89–006 

111TH CONGRESS REPT. 111–396 " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 2d Session Part 1 

HARMFUL ALGAL BLOOMS AND HYPOXIA RESEARCH AND 

CONTROL AMENDMENTS ACT OF 2009 

JANUARY 13, 2010.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State 

of the Union and ordered to be printed 

Mr. GORDON of Tennessee, from the Committee on Science and 

Technology, submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

together with 

ADDITIONAL VIEWS 

[To accompany H.R. 3650] 

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office] 

The Committee on Science and Technology, to whom was referred the bill (H.R. 3650) to establish a National Harmful Algal 

Bloom and Hypoxia Program, to develop and coordinate a comprehensive and integrated strategy to address harmful algal blooms 

and hypoxia, and to provide for the development and implementation of comprehensive regional action plans to reduce harmful algal 

blooms and hypoxia, 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 ...................................................................................... 6 

III. Background and Need for the Legislation ................................................ 6 

IV. Summary of Hearings ................................................................................. 8 

V. Committee Actions ...................................................................................... 10 

VI. Summary of Major Provisions of the Bill .................................................. 11 

VII. Section-by-Section Analysis ........................................................................ 13 

VIII. Committee Views ........................................................................................ 16 

IX. Cost Estimate .............................................................................................. 18 

X. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate ............................................. 18 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
2 

XI. Compliance with Public Law 104–4 .......................................................... 20 

XII. Comittee Oversight Findings and Recommendations .............................. 20 

XIII. Statement on General Performance Goals and Objectives ...................... 20 

XIV. Constitutional Authority Statement .......................................................... 20 

XV. Federal Advisory Committee Statement ................................................... 20 

XVI. Congressional Accountability Act .............................................................. 20 

XVII. Earmark Identification ............................................................................... 20 

XVIII. Statement on Preemption of State, Local, or Tribal Law ........................ 21 

XIX. Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported ........................ 21 

XX. Committee Recommendations .................................................................... 28 

XXI. Additional Views ......................................................................................... 29 

XXII. Exchange of Committee Correspondence .................................................. 32 

XXIII. Proceedings of the Subcommittee Markup ................................................ 37 

XXIV. Proceedings of the Full Committee Markup ............................................. 71 

I. AMENDMENT

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 ‘‘Harmful Algal Blooms and Hypoxia Research and 

Control Amendments Act of 2009’’. 

SEC. 2. AMENDMENT OF HARMFUL ALGAL BLOOM AND HYPOXIA RESEARCH AND CONTROL 

ACT OF 1998. 

Except as otherwise expressly provided, whenever in this Act an amendment or 

repeal is expressed in terms of an amendment to, or repeal of, a section or other 

provision, the reference shall be considered to be made to a section or other provision of the Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research and Control Act of 1998 (16 

U.S.C. 1451 note). 

SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS. 

(a) AMENDMENT.—The Act is amended by inserting after section 602 the following: 

‘‘SEC. 602A. DEFINITIONS. 

‘‘In this title: 

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

the Environmental Protection Agency. 

‘‘(2) PROGRAM.—The term ‘Program’ means the National Harmful Algal Bloom 

and Hypoxia Program established under section 603A. 

‘‘(3) UNDER SECRETARY.—The term ‘Under Secretary’ means the Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere.’’. 

(b) TABLE OF CONTENTS AMENDMENT.—The table of contents in section 2 of the 

Coast Guard Authorization Act of 1998 is amended by adding after the item relating 

to section 602 the following new item: 

‘‘Sec. 602A. Definitions.’’. 

SEC. 4. NATIONAL HARMFUL ALGAL BLOOM AND HYPOXIA PROGRAM. 

(a) AMENDMENT.—The Act is amended by inserting after section 603 the following: 

‘‘SEC. 603A. NATIONAL HARMFUL ALGAL BLOOM AND HYPOXIA PROGRAM. 

‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in subsection (d), the Under Secretary, 

through the Task Force established under section 603(a), shall establish and maintain a National Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Program pursuant to this section. 

‘‘(b) DUTIES.—The Under Secretary, through the Program, shall utilize the resources of the Task Force to— 

‘‘(1) develop and promote a national strategy to understand, detect, predict, 

control, mitigate, and respond to marine and freshwater harmful algal bloom 

and hypoxia events; 

‘‘(2) ensure the coordination of all Federal programs that address marine and 

freshwater harmful algal blooms and hypoxia, and other ocean and Great Lakes 

science and management programs and centers that address the chemical, biological, and physical components of marine and freshwater harmful algal 

blooms and hypoxia; 

‘‘(3) coordinate and work cooperatively with State, tribal, and local government agencies and programs that address marine and freshwater harmful algal 

blooms and hypoxia; 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
3 

‘‘(4) identify additional research, development, and demonstration needs and 

priorities relating to monitoring, prediction, prevention, control, mitigation, and 

response to marine and freshwater harmful algal blooms and hypoxia; 

‘‘(5) encourage international information sharing and research efforts on marine and freshwater harmful algal blooms and hypoxia, and encourage international mitigation, control, and response activities; 

‘‘(6) ensure the development and implementation of methods and technologies 

to protect the ecosystems affected by marine and freshwater harmful algal 

blooms; 

‘‘(7) coordinate an education program that integrates and augments existing 

programs to improve public understanding and awareness of the causes, impacts, and mitigation efforts for marine and freshwater harmful algal blooms 

and hypoxia; 

‘‘(8) assist in regional, State, tribal, and local efforts to develop and implement 

appropriate marine and freshwater harmful algal bloom and hypoxia response 

plans, strategies, and tools; 

‘‘(9) provide resources for and assist in the training of State, tribal, and local 

water and coastal resource managers in the methods and technologies for monitoring, controlling, mitigating, and responding to the effects of marine and 

freshwater harmful algal blooms and hypoxia events; 

‘‘(10) oversee the development, implementation, review, and periodic updating 

of the Regional Research and Action Plans under section 603B; and 

‘‘(11) administer peer-reviewed, merit-based competitive grant funding to support— 

‘‘(A) the projects maintained and established by the Program; and 

‘‘(B) the research and management needs and priorities identified in the 

Regional Research and Action Plans. 

‘‘(c) COOPERATIVE EFFORTS.—The Under Secretary shall work cooperatively and 

avoid duplication of efforts with other offices, centers, and programs within the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and other agencies represented on 

the Task Force established under section 603(a), States, tribes, and nongovernmental organizations concerned with marine and freshwater aquatic issues related 

to harmful algal blooms and hypoxia. 

‘‘(d) FRESHWATER PROGRAM.—With respect to the freshwater aspects of the Program, the Under Secretary and the Administrator shall jointly carry out the duties 

otherwise assigned to the Under Secretary under this section and section 603B, including each of the programs identified in subsection (e)(1) and (2). The Administrator’s participation under this subsection shall include— 

‘‘(1) research on the ecology of freshwater harmful algal blooms; 

‘‘(2) monitoring and event response of freshwater harmful algal blooms in 

lakes, rivers, estuaries (including their tributaries), and reservoirs; and 

‘‘(3) mitigation and control of freshwater harmful algal blooms. 

‘‘(e) NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION PROGRAMS.— 

‘‘(1) EXISTING PROGRAMS.—The Under Secretary shall maintain and enhance 

the following existing competitive programs: 

‘‘(A) The Ecology and Oceanography of Harmful Algal Blooms Program. 

‘‘(B) The Monitoring and Event Response for Harmful Algal Blooms Program. 

‘‘(C) The Northern Gulf of Mexico Ecosystems and Hypoxia Assessment 

Program. 

‘‘(D) The Coastal Hypoxia Research Program. 

‘‘(E) The Prevention, Control, and Mitigation of Harmful Algal Blooms 

Program. 

‘‘(2) NEW PROGRAMS.—The Under Secretary shall establish the following new 

programs: 

‘‘(A) An Event Response Program to coordinate and enhance, at the request of the States, marine and freshwater harmful algal blooms and hypoxia events response activities. 

