMENTAL LITERACY.—The term ‘‘environmental literacy’’ means the 

capacity to perceive and interpret the relative health of environmental systems 

and the interrelationships between natural and social systems and technology, 

and to assess options and take appropriate action to maintain, restore, or improve the health of those systems. 

(7) HIGH-LEVERAGE PROJECTS.—The term ‘‘high-leverage projects’’ means 

projects supported by grants authorized under this Act that use Federal, State 

and nongovernmental financial, technical, and other resources in such a manner 

that the potential beneficial outcomes are highly magnified or enhanced. 

(8) STATE.—The term ‘‘State’’ means each of the several States of the United 

States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin 

Islands, Guam, American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana 

Islands, any other territory or possession of the United States, and any Indian 

tribe. 

SEC. 4. ENVIRONMENTAL LITERACY GRANT PROGRAM. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—The Administrator shall establish a national competitive grant 

program, to be known as the ‘‘Environmental Literacy Grant Program’’, under which 

the Administrator shall provide, subject to the availability of appropriations, financial assistance to— 

(1) expand the adoption of coastal, ocean, Great Lakes, and climate on all 

time scales education; 

(2) build administrative and technical capacity with coastal, ocean, and watershed communities and stakeholder groups to enhance their effectiveness; 

(3) encourage water-dependent, wildlife-dependent, and other outdoor recreation, experiential learning, and hands-on involvement with coastal and watershed resources as a method of promoting stewardship of those resources; and 


dcolon on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with REPORTS
3 

(4) develop and implement new approaches to advance coastal, ocean, Great 

Lakes, and climate on all time scales education and environmental literacy at 

national, regional, and local levels. 

(b) PRIORITIES.—In awarding grants under this section, the Administrator shall 

give priority consideration to innovative, strategic, high-leverage projects that demonstrate strong potential for being sustained in the future by a grant recipient beyond the time period in which activities are carried out with the grant. 

(c) GUIDELINES.—No later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act 

and after consultation with appropriate stakeholders, the Administrator shall publish in the Federal Register guidelines regarding the implementation of this grant 

program, including publication of criteria for eligible entities, identification of national priorities, establishment of performance measures to evaluate program effectiveness, information regarding sources of non-Federal matching funds or in-kind 

contributions, and reporting requirements for grant award recipients. 

(d) LIMITATION ON USE OF FUNDS BY ADMINISTRATOR.—Of the amounts made 

available to implement this section— 

(1) no less than 80 percent shall be used for competitive grants or cooperative 

agreements; 

(2) no more than 10 percent may be used by the Administrator to implement 

the grant program; and 

(3) no less than 10 percent of the annual funds appropriated for the program 

authorized under this section shall be used to fund contracts or cooperative 

agreements to conduct strategic planning, promote communications among 

grant recipients and within communities, coordinate grant activities to foster an 

integrated program, and oversee national evaluation efforts. 

SEC. 5. B-WET PROGRAM. 

(a) EXISTING PROGRAM.—The Administrator shall conduct the B-WET Program, 

including each of the regional programs conducted or under active consideration for 

creation under such program immediately before the enactment of this Act. 

(b) NEW REGIONAL PROGRAMS.— 

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Administrator may create new regional programs under 

the B-WET Program in accordance with a strategy issued under this subsection. 

(2) STRATEGY.— 

(A) IN GENERAL.—The Administrator shall issue a strategy for establishing such new regional programs. 

(B) CONTENTS.—The strategy shall include the following: 

(i) Evaluation of the need for new regional program in areas that are 

not served under the B-WET Program on the date of enactment of this 

Act. 

(ii) Identification of potential new regional programs, including a listing of potential principal non-Federal partners. 

(iii) A comprehensive budget for future expansion of the B-WET Program over the period for which appropriations are authorized under 

this Act. 

(iv) Such other information as the Administrator considers necessary. 

(C) CONSULTATION AND PUBLIC COMMENT.—The Administrator shall consult with relevant stakeholders and provide opportunity for public comment 

in the development of the strategy. 