‘‘(B) An Infrastructure Program to— 

‘‘(i) increase availability of— 

‘‘(I) analytical facilities and technologies; 

‘‘(II) operational forecasts; and 

‘‘(III) reference and research materials; 

‘‘(ii) improve integration of harmful algal bloom activities with existing monitoring and observational programs; and 

‘‘(iii) enhance communication and coordination required to meet the 

purposes of this Act. 

‘‘(f) ACTION STRATEGY.— 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
4 

‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 12 months after the date of enactment of 

the Harmful Algal Blooms and Hypoxia Research and Control Amendments Act 

of 2009, the Under Secretary, through the Task Force established under section 

603(a), shall transmit to the Congress an action strategy that identifies— 

‘‘(A) the specific activities to be carried out by the Program and the 

timeline for carrying out such activities; and 

‘‘(B) the roles and responsibilities of each Federal agency in the Task 

Force established under section 603(a) in carrying out Program activities. 

‘‘(2) FEDERAL REGISTER.—The Under Secretary shall publish the action strategy in the Federal Register. 

‘‘(3) PERIODIC REVISION.—The Under Secretary shall periodically review and 

revise the action strategy prepared under this subsection as necessary. 

‘‘(g) REPORT.—Every 2 years after the submission of the action strategy, the 

Under Secretary shall prepare and transmit to the Congress a report that describes— 

‘‘(1) the activities carried out under the Program and the budget related to 

these activities; 

‘‘(2) the progress made on implementing the action strategy; and 

‘‘(3) the need to revise or terminate activities or projects under the Program.’’. 

(b) TABLE OF CONTENTS AMENDMENT.—The table of contents in section 2 of the 

Coast Guard Authorization Act of 1998 is amended by adding after the item relating 

to section 603 the following new item: 

‘‘Sec. 603A. National Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Program.’’. 

SEC. 5. REGIONAL RESEARCH AND ACTION PLANS. 

(a) AMENDMENT.—The Act is amended by inserting after section 603A the following: 

‘‘SEC. 603B. REGIONAL RESEARCH AND ACTION PLANS. 

‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—The Under Secretary, through the Task Force established 

under section 603(a), shall— 

‘‘(1) identify the appropriate regions and subregions to be addressed by each 

Regional Research and Action Plan; and 

‘‘(2) oversee the development and implementation of the Regional Research 

and Action Plans. 

‘‘(b) CONTENTS.—The Plans developed under this section shall identify— 

‘‘(1) regional priorities for ecological, economic, and social research on issues 

related to the impacts of harmful algal blooms and hypoxia; 

‘‘(2) research, development, and demonstration activities needed to develop 

and advance technologies and techniques for minimizing the occurrence of 

harmful algal blooms and hypoxia and improving capabilities to prevent, predict, monitor, control, and mitigate harmful algal blooms and hypoxia; 

‘‘(3) ways to reduce the duration and intensity of harmful algal blooms and 

hypoxia, including in times of emergency; 

‘‘(4) research and methods to address human health dimensions of harmful 

algal blooms and hypoxia; 

‘‘(5) mechanisms, including the potential costs and benefits of those mechanisms, to protect vulnerable ecosystems that could be or have been affected by 

harmful algal blooms and hypoxia events; 

‘‘(6) mechanisms by which data, information, and products are transferred between the Program and State, tribal, and local governments and relevant research entities; 

‘‘(7) communication, outreach, and information dissemination methods that 

State, tribal, and local governments and stakeholder organizations can undertake to educate and inform the public concerning harmful algal blooms and hypoxia; and 

‘‘(8) the roles that Federal agencies can play to assist in the implementation 

of the Plan. 

‘‘(c) BUILDING ON AVAILABLE STUDIES AND INFORMATION.—In developing the Plans 

under this section, the Under Secretary shall— 

‘‘(1) utilize and build on existing research, assessments, and reports, including 

those carried out pursuant to existing law and other relevant sources; and 

‘‘(2) consider the impacts, research, and existing program activities of all 

United States coastlines and fresh and inland waters, including the Great 

Lakes, the Chesapeake Bay, and estuaries and tributaries. 

‘‘(d) DEVELOPMENT OF PLANS.—The Under Secretary shall develop Plans under 

this section with assistance from the individuals and entities described in subsection 

(g). 

‘‘(e) PLAN TIMELINE AND UPDATES.—The Under Secretary, through the Task Force 

established under section 603(a), shall ensure that the Plans developed under this 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
5 

section are completed not later than 24 months after the date of enactment of the 

Harmful Algal Blooms and Hypoxia Research and Control Amendments Act of 2009, 

and updated once every 5 years thereafter. 

‘‘(f) REPORTS.—Not later than 6 months after the completion of each Regional Research and Action Plan, the Under Secretary shall transmit to the Congress a report 

that provides a summary of such Plan, and once every 30 months after the completion of such Plan, the Under Secretary shall transmit to the Congress a report that 

describes— 

‘‘(1) the activities taken to implement the Plan, including a description of research funded and actions and outcomes of Plan response strategies carried out; 

and 

‘‘(2) Federal funding provided to implement the Plan. 

‘‘(g) COORDINATION AND CONSULTATION.—In developing the Plans under this section, as appropriate, the Under Secretary— 

‘‘(1) shall coordinate with State coastal management and planning officials; 

‘‘(2) shall coordinate with tribal resource management officials; 

‘‘(3) shall coordinate with water management and watershed officials from 

both coastal States and noncoastal States with water sources that drain into 

water bodies affected by harmful algal blooms and hypoxia; and 

‘‘(4) shall consult with— 

‘‘(A) public health officials; 

‘‘(B) emergency management officials; 

‘‘(C) science and technology development institutions; 

‘‘(D) economists; 

‘‘(E) industries and businesses affected by marine and freshwater harmful 

algal blooms and hypoxia; 

‘‘(F) scientists, with expertise concerning harmful algal blooms or hypoxia, from academic or research institutions; and 

‘‘(G) other stakeholders.’’. 

(b) TABLE OF CONTENTS AMENDMENT.—The table of contents in section 2 of the 

Coast Guard Authorization Act of 1998 is amended by adding after the item relating 

to section 603A, as added by section 4(b) of this Act, the following new item: 

‘‘Sec. 603B. Regional research and action plans.’’. 

SEC. 6. NORTHERN GULF OF MEXICO HYPOXIA. 

Section 604 is amended to read as follows: 

‘‘SEC. 604. NORTHERN GULF OF MEXICO HYPOXIA. 

‘‘(a) TASK FORCE INITIAL PROGRESS REPORTS.—Not later than 12 months after the 

date of enactment of the Harmful Algal Blooms and Hypoxia Research and Control 

Amendments Act of 2009, the Administrator, through the Mississippi River/Gulf of 

Mexico Watershed Nutrient Task Force, shall complete and transmit to the Congress and the President a report on the progress made by Task Force-directed activities toward attainment of the coastal goal of the 2008 Gulf Hypoxia Action Plan. 

‘‘(b) TASK FORCE 2-YEAR PROGRESS REPORTS.—After the initial report required 

under subsection (a), the Administrator, through the Task Force, shall complete and 

transmit to Congress and the President a report every 2 years thereafter on the 

progress made by Task Force-directed activities toward attainment of the coastal 

goal of the 2008 Gulf Hypoxia Action Plan. 

‘‘(c) CONTENTS.—The reports required by this section shall assess progress made 

toward nutrient load reductions, the response of the hypoxic zone and water quality 

throughout the Mississippi/Atchafalaya River Basin, and the economic and social effects. The reports shall— 

‘‘(1) include an evaluation of how current policies and programs affect management decisions, including those made by municipalities and industrial and 

agricultural producers; 

‘‘(2) evaluate lessons learned; and 

‘‘(3) recommend appropriate actions to continue to implement or, if necessary, 

revise the strategy set forth in the 2008 Gulf Hypoxia Action Plan.’’. 

SEC. 7. PACIFIC NORTHWEST, ESTUARIES, AND PUGET SOUND HYPOXIA. 

(a) AMENDMENT.—The Act is amended by inserting after section 604 the following: 

‘‘SEC. 604A. PACIFIC NORTHWEST, ESTUARIES, AND PUGET SOUND HYPOXIA. 

‘‘(a) ASSESSMENT REPORT.—Not later than 12 months after the date of enactment 

of this Act, the Task Force established under section 603 shall complete and submit 

to Congress and the President an integrated assessment of hypoxia in the coastal 

and estuarine waters of the Pacific Northwest that examines the status of current 

research, monitoring, prevention, response, and control efforts. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
6 

‘‘(b) PLAN.—Not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of this Act, such 

Task Force shall develop and submit to Congress a plan, based on the integrated 

assessment submitted under subsection (a), for reducing, mitigating, and controlling 

hypoxia in the coastal and estuarine waters of the Pacific Northwest. In developing 

such plan, the Task Force shall consult with State, Indian tribe, and local governments, and academic, agricultural, industry, and environmental groups and representatives. Such plan shall include incentive-based partnership approaches. The 

plan shall also address the social and economic costs and benefits of the measures 

for reducing, mitigating, and controlling hypoxia. At least 90 days before submission 

of such plan to the Congress, a summary of the proposed plan shall be published 

in the Federal Register. After submission of the plan, the Task Force shall provide 

progress reports on the activities toward attainment of the goals set forth in the 

plan reduce, mitigate, and control hypoxia in the coastal and estuarine waters of 

the Pacific Northwest every 2 years.’’. 

(b) TABLE OF CONTENTS AMENDMENT.—The table of contents in section 2 of the 

Coast Guard Authorization Act of 1998 is amended by adding after the item relating 

to section 604 the following new item: 

‘‘Sec. 604A. Pacific Northwest, estuaries, and Puget Sound hypoxia.’’. 

SEC. 8. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS. 

Section 605 is amended to read as follows: 

‘‘SEC. 605. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS. 

‘‘There are authorized to be appropriated— 

‘‘(1) to the Under Secretary to carry out sections 603A and 603B, $35,000,000 

for each of fiscal years 2010 through 2014, of which, for each fiscal year— 

‘‘(A) up to $3,000,000 shall be for the development of the Regional Research and Action Plans and the reports required by sections 604 and 604A; 

‘‘(B) $3,000,000 shall be for the research and assessment activities related 

to marine and freshwater harmful algal blooms at research laboratories of 

the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; 

‘‘(C) $8,000,000 shall be used to carry out the Ecology and Oceanography 

of Harmful Algal Blooms Program (ECOHAB); 

‘‘(D) $5,500,000 shall be used to carry out the Monitoring and Event Response for Harmful Algal Blooms Program (MERHAB); 

‘‘(E) $1,500,000 shall be used to carry out the Northern Gulf of Mexico 

Ecosystems and Hypoxia Assessment Program (NGOMEX); 

‘‘(F) $5,000,000 shall be used to carry out the Coastal Hypoxia Research 

Program (CHRP); 

‘‘(G) $5,000,000 shall be used to carry out the Prevention, Control, and 

Mitigation of Harmful Algal Blooms Program (PCM); 

‘‘(H) $1,000,000 shall be used to carry out the Event Response Program; 

and 

‘‘(I) $3,000,000 shall be used to carry out the Infrastructure Program; and 

‘‘(2) to the Administrator to carry out sections 603A and 603B, $6,000,000 for 

each of fiscal years 2010 through 2014, of which up to $3,000,000 for each fiscal 

year shall be for participation in carrying out section 603A(e), as described in 

section 603A(d).’’. 

II. PURPOSE OF THE BILL

The purpose of this bill is to establish a National Harmful Algal 

Bloom and Hypoxia Program to develop and coordinate a comprehensive and integrated strategy to address harmful algal blooms 

and hypoxia, and to provide for the development and implementation of regional action plans to reduce harmful algal blooms and 

hypoxia. 

III. BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR THE LEGISLATION

Harmful algal blooms (HABs) and hypoxia (severe depletion of 

oxygen) are one of the most scientifically complex and economically 

significant coastal management issues facing the nation. In the 

past, few regions of the U.S. were affected by HABs. Now, all U.S. 

coastal regions have reported major blooms and hypoxic events. 

These phenomena have devastating environmental, economic, and 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
7 

human health impacts. Impacts include human illness and mortality following direct consumption or indirect exposure to toxic 

shellfish or toxins in the environment; economic hardship for coastal economies, many of which are highly dependent on tourism or 

harvest of local seafood; as well as dramatic fish, bird, and mammal mortalities. There are also devastating impacts to ecosystems, 

leading to environmental damage that may reduce the ability of 

those systems to sustain species due to habitat degradation, increased susceptibility to disease, and long-term alterations to community structure. 

Scientific understanding of harmful algal blooms and hypoxic 

events has improved significantly since the early 1990s. However, 

there is a need for additional efforts in monitoring, prevention, control and mitigation of these complex phenomena. Practical and innovative approaches to address hypoxia and HABs in U.S. waters 

are essential for management of aquatic ecosystems and to fulfill 

a stronger investment in the health of the coasts, oceans, and waterways. 

Recognizing this need, in 2004 Congress reauthorized and expanded the Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research and Control Act of 1998 (Public Law 105–383) by passing the Harmful 

Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Amendments Act of 2004 (Public Law 

108–456). The 1998 Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research 

and Control Act (HABHRCA) established an Interagency Task 

Force to develop a national HABs assessment and authorized funding for existing and new research programs on HABs. These programs involve federal, state, and academic partners and support 

interdisciplinary extramural research studies to address the issues 

of HABs in an ecosystem context. HABHRCA, reauthorized in 

2004, required assessments of HABs in different coastal regions 

and the Great Lakes and plans to expand research to address the 

impacts of HABs. The law also authorized research, education, and 

monitoring activities related to the prevention, reduction, and control of harmful algal blooms and hypoxia, and reconstituted the 

Interagency Task Force on HABs and Hypoxia. 

The 2004 reauthorization also directed NOAA to produce several 

reports and assessments in addition to authorizing funding for both 

new and existing programs and activities. The Prediction and Response Report, released in September 2007, addresses both the 

state of research and methods for HAB prediction and response, especially at the federal level. The National Scientific Research, Development, Demonstration, and Technology Transfer Plan for Reducing Impacts from Harmful Algal Blooms (RDDTT Plan) establishes research priorities to develop and demonstrate prevention, 

control and mitigation methods to advance current prediction and 

response capabilities. The law also required development of local 

and regional Scientific Assessment of Hypoxia and a Scientific Assessment of Harmful Algal Blooms. 

The HABHRCA authorized funds were directed to conduct research and seek to control HABs and hypoxia in U.S. marine waters, estuaries and the Great Lakes. The 2004 reauthorization also 

required a report on The Scientific Assessment of Freshwater 

Harmful Algal Blooms that describes the state of knowledge of 

HABs in U.S. inland and freshwaters, and presents a plan to advance research and reduce the impacts on humans and the environVerDate Nov 24 2008 22:49 Jan 15, 2010 Jkt 089006 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR396P1.XXX HR396P1

smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
8 

ment. There is a continued need to research and respond to HABs 

in marine waters, the Great Lakes, and in inland waterways, such 

as rivers, lakes and reservoirs. 

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) oversees a wide 

array of programs specifically designed to protect and preserve the 

coastal and marine waters of the United States, including watershed protection programs working through partnerships and an 

array of regulatory programs. In conjunction with its statutory responsibilities to ensure water quality under the Clean Water Act 

and the Safe Drinking Water Act, EPA has a program of research 

and development on water treatment technologies, health effects of 

water pollutants, security from deliberate contamination, and watershed protection. 