(D) SUBMISSION TO CONGRESS.—The Administrator shall submit the strategy to the Committee on Natural Resources of the House of Representatives 

and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate by not later than 270 days after the date of enactment of this Act. 

(3) PRIORITY CONSIDERATION.—In creating new regional programs under this 

subsection, the Administrator shall give priority consideration to the needs of— 

(A) United States territories, including Guam, the Commonwealth of 

Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and American Samoa; 

(B) the Great Lakes States; 

(C) Alaska; and 

(D) the mid-Atlantic region. 

(c) MODIFICATION OF B-WET PROGRAM.— 

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Administrator may modify or realign regional programs 

under the B-WET Program, based on— 

(A) changes in regional needs; 

(B) mutual interest between the Administrator and relevant stakeholders 

within a region or regions; 

(C) changes in resources available to the Administrator to implement the 

B-WET Program; and 


dcolon on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with REPORTS
4 

(D) other circumstances as determined necessary by the Administrator. 

(2) CONSULTATION AND PUBLIC COMMENT.—The Administrator shall— 

(A) consult with the persons conducting a regional program and provide 

opportunity for public comment prior to making a final decision to modify 

or realign such regional program; and 

(B) publish public notice of such a decision no less than 30-days before 

the effective date of such a modification or realignment. 

(d) REGIONAL PROGRAM MANAGERS.— (1) APPOINTMENT OF REGIONAL PROGRAM MANAGER.—The Administrator shall 

be responsible for the selection, appointment, and when necessary replacement 

of a regional program manager for each regional program under the B-WET 

Program. 

(2) QUALIFICATIONS.—To qualify for appointment as a regional program manager, an individual must— 

(A) reside in the region for which appointed; and 

(B) demonstrate competence and expertise in bay-watershed education 

and training. 

(3) FUNCTIONS.—Each regional program manager shall— 

(A) be responsible for managing and administering the B-WET Program 

in the region for which appointed, in accordance with this Act; 

(B) determine the most appropriate communities within the region to be 

served by the B-WET Program; 

(C) encourage water-dependent, wildlife-dependent, and other outdoor 

recreation, experiential learning experiences for students, and hands-on involvement with coastal and watershed resources as a method of promoting 

stewardship of those resources and complementing core classroom curriculum; 

(D) support communication and collaboration among educators, natural 

resource planners and managers, and governmental and nongovernmental 

stakeholders; 

(E) share and distribute information regarding educational plans, strategies, learning activities, and curricula to all stakeholders within its region; 

(F) provide financial and technical assistance pursuant to the guidelines 

developed by the Administrator under this section; and 

(G) perform any additional duties as necessary to carry out the functions 

of the program. 

(e) PROGRAM GUIDELINES.—No later than 180 days after the date of enactment 

of this Act and after consultation with appropriate stakeholders, the Administrator 

shall publish in the Federal Register guidelines regarding the implementation of the 

B-WET Program, as follows: 

(1) CONTRACTS.—The Administrator shall create guidelines through which 

each regional program manager may enter into contracts (subject to the availability of appropriations) to support projects to design, demonstrate, evaluate, 

or disseminate practices, methods, or techniques related to Bay-watershed education and training. 

(2) GRANT MAKING AND COOPERATIVE AGREEMENTS.— 

(A) IN GENERAL.—The Administrator shall create guidelines through 

which each regional program manager may provide financial assistance in 

the form of a grant (subject to the availability of appropriations) or cooperative agreement to support projects that advance the purpose of this Act. 

The guidelines shall include criteria for eligible entities, identification of national priorities, establishment of performance measures to evaluate program effectiveness, and reporting requirements for grant award recipients. 

(B) PRIORITY.—In making grants under this paragraph, each regional program manager shall give priority to those projects that will— 

(i) promote bay-watershed education throughout the region concerned; 

(ii) advance strategic initiatives to incorporate bay-watershed education into formal and informal education systems; 

(iii) build capacity within bay-watershed education communities and 

stakeholder groups for expanding and strengthening their work; 

(iv) build bay-watershed education into professional development or 

training activities for educators; and 

(v) broadly replicate existing, proven bay-watershed education programs. 