EPA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 

(NOAA) are co-leads of a Federal Workgroup of thirteen federal 

agencies committed to supporting the Gulf of Mexico Alliance, a 

partnership formed by the five Gulf State Governors. In addition, 

EPA is also a participating member of the Mississippi River/Gulf 

of Mexico Watershed Nutrient Task Force. However, at present, 

there is a lack of significant federal research and development 

aimed at addressing freshwater HABs. Because of the agency’s 

complementary work on inland water ecosystems, the EPA is a logical federal entity to partner with NOAA to develop and implement 

a research, development, and demonstration program to address 

freshwater harmful algal blooms and hypoxia through research, 

monitoring, prevention, mitigation, and control. As the lead agency 

with oversight over freshwater quality, the EPA should ensure the 

protection of aquatic ecosystems to protect human health, support 

economic and recreational activities, and provide healthy habitat 

for fish, plants, and wildlife by conducting research to develop HAB 

prevention, control and mitigation technologies. 

Addressing the many dimensions of HABs requires a coordinated 

multi-agency approach, and there are presently a number of programs and agencies that address the various aspects of HABs. 

However, there is a need to expand Harmful Algal Blooms research 

to include both marine and freshwaters. The reauthorization of the 

HABHRCA should address both marine and freshwater blooms and 

hypoxia by building upon and utilizing the findings and results of 

various reports and assessments to formulate national and regional 

action strategies. 

IV. SUMMARY OF HEARINGS

The Committee on Science and Technology Subcommittee on Energy and Environment held two hearings on harmful algal blooms 

and hypoxia. 

The first hearing was held in the 110th Congress on Thursday, 

July 10, 2008. The hearing, entitled Harmful Algal Blooms: The 

Challenges on the Nation’s Coastline, examined Harmful Algal 

Blooms (HABs) recent trends and impacts on the coast, ocean, and 

Great Lakes. The purpose of the hearing was to discuss the challenges harmful algal blooms and red tide events impose on the 

coastlines and in marine and fresh waters. The hearing also examined the current research on the microbial bloom ecology as well 

as the options for prevention, control, and mitigation. In addition, 

the hearing focused on the state of the science and recent trends 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
9 

on an international level as it relates to national and global 

changes. The invited panel of witnesses was asked to comment on 

the National Plan for Algal Toxins and Harmful Algal Blooms, and 

how the plan will affect our nation’s ability to control the HABs 

problem. The witnesses included: 

Dr. Robert Magnien, Director of the Center for Sponsored Coastal Ocean Research in the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, NOAA, discussed the current state of federally funded 

HABs research at NOAA, as well as options for prevention, control, 

and mitigation, and the National Plan for Algal Toxins and Harmful Algal Blooms. 

Dr. Donald Anderson, Senior Scientist and Director of the Coastal Ocean Institute at Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, discussed the current research on the ecology of the blooms of microorganisms on both the east and west coasts. He also discussed the 

issue and the state of the science on an international level, as well 

as commented on the National Plan for Algal Toxins and Harmful 

Algal Blooms. 

Dr. H. Kenneth Hudnell, Vice President and Director of Science 

at SolarBee Inc., discussed the challenges and impacts of harmful 

algal blooms, specifically in fresh water. SolarBee is a solar-powered technology to improve water quality through high-flow, longdistance circulation. He also discussed the applications of new technologies for prevention and control of biotoxins in water. 

Mr. Dan Ayres, Coastal Shellfish Manager and Lead Biologist at 

the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife Region Six 

Office, discussed the challenges harmful algal blooms and red tide 

events impose on the coastlines. He also discussed the impacts of 

harmful algal blooms on beach closures, tourism, human health, 

and the science behind these toxins. 

The Energy and Environment Subcommittee held a second hearing in the 111th Congress on September 17, 2009 to receive testimony on Harmful Algal Blooms and Hypoxia research and response 

needs, and to receive testimony on the Committee Print entitled 

the Harmful Algal Blooms and Hypoxia Research and Control Act 

of 2009. The Subcommittee heard from the following witnesses: 

Dr. Robert Magnien, Director of the Center for Sponsored Coastal Ocean Research, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). Dr. Robert Magnien discussed NOAA’s current HABs 

and hypoxia activities, as well as the need to implement national 

and regional plans to address both marine and fresh water blooms 

and hypoxia events. Dr. Magnien expressed the NOAA’s concerns 

over the draft bills apparent omission of current NOAA programs 

such as the Ecology and Oceanography of Harmful Algal Blooms 

Program (ECOHAB); the Monitoring and Event Response for 

Harmful Algal Blooms Program (MERHAB); the Northern Gulf of 

Mexico Ecosystems and Hypoxia Assessment Program (NGOMEX); 

the Coastal Hypoxia Research Program (CHRP); and the Prevention, Control, and Mitigation of Harmful Algal Blooms Program 

(PCM). He also recommended establishing two new programs: an 

Event Response Program and an Infrastructure Program. 

Ms. Suzanne E. Schwartz, Acting Director of the Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). Ms. Suzanne E. Schwartz discussed EPA’s current 

hypoxia activities focused on reduction of nutrient loading in the 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
10 

Gulf of Mexico. Ms. Schwartz suggested the legislation provide 

EPA more direction in its role in the National Harmful Algal 

Blooms and Hypoxia Program and as it relates to freshwater 

HABs. 

Mr. Dan Ayres, Coastal Shellfish Manager and Lead Biologist at 

the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife Region Six 

Office discussed the impacts HABs and hypoxia events impose on 

the west coast. He also highlighted the ongoing research and need 

for response and implementation plans regarding HABs and hypoxia for prevention, control, and mitigation on the west coast. 

Dr. Donald Anderson, Senior Scientist and Director of the Coastal Ocean Institute at Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution discussed the impacts of HABs and hypoxia on U.S. coasts and oceans 

and how they have evolved over the past several years. He emphasized the need for more research, as well as implementation plans 

that improve monitoring, prevention, control, mitigation and response. 

Dr. Greg L. Boyer, Professor of Biochemistry, State University of 

New York College of Environmental Science and Forestry and Director of the Great Lakes Research Consortium, discussed the 

science behind freshwater harmful algal blooms, as well as the impacts of HABs and hypoxia on inland and fresh waters, and the research and implementation needs to respond to freshwater HABs 

events. 

Dr. Anderson and Dr. Boyer also suggested the legislation include the existing NOAA programs as well as create two new programs and provide more explicit direction to EPA. They also expressed concerns about the overlapping timelines for the action 

strategy and the regional research and action plans and requested 

a less aggressive timeline to allow adequate time for completion. 

Dr. Donald Scavia, Graham Family Professor of Environmental 

Sustainability and Professor of Natural Resources and Environment, University of Michigan discussed the impacts of HABs and 

hypoxia on the Great Lakes and Chesapeake Bay areas, as well as 

the needs for an implementation strategy for hypoxia in the Northern Gulf of Mexico and Mississippi River. Dr. Scavia noted the importance for accountability and suggested the Gulf of Mexico 

timelines be more aggressive. 

V. COMMITTEE ACTIONS

On September 25, 2009, Representative Brian Baird of Washington, for himself and Representatives Ehlers of Michigan, Mack 

of Florida, Castor of Florida, Kratovil of Maryland, and Delahunt 

of Massachusetts introduced H.R. 3650, the Harmful Algal Blooms 

and Hypoxia Research and Control Amendments Act of 2009. The 

bill was referred to the Committee on Science and Technology and 

the Committee on Natural Resources. 

The Subcommittee on Energy and Environment met to consider 

H.R. 3650, the Harmful Algal Blooms and Hypoxia Research and 

Control Amendments Act of 2009 on September 30, 2009. The Subcommittee considered the following amendments: 

Subcommittee Chairman Baird and Mr. Ehlers of Michigan offered a managers amendment making several technical and clarifying changes and alters certain reporting requirements. The 

amendment was agreed to by a voice vote. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
11 

Ms. Edwards of Maryland offered an amendment, to amend Section 5 (‘‘Regional Research Action Plans’’) to require that the Under 

Secretary ‘‘consider the impacts, research, and existing program activities of all United States coastlines and fresh and inland waters, 

including the Great Lakes, the Chesapeake Bay, and estuaries and 

tributaries’’ in developing the Regional Research Action Plans. The 

amendment was agreed to by a voice vote. 

Mr. Baird moved that the Subcommittee favorably report H.R. 

3650 to the full Committee on Science and Technology as amended. 

The motion was agreed to by a voice vote. 

The Committee on Science and Technology met to consider H.R. 

3650, the Harmful Algal Blooms and Hypoxia Research and Control Amendments Act of 2009, on October 7, 2009. The Committee 

considered the following amendments: 

Mr. Baird and Mr. Ehlers offered a manager’s amendment that 

made several technical and clarifying changes and amended Section 4 to require the Administrator of EPA to include research, 

monitoring, event response, mitigation, and control activities related to freshwater harmful algal blooms. The amendment also 

made adjustments to the Authorization of Appropriation section to 

include NOAA internal research funding. The amendment was 

agreed to by voice vote. 

Mr. Hall offered an amendment to prohibit anything in the Act 

from being construed to require that that state, tribal, and local 

governments take any action that will result in increased financial 

burden to such government. The amendment failed by a roll call 

vote. 

Mr. Smith offered an amendment to require that the Regional 

Research and Action plans be developed at the request of the 

states. The amendment failed by a roll call vote. 

Mr. Broun offered an amendment to require that no funds under 

this Act could be used for lobbying the legislative or executive 

branches of the Federal, State, or local governments and no funds 

may be awarded to any entity if that entity or any employee of that 

entity has been charged by any Federal, State, or local government 

agency with fraud, waste, abuse of government funds, or any illegal 

activities. The amendment was withdrawn. 

H.R. 3650, as amended, was agreed to by voice vote. 

Mr. Gordon moved that the Committee favorably report H.R. 

3650, as amended, to the House with the recommendation that the 

bill does pass. The motion was agreed to by voice vote. 

VI. SUMMARY OF MAJOR PROVISIONS OF THE BILL

The Harmful Algal Blooms and Hypoxia Research and Control 

Amendments Act of 2009, as amended, would establish and maintain a National Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Program. The 

program will be led by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), as chair of the Task Force established in the 

1998 HABHRCA. H.R. 3650 directs the Under Secretary to utilize 

the resources of the Task Force to ensure the Program: 1) develops 

a national strategy to address both marine and freshwater HABs 

and hypoxia; 2) coordinates all Federal programs related to HABs 

and hypoxia; 3) works with State, tribal, and local government 

agencies; 4) identifies additional research needs and priorities; 5) 

encourages international research efforts on HABs and hypoxia; 6) 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
12 

develops and implements methods and technologies to protect ecosystems damaged by HABs; 7) coordinates an education program to 

improve public understanding; 8) assist in regional, State, tribal, 

and local efforts to implement response plans, strategies, and tools; 

9) provides resources for training of State, tribal and local water 

and coastal resource managers; 10) oversees the updating of the 

Regional Research and Action Plans; and 11) administers peer-reviewed, merit-based competitive grant funding. In addition, the Act 

directs the Under Secretary to work cooperatively and avoid duplication of efforts with other offices, centers, and programs within 

NOAA, as well as with States, tribes, stakeholder organizations, 

and other agencies represented on the Task Force. 

The bill directs the Under Secretary and the Administrator of the 

Environmental Protection Agency to jointly carry out the duties for 

the freshwater aspects of the Program. The Administrator of EPA 

is mandated to participate in the research of the existing and new 

programs to research the ecology of freshwater harmful algal 

blooms; monitoring and event response activities of freshwater 

harmful algal blooms; and mitigation and control efforts of freshwater harmful algal blooms. The bill directs NOAA to maintain 

and enhance the existing five competitive programs: the Ecology 

and Oceanography of Harmful Algal Blooms Program (ECOHAB); 

the Monitoring and Event Response for Harmful Algal Blooms Program (MERHAB); the Northern Gulf of Mexico Ecosystems and Hypoxia Assessment Program (NGOMEX); the Coastal Hypoxia Research Program (CHRP); and the Prevention, Control, and Mitigation of Harmful Algal Blooms Program (PCM) and establish two 

new programs: an Event Response Program and an Infrastructure 

Program. The bill also requires the Under Secretary to transmit to 

Congress an action strategy that outlines the specific activities to 

be carried out by the Program, a timeline for such activities, and 

the programmatic roles of each Federal agency in the Task Force. 

The action strategy shall be published in the Federal Register and 

be periodically revised by the Under Secretary. 

H.R. 3650 directs the Under Secretary, through the Task Force, 

to oversee the development and implementation of Regional Research and Action Plans, and identify the appropriate regions and 

sub-regions to be addressed by each Plan. The bill outlines some 

content the Plans should identify, including: (1) regional priorities 

for ecological, economic, and social research related to the impacts 

of HABs and hypoxia; (2) research, development, and demonstration activities to advance technologies and techniques for minimizing the occurrence and address the impacts of HABs and hypoxia; (3) ways to reduce the duration and intensity of HABs 

events; (4) research and methods to address the impacts of HABs 

on human health; (5) mechanisms and the potential costs of these 

mechanisms to protect vulnerable ecosystems that could be or have 

been affected by HABs; (6) mechanisms by which data is transferred between the Program and State, tribal, and local governments and relevant research entities; (7) communication, outreach, 

and dissemination methods used to educate and inform the public; 

and (8) the roles that Federal agencies can play to assist implementation of the Plan. 

The bill explicitly directs the utilization of existing research, assessments, and reports and considers the impacts in all waterways, 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
13 

including the Chesapeake Bay in the development of the Plans. 

The bill also provides a list of individuals and entities that the 

Under Secretary shall work with to develop the Plans. The bill also 

requires that the Plans be completed within a 2-year period after 

the date of enactment and updated once every 5 years. Furthermore, H.R. 3650 requires that the Under Secretary submit a report 

to Congress that provides a summary of each Plan not later than 

6 months after the completion of each Regional Research and Action Plan and once every 30 months after the completion of the 

Plans, report on the activities taken to implement the Plans. 

H.R. 3650 directs the Administrator, through the Mississippi 

River/Gulf of Mexico Watershed Nutrient Task Force, to transmit 

a report to Congress and the President on the progress made toward attainment of the coastal goals of the 2008 Gulf Hypoxia Action Plan. The initial report is required no later than 12 months 

after the date of enactment and every 2 years thereafter. The reports are required to assess progress made toward nutrient load reductions, the response of the hypoxia zone and water quality 

throughout the Mississippi/Atchafalaya River Basin and the economic and social effects. The bill also directs the Interagency Task 

Force to transmit an assessment report to Congress and the President within 12 months of the enactment of the Act and a plan 

within 2 years to address hypoxia in the coastal and estuarine waters of the Pacific Northwest by examining the current research, 

monitoring, prevention, response, and control efforts 

H.R. 3650 provides an authorization of $35,000,000 each of the 

fiscal years 2010 through 2014 to the Under Secretary to carry out 

the Program, of which $3M is authorized in each of the fiscal years 

for the development of the Regional Research and Action Plans; 

$3M for research activities at the laboratories of NOAA; $8M for 

ECOHAB; $5.5M for MERHAB; $1.5M for NGOMEX; $5M for 

CHRP; $5M for PCM; $1M for the Event Response Program; and 

$3M for the Infrastructure Program. The bill also provides an authorization of $6,000,000 in each of the fiscal years 2010 through 

2014 to the Administrator for the freshwater HABs activities of 

Program, of which up to $3M is mandated for participation in the 

existing and new programs outlined in previous sections of the Act. 

VII. SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

Purpose: To establish a National Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Program, to develop and coordinate a comprehensive strategy 

to address harmful algal blooms and hypoxia and to provide for the 

development and implementation of comprehensive regional action 

plans to reduce harmful algal blooms and hypoxia. 

Section 1. Short title 

The Harmful Algal Blooms and Hypoxia Research and Control 

Amendments Act of 2009. 