(f) NON-FEDERAL SHARE.— 

(1) IN GENERAL.—In awarding grants under this section, the regional program 

managers shall give priority consideration to a project for which the Federal 

share does not exceed 75 percent of the aggregate cost of such project. 


dcolon on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with REPORTS
5 

(2) IN-KIND CONTRIBUTION.—The non-Federal share of the costs of any project 

supported by an award of grant funding under this section may be cash or the 

fair market value of services, equipment, donations, or any other form of in-kind 

contribution. 

(3) OTHER PRIORITY.—The regional program managers shall give priority consideration to a project that will be conducted by or benefit any under-served 

community, any community that has an inability to draw on other sources of 

funding because of the small population or low income of the community, or any 

other person for any other reason the Administrator considers appropriate and 

consistent with the purpose of this Act. 

(g) REGIONAL PROGRAM COORDINATION.—Within the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the Office of Education shall work with regional program 

managers on the following regional B-WET Program functions: 

(1) Strategic planning efforts. 

(2) Integration and coordination of programs. 

(3) Coordination of national evaluation efforts. 

(4) Promotion of network wide communications. 

(5) Selection of new Regional Program Managers. 

(6) Management, tracking, and oversight of the B-WET Program. 

(h) LIMITATION ON USE OF FUNDS BY ADMINISTRATOR.—Of the amounts made 

available to implement this section— 

(1) no less than 80 percent shall be used for implementation of regional program activities, including the award of grants; and 

(2) no more than 20 percent may be used by the Administrator to implement 

the regional programs and regional program coordination. 

SEC. 6. BIENNIAL REPORT. 

Not later than December 31, 2011, and biennially thereafter, the Administrator 

shall submit to Congress a report on the grant programs authorized under this Act. 

Each such report shall include a description of the eligible activities carried out with 

grants awarded under the Act during the previous two fiscal years, an assessment 

of the success and impact of such activities, and a description of the type of programs carried out with such grant, disaggregated by State. 

SEC. 7. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS. 

There are authorized to be appropriated to the Administrator to carry out this Act 

such sums as may be necessary for each of fiscal years 2011 through 2015. 

PURPOSE OF THE BILL

The purpose of H.R. 3644 is to direct the National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration to establish education and watershed 

programs which advance environmental literacy, including preparedness and adaptability for the likely impacts of climate change 

in coastal watershed regions. 

BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

Since 2002 and 2005, respectively, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Bay-Watershed Education and 

Training (B–WET) and Environmental Literacy Grant (ELG) Programs have made great strides in advancing ocean, atmospheric, 

and environmental literacy in the United States. With a focus on 

children in grades K–12, these programs have promoted public 

awareness and appreciation of the economic, social, and environmental benefits of coastal and watershed areas, and the importance 

of responsible stewardship of these invaluable resources. 

NOAA’s B–WET program provides regionally-focused funding 

through competitive grants to projects which promote ‘‘meaningful 

watershed educational experiences,’’ in which schoolchildren are involved in hands-on investigative or project-oriented learning experiences. There are currently six NOAA B–WET offices: Chesapeake 

Bay, California, Hawaii, Gulf Coast, New England, and Northwest. 

Over the program’s history, more than $40 million has been used 

to fund more than 530 B–WET projects across the country. In FisVerDate Nov 24 2008 06:42 Jan 13, 2010 Jkt 089006 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR392.XXX HR392

dcolon on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with REPORTS
6 

cal Year 2008 alone, 130 B–WET projects reached more than 

125,000 students and 6,000 teachers. 

NOAA’s ELG program focuses on creating an environmentally 

literate public that uses a comprehensive understanding of the role 

of the oceans, coasts and atmosphere to guide responsible social, 

environmental, and economic decision-making. Since 2005, 59 competitive awards totaling $25.8 million have been granted through 

the ELG program, enabling NOAA to partner with a variety of educational and nonprofit organizations that reach diverse audiences 

across the country. 

Both the B–WET and ELG programs were established through 

the congressional appropriations process. Neither program has 

been formally codified in law, although language to formally authorize the Chesapeake Bay B–WET Program as an activity of 

NOAA’s Chesapeake Bay Office exists in H.R. 1771, the Chesapeake Bay Science, Education, and Ecosystem Enhancement Act of 

2009, which passed the House of Representatives on September 30, 

2009. 

COMMITTEE ACTION

H.R. 3644 was introduced on September 24, 2009 by Representative Lois Capps (D–CA). The bill was referred to the Committee on 

Natural Resources, and within the Committee to the Subcommittee 

on Insular Affairs, Oceans and Wildlife. On October 15, 2009, the 

Subcommittee held a hearing where the Administration and several other witnesses testified in support of the legislation. 

On November 18, 2009, the Subcommittee was discharged from 

the further consideration of H.R. 3644 and the full Natural Resources Committee met to consider the bill. Rep. Capps offered an 

amendment in the nature of a substitute to limit the authorization 

of B–WET regional programs to those in existence or under active 

consideration for creation immediately before enactment of the Act 

(such as the Great Lakes regional program). Additionally, the 

amendment specified that the NOAA Administrator may expand 

the B–WET program pursuant to the development of a strategy for 

growth, which shall be reported to Congress and which shall include a prioritization of areas for expansion based on need, interest 

and available resources. The amendment also changed the authorization level to such sums as may be necessary for the next five fiscal years, and made other technical and clarifying changes. 

Representative Bill Cassidy (R–LA) offered an amendment to the 

amendment in the nature of a substitute that would level funding 

of the B–WET Program at $9,700,000 per year and reduce the 

funding level of the Environmental Literacy Grant Program to 

$8,500,000 per year through fiscal year 2015. It was not adopted 

by a roll call vote of 11 yeas to 16 nays, as follows: 


dcolon on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with REPORTS
7 

Insert offset folio 8 here HR392.001 


dcolon on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with REPORTS
8 

Rep. Cassidy offered a second amendment that would add economic education and economic literacy as a co-equal purpose. The 

amendment was withdrawn. The amendment in the nature of a 

substitute was then adopted by voice vote. The bill, as amended, 

was then ordered favorably reported to the House of Representatives by a roll call vote of 22 yeas to 13 nays, as follows: 


dcolon on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with REPORTS
9 

Insert offset folio 10 here HR392.002 


dcolon on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with REPORTS
10 

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

Section 1—Short title 

Section 1 provides that this Act may be cited as the ‘‘Ocean, 

Coastal and Watershed Education Act.’’ 

Section 2—Findings and purpose 

Section 2 establishes the findings of this Act as follows: (1) The 

United States faces major environmental challenges (e.g., climate 

change, overfishing, habitat destruction, natural disasters) that 

threaten human health, economic development, environmental 

quality, and national security; (2) Communities in coastal watersheds are increasingly vulnerable to these environmental challenges; (3) These challenges can be met by engaging all members 

of coastal watershed communities to create more engaged and environmentally literate citizens; and (4) Wildlife-dependent (as defined 

in the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 

(16 U.S.C. 668dd–668ee) to mean recreational uses involving ‘‘hunting, fishing, wildlife observation and photography, or environmental education and interpretation’’) and other outdoor recreation 

has intrinsic social and conservation value and can play an important role in instilling a sustainable conservation ethic in America’s 

youth. 

Section 2 also establishes the purposes of the Act, which include 

advancing environmental literacy, stewardship, and public awareness and appreciation of the economic, social, recreational, and environmental benefits of coastal watersheds. To achieve these purposes, the Act establishes two programs: (1) Environmental Literacy Grant Program, and (2) Bay Watershed Education and Training (B–WET) regional programs. 

Section 3—Definitions 

Section 3 defines terms that appear in the Act. 

Section 4—Environmental Literacy Grant Program 

Section 4 provides that the Administrator of NOAA (Administrator) shall establish the Environmental Literacy Grant Program. 