Section 2. Amendment of Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research and Control Act of 1998 

Explains that the text the bill modifies is the Harmful Algal 

Bloom and Hypoxia Research and Control Act of 1998, unless otherwise expressly stated. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
14 

Section 3. Definitions 

Provides definitions for the Act, including: Administrator of the 

Environmental Protection Agency; the National Harmful Algal 

Bloom and Hypoxia Program; and the Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere; and Amends the Table of Contents. 

Section 4. National Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Program 

Directs the Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere to utilize the resources of the Task Force to establish and 

maintain a National Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Program. 

The bill outlines tasks for the Under Secretary to ensure the Program: (1) develops a national strategy to address both marine and 

freshwater HABs and hypoxia; (2) coordinates all Federal programs 

related to HABs and hypoxia; (3) works with State, tribal, and local 

government agencies; (4) identifies additional research needs and 

priorities; (5) encourages international research efforts on HABs 

and hypoxia; (6) develops and implements methods and technologies to protect ecosystems damaged by HABs; (7) coordinates 

an education program to improve public understanding; (8) assists 

in regional, State, tribal, and local efforts to implement response 

plans, strategies, and tools; (9) provides resources for training of 

State, tribal and local water and coastal resource managers; (10) 

oversees the updating of the Regional Research and Action Plans; 

and (11) administers peer-reviewed, merit-based competitive grant 

funding. In addition, the Act directs the Under Secretary to work 

cooperatively and avoid duplication of efforts with other offices, 

centers, and programs within NOAA, as well as with States, tribes, 

stakeholder organizations, and other agencies represented on the 

Task Force. 

The bill directs the Under Secretary and the Administrator of the 

Environmental Protection Agency to jointly carry out the duties for 

the freshwater aspects of the Program. The Administrator of EPA 

is mandated to participate in the research of the existing and new 

programs to research the ecology of freshwater harmful algal 

blooms; monitoring and event response activities of freshwater 

harmful algal blooms; and mitigation and control efforts of freshwater harmful algal blooms. The bill directs NOAA to maintain 

and enhance the existing five competitive programs: the Ecology 

and Oceanography of Harmful Algal Blooms Program (ECOHAB); 

the Monitoring and Event Response for Harmful Algal Blooms Program (MERHAB); the Northern Gulf of Mexico Ecosystems and Hypoxia Assessment Program (NGOMEX); the Coastal Hypoxia Research Program (CHRP); and the Prevention, Control, and Mitigation of Harmful Algal Blooms Program (PCM) and establish two 

new programs: an Event Response Program and an Infrastructure 

Program. The bill also requires the Under Secretary to transmit to 

Congress an action strategy that outlines the specific activities to 

be carried out by the Program, a timeline for such activities, and 

the programmatic roles of each Federal agency in the Task Force. 

The action strategy shall be published in the Federal Register and 

be periodically revised by the Under Secretary. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
15 

Section 5. Regional Research and Action Plans 

Directs the Under Secretary, through the Task Force, to oversee 

the development and implementation of Regional Research and Action Plans by identifying the appropriate regions and sub-regions 

to be addressed by each Plan. The bill outlines some content the 

Plans should identify, including: 1) regional priorities for ecological, 

economic, and social research related to the impacts of HABs and 

hypoxia; 2) research, development, and demonstration activities to 

advance technologies and techniques for minimizing the occurrence 

and address the impacts of HABs and hypoxia; 3) ways to reduce 

the duration and intensity of HABs events; 4) research and methods to address the impacts of HABs on human health; 5) mechanisms and the potential costs of these mechanisms to protect vulnerable ecosystems that could be or have been affected by HABs; 

6) mechanisms by which data is transferred between the Program 

and State, tribal, and local governments and relevant research entities; 7) communication, outreach, and dissemination methods 

used to educate and inform the public; and 8) the roles that Federal agencies can play to assist implementation of the Plan. 

Section 5 explicitly directs the utilization of existing research, assessments, and reports and considers the impacts in all waterways, 

including the Chesapeake Bay, in the development of the Plans. 

The bill provides a list of individuals and entities that the Under 

Secretary shall coordinate with in developing the Plans. The bill requires that the Plans be completed within 2 years after the date 

of enactment, and updated once every 5 years. Section 5 requires 

that the Under Secretary submit a report to Congress that provides 

a summary of each Plan not later than 6 months after the completion of each Regional Research and Action Plan and once every 30 

months after the completion of the Plans, report on the activities 

taken to implement the Plans. 

Section 6. Northern Gulf of Mexico Hypoxia 

Directs Administrator, through the Mississippi River/Gulf of 

Mexico Watershed Nutrient Task Force, to transmit a report to 

Congress and the President on the progress made toward attainment of the coastal goals of the 2008 Gulf Hypoxia Action Plan. 

The initial report is required no later than 12 months after the 

date of enactment and every 2 years thereafter. The reports are required to assess progress made toward nutrient load reductions, 

the response of the hypoxia zone and water quality throughout the 

Mississippi/Atchafalaya River Basin and the economic and social 

effects. The reports shall include an evaluation of current policies 

and programs, and lessons learned. In addition, Section 6 requires 

the reports to recommend appropriate actions to continue to implement or, if necessary, revise the strategy set forth in the 2008 Gulf 

Hypoxia Action Plan. 

Section 7. Pacific Northwest, Estuaries, and Puget Sound Hypoxia 

Directs the Task Force to transmit an assessment report to Congress and the President within 12 months of the enactment of the 

Act on the hypoxia in the coastal and estuarine waters of the Pacific Northwest by examining the current research, monitoring, prevention, response, and control efforts. Section 7 also requires the 

Task Force to develop a plan within 2 years of the enactment of 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
16 

the Act for reducing, mitigating, and controlling hypoxia in the Pacific Northwest. In developing the Plan, the Task Force is directed 

to consult with State, tribal, and local governments as well as academic, agricultural, industry, and environmental groups and representatives. The Task Force is also directed to provide progress reports every 2 years after the submission of the Plan, on the activities toward attainment of the goals outlined in the Plan. 

Section 8. Authorization of appropriations 

Provides an authorization of $35,000,000 for each of the fiscal 

years 2010 through 2014 to the Under Secretary to carry out the 

Program, of which $3,000,000 is authorized in each of the fiscal 

years for the development of the Regional Research and Action 

Plans; $3,000,000 for research activities at the laboratories of 

NOAA; $8,000,000 for ECOHAB; $5,500,000 for MERHAB; 

$1,500,000 for NGOMEX; $5,000,000 for CHRP; $5,000,000 for 

PCM; $1,000,000 for the Event Response Program; and $3,000,000 

for the Infrastructure Program. The bill also provides an authorization of $6,000,000 in each of the fiscal years 2010 through 2014 to 

the Administrator for the freshwater HABs activities of Program, 

of which up to $3,000,000 is mandated for participation in the existing and new programs outlined in previous sections of the Act. 

VIII. COMMITTEE VIEWS

H.R. 3650, the Harmful Algal Blooms and Hypoxia Research and 

Control Amendments Act of 2009, will help understand, detect, predict, control, mitigate, and respond to both marine and freshwater 

harmful algal blooms (HABs) and hypoxia events. It is the intent 

of the Committee that the research and activities also seek ways 

to reduce the duration and intensity of blooms that many US waterways currently experience so that individual bloom episodes do 

not last as long and are less intense when they do occur. This is 

particularly important in order to minimize times of emergency 

such as beach and tourism activity closures, cancellations, and 

evacuations and health and food warnings. 

The Committee regards this legislation as the next necessary 

step to build upon and utilize the findings and results of various 

reports and assessments that have resulted from the previous two 

Harmful Algal Blooms and Hypoxia Research and Control Acts 

(1998 and 2004) in formulating the national and regional action 

strategies. Addressing the many dimensions of HABs requires a coordinated multi-agency approach, and there are presently a number of programs and agencies that address the various aspects of 

HABs. It is in the opinion of the Committee that the federal agencies established as the Interagency Task Force (1998 HABHRCA 

Act) and existing programs should collaborate and coordinate to address both marine and freshwater harmful algal blooms and hypoxia. 