It further establishes that this national competitive grant program 

shall provide financial assistance to: (1) Expand the adoption of 

coastal, ocean, Great Lakes, and climate on all time scales education; (2) Build administrative and technical capacity within coastal and watershed communities to enhance their effectiveness; (3) 

Encourage water-dependent and outdoor recreation and learning to 

promote environmental stewardship; and (4) Develop and implement new approaches to coastal, ocean, Great Lakes, and climate 

on all time scales education and literacy. Priority consideration 

shall be given to innovative, strategic, high-leverage projects that 

demonstrate long-term potential. 

This section further provides that after consultation with appropriate stakeholders and within 180 days of enactment of this Act, 

the Administrator must publish program guidelines, including criteria for eligible entities, national priorities, and performance 

measures. Of amounts made available to implement the program, 

no less than 80% shall be used for competitive grants, no more 

than 10% for the Administrator to implement the program, and no 


dcolon on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with REPORTS
11 

less than 10% for strategic planning and coordination to foster communication, integration, and evaluation efforts. 

Section 5—B–WET Program 

Section 5 provides that the Administrator shall conduct B–WET 

programs that already exist or are under active consideration for 

creation. It also authorizes the Administrator to create new regional programs, pursuant to a strategy that identifies regional 

needs, potential partnerships, a budget for expansion, and potential 

new regional programs. The section further provides that priority 

consideration for the establishment of new programs shall be given 

to U.S. territories, the Great Lakes States, Alaska, and the mid-Atlantic region. Public comment is required and the strategy must be 

submitted to Congress. The Administrator, following public comment and notice, may also modify or realign regional programs 

based on regional need, mutual interest, and resource availability. 

This section further provides that each regional program is appointed one regional manager who administers and supports the 

program. The Administrator must publish program implementation 

guidelines within 180 days of enactment of the Act, including 

guidelines related to contracts, grant making, and cooperative 

agreements. Priority consideration shall be given to those programs 

that promote bay-watershed education throughout the region, build 

capacity for expanding and strengthening current work, promote 

professional development and training for educators, and replicate 

existing proven programs. Priority consideration shall also be given 

to those projects for which the federal share does not exceed 75% 

and those which are conducted by or benefit any under-served or 

low-income communities. 

Section 5 also requires NOAA’s Office of Education to work with 

regional B–WET programs on strategic planning, integration and 

coordination, evaluation, network-wide communications, selection 

of new regional program managers, and management, tracking and 

oversight. Of amounts made available to implement the program, 

no less than 80% of funds shall be used to implement regional 

grant programs activities and no more than 20% shall be used by 

the Administrator to implement the program. 

Section 6—Report 

Section 6 requires the Administrator to submit a biennial report 

to Congress on the grant programs authorized under this Act. 

Section 7—Authorization of appropriations 

Section 7 authorizes to be appropriated such sums as may be 

necessary for each of fiscal years 2011 through 2015. 

COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Regarding clause 2(b)(1) of rule X and clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII 

of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the Committee on 

Natural Resources’ oversight findings and recommendations are reflected in the body of this report. 

CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY STATEMENT

Article I, section 8 of the Constitution of the United States 

grants Congress the authority to enact this bill. 


dcolon on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with REPORTS
12 

COMPLIANCE WITH HOUSE RULE XIII

1. Cost of Legislation. 

Clause 3(d)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives requires an estimate and a comparison by the Committee of the costs which would be incurred in carrying out this 

bill. However, clause 3(d)(3)(B) of that rule provides that this requirement does not apply when the Committee has included in its 

report a timely submitted cost estimate of the bill prepared by the 

Director of the Congressional Budget Office under section 402 of 

the Congressional Budget Act of 1974. 

2. Congressional Budget Act. 

As required by clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 

House of Representatives and section 308(a) of the Congressional 

Budget Act of 1974, this bill does not contain any new budget authority, spending authority, credit authority, or an increase or decrease in revenues or tax expenditures. 

3. General Performance Goals and Objectives. 

As required by clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII, the general performance goal or objective of this bill is to direct the National Oceanic 

and Atmospheric Administration to establish education and watershed programs which advance environmental literacy, including 

preparedness and adaptability for the likely impacts of climate 

change in coastal watershed regions. 

4. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate. 