While the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 

(NOAA) has been a lead agency in the country’s HABs and Hypoxia 

research activities, it is the intent of the Committee that NOAA 

does not bear the burden of the entire Program. H.R. 3650 intends 

for NOAA to lead the National Harmful Algal bloom and Hypoxia 

Program in its role as the chair of the Interagency Task Force, not 

to just be a NOAA National Program. The Under Secretary of ComVerDate Nov 24 2008 22:49 Jan 15, 2010 Jkt 089006 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR396P1.XXX HR396P1

smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
17 

merce for Oceans and Atmosphere should outline the roles and responsibilities of each Federal agency in the Task Force to ensure 

all participation in the development and implementation of the national action strategy and regional research and action plans to address marine and freshwater HABs and Hypoxia. It is the intent 

of the committee that the Under Secretary ensures the coordination 

of the Task Force, as well as coordinates and works cooperatively 

with all Federal, State, and local programs, including NOAA internal programs and activities that address marine and freshwater 

HABs and Hypoxia. 

Despite the fact that HABs and Hypoxia are not limited to marine waters, in recent years, research and related activities have 

seemingly focused on marine waters at the expense of freshwater 

issues. It is the intent of the Committee that H.R. 3650 expands 

the National Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Program to include 

freshwater HABs and Hypoxia. It is not the intent of the committee, at this juncture, to establish a separate freshwater HABs 

and Hypoxia program, but for the Program to address both marine 

and fresh waters with the coordination of all federal agency participants of the Interagency Task Force. As the lead agency with oversight over freshwater quality, Environmental Protection Agency is 

in the position to ensure the protection of aquatic ecosystems to 

protect human health, and promote freshwater economic and recreational activities by conducting both internal and extramural research to better understand, detect, prevent, control and mitigate 

freshwater HABs and Hypoxia. It is the intent of the Committee 

that the EPA not only continue its extensive Hypoxia work surrounding the Gulf of Mexico but to also participate in the Program 

with respects to the inland and freshwater needs of country. The 

Committee intends for EPA to work with NOAA in the five existing 

programs and the two new programs (Ecology and Oceanography 

of Harmful Algal Blooms Program (ECOHAB); the Monitoring and 

Event Response for Harmful Algal Blooms Program (MERHAB); 

the Northern Gulf of Mexico Ecosystems and Hypoxia Assessment 

Program (NGOMEX); the Coastal Hypoxia Research Program 

(CHRP); the Prevention, Control, and Mitigation of Harmful Algal 

Blooms Program (PCM); and the Event Response Program and Infrastructure Program established in H.R. 3650 for the research on 

ecology of freshwater HABs and Hypoxia; monitoring and event response of outbreaks in lakes, rivers, estuaries (including their tributaries and the watersheds), and reservoirs; and mitigation and 

control activities. The Committee intends for a portion of the funding provided to the Administrator of the Environmental Protection 

Agency to be used to participate in these programs. The Committee 

intends for NOAA and EPA to work together to expand the national HABs program to include not only marine but freshwater 

HABs and Hypoxia, while maintaining NOAA’s current role in the 

Great Lakes as well as in the Gulf of Mexico. 

Advances in knowledge, methods and technologies have led to 

significant improvements of responding to HABs and Hypoxia. It is 

the intent of the Committee that as H.R. 3650 seeks to not only 

control, mitigate, and respond to HABs and Hypoxia, but the monitoring and predicting of these blooms and Hypoxia utilize existing 

monitoring and observational systems and programs to further enhance research, communication, and coordination. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
18 

In the development and implementation of the Regional Research 

and Action Plans mandated by H.R. 3650, it is the Committee’s intention for the Undersecretary to coordinate and collaborate with 

the State, local, and tribal governments that are directly affected 

by HABs and Hypoxia and to formulate plans that will not cause 

financial burdens on these governments. It is also the intent of the 

Committee for all participating agencies of the Interagency Task 

Force to participate in the development and implementation of the 

Plans. The Committee intends for the Regional Plans to also serve 

as vehicle to gain more public involvement of the people that live 

in and around the communities affected by HABs and Hypoxia. 

With more education of the public and outreach and information 

dissemination methods, the Committee does not intend for federal 

funds to be wasted, abused or utilized for lobbying the legislative 

or executive branches of the Federal, State, or local governments. 

In U.S. waters, HABs as well as hypoxic events are found in an 

expanding number of locations and are also increasing in duration 

and severity. It is the intent of the Committee that the National 

Harmful Algal Blooms Program and NOAAs five existing programs 

and the funding be balanced to address all areas of the U.S. and 

waterways. 

IX. COST ESTIMATE

A cost estimate and comparison prepared by the Director of the 

Congressional Budget Office under section 402 of the Congressional 

Budget Act of 1974 has been timely submitted to the Committee on 

Science and Technology prior to the filing of this report and is included in Section X of this report pursuant to House Rule XIII, 

clause 3(c)(3). 

H.R. 3650 does not contain new budget authority, credit authority, or changes in revenues or tax expenditures. Assuming that the 

sums authorized under the bill are appropriated, H.R. 3650 does 

authorize additional discretionary spending, as described in the 

Congressional Budget Office report on the bill, which is contained 

in Section X of this report. 

X. CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE COST ESTIMATE

OCTOBER 15, 2009. 

Hon. BART GORDON, 

Chairman, Committee on Science and Technology, 

House of Representatives, Washington, DC. 

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The Congressional Budget Office has prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 3650, the Harmful Algal 

Blooms and Hypoxia Research and Control Amendments Act of 

2009. 

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

to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Jeff LaFave. 

Sincerely, 

DOUGLAS W. ELMENDORF. 

Enclosure. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
19 

H.R. 3650—Harmful Algal Blooms and Hypoxia Research and Control Amendments Act of 2009 

Summary: H.R. 3650 would amend current law to attempt to reduce the effects of harmful algal blooms and hypoxia (reduced oxygen level) in certain bodies of water. The bill would authorize the 

appropriation of $41 million a year over the 2010–2014 period for 

programs by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 

(NOAA) and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to mitigate 

the effects of harmful algal blooms and hypoxia. Assuming appropriation of the authorized amounts, CBO estimates that implementing the legislation would cost $153 million over the 2010–2014 

period and $22 million after 2014. Enacting the legislation would 

not affect direct spending or revenues. 

H.R. 3650 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. 3650 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 

SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION 

Spending Under Current Law a

Authorization Level ...................................................... 30 0 0 0 0 30 

Estimated Outlays ....................................................... 20 6 4 0 0 30 

Proposed Changes 

Authorization Level ...................................................... 11 41 41 41 41 175 

Estimated Outlays ....................................................... 7 29 36 40 41 153 

Estimated Spending Under H.R. 3650 

Authorization Level ...................................................... 41 41 41 41 41 205 

Estimated Outlays ....................................................... 27 35 40 40 41 183 

a The 2010 level is the amount authorized for that year; a full-year appropriation for 2010 has not yet been provided for this program. 

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

3650 will be enacted near the start of fiscal year 2010 and that the 

authorized amounts will be appropriated for each fiscal year. Estimated outlays are based on historical spending patterns for similar 

NOAA and EPA programs. 

H.R. 3650 would authorize the appropriation of $35 million a 

year over the 2010–2014 period for a NOAA program to mitigate 

the effects of harmful algal blooms and hypoxia in coastal waters. 

The bill also would authorize the appropriation of $6 million annually through 2014 for NOAA and EPA to conduct similar programs 

for freshwater systems. (In 2010, $30 million is authorized to be 

appropriated for harmful algal blooms and hypoxia programs under 

current law.) The bill would direct NOAA to enhance several existing grant programs and establish two new programs related to 

algal blooms and hypoxia. The bill also would require NOAA to 

oversee and coordinate regional efforts to address related problems. 

Finally, the bill would require NOAA to submit biennial reports to 

the Congress describing the activities of the program. 