Under clause 3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act of 

1974, the Committee has received the following cost estimate for 

this bill from the Director of the Congressional Budget Office: 

H.R. 3644—Ocean, Coastal, and Watershed Education Act 

Summary: H.R. 3644 would reauthorize—through 2015—and expand two National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 

(NOAA) grant programs aimed at enhancing environmental education related to water resources. Based on information from 

NOAA and assuming appropriation of the necessary amounts, CBO 

estimates that implementing the legislation would cost $139 million over the 2011–2014 period and $48 million after 2014. Enacting the legislation would not affect direct spending or revenues. 

H.R. 3644 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. 

Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated budgetary impact of H.R. 3644 is shown in the following table. The costs 

of this legislation fall within budget function 300 (natural resources 

and environment). 

By fiscal year, in millions of dollars— 

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2010– 

2014 

CHANGES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION 

Environmental Literacy Grant Program: 

Estimated Authorization Level ................................. 0 19 20 20 20 79 

Estimated Outlays ................................................... 0 14 19 20 20 73 

Bay-Watershed Education and Training Program: 

Estimated Authorization Level ................................. 0 17 17 18 18 70 

Estimated Outlays ................................................... 0 13 17 18 18 66 


dcolon on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with REPORTS
13 

By fiscal year, in millions of dollars— 

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2010– 

2014 

Total Changes: 

Estimated Authorization Level ........................ 0 36 37 38 38 149 

Estimated Outlays .......................................... 0 27 36 38 38 139 

Basis of estimate: For this estimate, CBO assumes that H.R. 

3644 will be enacted early in calendar year 2010 and that the necessary amounts will be appropriated for each fiscal year from 2011 

through 2015. (The two programs are already authorized in 2010 

under current law.) Estimated outlays are based on historical 

spending patterns for similar NOAA programs. 

H.R. 3644 would reauthorize NOAA’s Environmental Literacy 

Grant Program, which funds projects to educate the public about 

water resources. In 2009, NOAA received appropriations totaling 

$9 million for environmental literacy grants. (The agency has not 

yet received a full-year appropriation for 2010.) Based on information from NOAA regarding funding levels for similar grant programs, CBO estimates that the agency would require funding equal 

to about twice that amount to implement the program because the 

agency is currently able to fund less than 10 percent of the proposals it receives under the program. For other similar grant programs the agency provides funding for 25 percent of the proposals 

it receives. Assuming appropriation of the necessary amounts, CBO 

estimates that implementing the program would cost $73 million 

over the 2011–2014 period and $26 million after 2014. 

H.R. 3644 also would reauthorize and expand NOAA’s Bay-Watershed Education and Training (B–WET) Program to promote 

stewardship of coastal and marine resources in several regions of 

the United States. In 2009, NOAA received appropriations totaling 

$10 million to fund grants for six regional programs. Under the 

bill, NOAA would maintain existing regional programs, expand one 

of those programs to include U.S. territories in the Pacific Ocean, 

and establish four additional regional programs. Based on historical funding for the B–WET Program (about $1.6 million per region 

annually) and assuming appropriation of the necessary amounts, 

CBO estimates that implementing the program would cost $66 million over the 2011–2014 period and $23 million after 2014. 

Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: H.R. 3644 contains 

no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in 

UMRA and would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal governments. 

Estimate prepared by: Federal costs: Jeff LaFave; Impact on 

state, local, and tribal governments: Ryan Miller; Impact on the 

private sector: Amy Petz. 

Estimate approved by: Theresa Gullo, Deputy Assistant Director 

for Budget Analysis. 

COMPLIANCE WITH PUBLIC LAW 104–4

This bill contains no unfunded mandates. 


dcolon on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with REPORTS
14 

EARMARK STATEMENT

H.R. 3644 does not contain any congressional earmarks, limited 

tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in clause 9 of rule 

XXI. 

PREEMPTION OF STATE, LOCAL OR TRIBAL LAW

This bill is not intended to preempt any State, local or tribal law. 

CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW

If enacted, this bill would make no changes in existing law. 


dcolon on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with REPORTS
(15) 

ADDITIONAL VIEWS 

H.R. 3644, the Bay-Watershed Education and Training Regional 

Program and National Environmental Literacy Grant Program Act, 

authorizes two existing programs within the National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA): the Bay-Watershed Education and Training Regional Program and the National Environmental Literacy Program. While both of these programs have received some level of funding from Congress, no authorization for either program has been enacted. Authorization levels in the bill, as 

introduced, are far above what the programs have historically received and are at a level that are unsupportable. Rather than address the concerns raised by Members of the Committee at both the 

Subcommittee hearing and full Committee mark-up of the legislation, specific authorization levels were replaced by ‘‘such sums as 

may be necessary’’ in the Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute 

that was considered at the mark-up. 

At a time when the country faces record deficit levels, a ‘‘blank 

check’’ authorization for these two programs is irresponsible. Not 

only does this ignore this authorizing Committee’s responsibility to 

set funding levels for the Appropriators to follow, but it also ignores the realities of this country’s current economic problems. 

As introduced, the legislation would have authorized the two programs at a total of $235.0 million over a five year period. Concern 

over the funding levels were raised by Members of the Subcommittee during the Subcommittee on Insular Affairs, Oceans and 

Wildlife hearing which was held on October 15, 2009. In addition 

to concerns raised by Members, the NOAA testimony included the 

statement ‘‘NOAA supports education and outreach programs in 

the Office of Education and throughout NOAA’s line offices—the 

authorization levels in H.R. 3644 could divert funding from these 

other programs.’’ 

Funding for the Bay-Watershed Education and Training Program 

began in Fiscal Year 2002 with the Chesapeake Bay B–WET program which received $1.2 million. While five new B–WET programs 

have been added by Appropriators since Fiscal Year 2003, funding 

for the entire program has never exceeded $9.699 million. H.R. 

3644, as introduced, would increase this level to $20.0 million in 

the first year and increase to $25.0 million in the third year for a 

total authorization of $117.5 million over five years. This level of 

increase represents an increase of more than 200 percent in the 

first year. 

The President’s Fiscal Year 2010 budget request did not request 

any funding for either the B–WET California program (a decrease 

of $2.5 million from the FY 2009 appropriated level) or the B–WET 

Regional Programs (a decrease of $7.2 million from the FY 2009 

appropriated level). Congressional action on the Department of 

Commerce’s appropriation in both the House and Senate bills inVerDate Nov 24 2008 06:42 Jan 13, 2010 Jkt 089006 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6604 E:\HR\OC\HR392.XXX HR392

dcolon on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with REPORTS
16 

cluded funding levels far below the authorization levels in H.R. 

3644 as introduced—$2.5 million for the California B–WET program in the House-passed bill report language and $7.2 million for 

the B–WET Regional Programs in the Senate-passed bill report 

language. It is clear that neither the President nor Congressional 

appropriators have supported the authorization levels intended by 

this legislation. 

In addition, the National Environmental Literacy Program which 

has been funded under the line item in the NOAA budget called 

Competitive Education Grants has only been requested in the 

President’s budget request since Fiscal Year 2008. In Fiscal Year 

2008, the program received $4.881 and in Fiscal Year 2009, the 

program received $8.5 million. H.R. 3644 would increase this level 

to $20.0 million in the first year and increase to $25.0 million in 

the third year for a total authorization of $117.5 million over five 

years. This level of increase represents an increase of more than 

200 percent in the first year. The President’s Fiscal Year 2010 budget request included $5.043 million for the Competitive Educational Grants—a decrease of $4.0 

million from the FY 2009 level. While both the House and Senate 

bills to appropriate funds for NOAA for Fiscal Year 2010 included 

increases to this program, neither bill approaches the funding levels included in H.R. 3644 as introduced. 

In authorizing these programs that have been in existence for a 

number of years, reasonable authorization levels need to be established with existing national deficit levels in mind. Replacing unreasonable authorization levels with a blank check—as was done at 

the full Committee consideration of this legislation—ignores this 

Committee’s responsibilities. 

BILL CASSIDY. 

Æ 


dcolon on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with REPORTS