Assuming appropriation of the authorized amounts, CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 3650 would cost $153 million over 

the 2010–2014 period and $22 million after 2014. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
20 

Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: H.R. 3650 contains 

no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in 

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

Previous CBO estimate: On September 2, 2009, CBO transmitted 

a cost estimate for S. 952, the Harmful Algal Blooms and Hypoxia 

Research and Control Amendments Act of 2009, as ordered reported by the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation on August 5, 2009. Both S. 952 and H.R. 3650 would 

amend and reauthorize the Harmful Algal Blooms and Hypoxia Research and Control Act of 1998, but S. 952 would authorize the appropriation of $45 million a year over the 2010–2014 period. The 

CBO cost estimates reflect that difference. 

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. 

XI. COMPLIANCE WITH PUBLIC LAW 104–4 

H.R. 3246 contains no unfunded mandates. 

XII. COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee on Science and Technology’s oversight findings 

and recommendations are reflected in the body of this report. 

XIII. STATEMENT ON GENERAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND

OBJECTIVES

Pursuant to clause (3)(c) of House rule XIII, the goal of H.R. 

3650 is to authorize the Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans 

and Atmosphere and the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to award grants to reduce harmful algal blooms and 

hypoxia. 

XIV. CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY STATEMENT

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

grants Congress the authority to enact H.R. 3650. 

XV. FEDERAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE STATEMENT

H.R. 3650 does not establish nor authorize the establishment of 

any advisory committee. 

XVI. CONGRESSIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY ACT

The Committee finds that H.R. 3650 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. EARMARK IDENTIFICATION

H.R. 3650 does not contain any congressional earmarks, limited 

tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in House Rule 

XXI, clause 9. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
21 

XVIII. STATEMENT ON PREEMPTION OF STATE, LOCAL, OR TRIBAL

LAW

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

XIX. 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): 

COAST GUARD AUTHORIZATION ACT OF 1998 

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Coast Guard Authorization Act of 

1998’’. 

SEC. 2. TABLE OF CONTENTS. 

The table of contents for this Act is as follows: 

Sec. 1. Short title. 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE VI—HARMFUL ALGAL BLOOMS AND HYPOXIA 

Sec. 601. Short title. 

* * * * * * * 

Sec. 602A. Definitions. 

* * * * * * * 

Sec. 603A. National Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Program. 

Sec. 603B. Regional research and action plans. 

* * * * * * * 

Sec. 604A. Pacific Northwest, estuaries, and Puget Sound hypoxia. 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE VI—HARMFUL ALGAL BLOOMS 

AND HYPOXIA 

SEC. 601. SHORT TITLE. 

This title may be cited as the ‘‘Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia 

Research and Control Act of 1998’’. 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 602A. DEFINITIONS. 

In this title: 

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

Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency. 

(2) PROGRAM.—The term ‘‘Program’’ means the National 

Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Program established under 

section 603A. 

(3) UNDER SECRETARY.—The term ‘‘Under Secretary’’ means 

the Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere. 

* * * * * * * 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
22 

SEC. 603A. NATIONAL HARMFUL ALGAL BLOOM AND HYPOXIA PROGRAM. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in subsection (d), the Under 

Secretary, through the Task Force established under section 603(a), 

shall establish and maintain a National Harmful Algal Bloom and 

Hypoxia Program pursuant to this section. 

(b) DUTIES.—The Under Secretary, through the Program, shall 

utilize the resources of the Task Force to— 

(1) develop and promote a national strategy to understand, 

detect, predict, control, mitigate, and respond to marine and 

freshwater harmful algal bloom and hypoxia events; 

(2) ensure the coordination of all Federal programs that address marine and freshwater harmful algal blooms and hypoxia, and other ocean and Great Lakes science and management programs and centers that address the chemical, biological, and physical components of marine and freshwater harmful algal blooms and hypoxia; 

(3) coordinate and work cooperatively with State, tribal, and 

local government agencies and programs that address marine 

and freshwater harmful algal blooms and hypoxia; 

(4) identify additional research, development, and demonstration needs and priorities relating to monitoring, prediction, prevention, control, mitigation, and response to marine and freshwater harmful algal blooms and hypoxia; 

(5) encourage international information sharing and research 

efforts on marine and freshwater harmful algal blooms and hypoxia, and encourage international mitigation, control, and response activities; 

(6) ensure the development and implementation of methods 

and technologies to protect the ecosystems affected by marine 

and freshwater harmful algal blooms; 

(7) coordinate an education program that integrates and augments existing programs to improve public understanding and 

awareness of the causes, impacts, and mitigation efforts for marine and freshwater harmful algal blooms and hypoxia; 

(8) assist in regional, State, tribal, and local efforts to develop 

and implement appropriate marine and freshwater harmful 

algal bloom and hypoxia response plans, strategies, and tools; 

(9) provide resources for and assist in the training of State, 

tribal, and local water and coastal resource managers in the 

methods and technologies for monitoring, controlling, mitigating, and responding to the effects of marine and freshwater 

harmful algal blooms and hypoxia events; 

(10) oversee the development, implementation, review, and 

periodic updating of the Regional Research and Action Plans 

under section 603B; and 

(11) administer peer-reviewed, merit-based competitive grant 

funding to support— 

(A) the projects maintained and established by the Program; and 

(B) the research and management needs and priorities 

identified in the Regional Research and Action Plans. 

(c) COOPERATIVE EFFORTS.—The Under Secretary shall work cooperatively and avoid duplication of efforts with other offices, centers, and programs within the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
23 

Administration and other agencies represented on the Task Force established under section 603(a), States, tribes, and nongovernmental 

organizations concerned with marine and freshwater aquatic issues 

related to harmful algal blooms and hypoxia. 

(d) FRESHWATER PROGRAM.—With respect to the freshwater aspects of the Program, the Under Secretary and the Administrator 

shall jointly carry out the duties otherwise assigned to the Under 

Secretary under this section and section 603B, including each of the 

programs identified in subsection (e)(1) and (2). The Administrator’s 

participation under this subsection shall include— 

(1) research on the ecology of freshwater harmful algal 

blooms; 

(2) monitoring and event response of freshwater harmful 

algal blooms in lakes, rivers, estuaries (including their tributaries), and reservoirs; and 

(3) mitigation and control of freshwater harmful algal 

blooms. 

(e) NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION PROGRAMS.— 

(1) EXISTING PROGRAMS.—The Under Secretary shall maintain and enhance the following existing competitive programs: 

(A) The Ecology and Oceanography of Harmful Algal 

Blooms Program. 

(B) The Monitoring and Event Response for Harmful 

Algal Blooms Program. 

(C) The Northern Gulf of Mexico Ecosystems and Hypoxia Assessment Program. 

(D) The Coastal Hypoxia Research Program. 

(E) The Prevention, Control, and Mitigation of Harmful 

Algal Blooms Program. 

(2) NEW PROGRAMS.—The Under Secretary shall establish the 

following new programs: 

(A) An Event Response Program to coordinate and enhance, at the request of the States, marine and freshwater 

harmful algal blooms and hypoxia events response activities. 

(B) An Infrastructure Program to— 

(i) increase availability of— 

(I) analytical facilities and technologies; 

(II) operational forecasts; and 

(III) reference and research materials; 

(ii) improve integration of harmful algal bloom activities with existing monitoring and observational programs; and 

(iii) enhance communication and coordination required to meet the purposes of this Act. 

(f) ACTION STRATEGY.— 

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 12 months after the date of 

enactment of the Harmful Algal Blooms and Hypoxia Research 

and Control Amendments Act of 2009, the Under Secretary, 

through the Task Force established under section 603(a), shall 

transmit to the Congress an action strategy that identifies— 

(A) the specific activities to be carried out by the Program 

and the timeline for carrying out such activities; and 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
24 

(B) the roles and responsibilities of each Federal agency 

in the Task Force established under section 603(a) in carrying out Program activities. 

(2) FEDERAL REGISTER.—The Under Secretary shall publish 

the action strategy in the Federal Register. 

(3) PERIODIC REVISION.—The Under Secretary shall periodically review and revise the action strategy prepared under this 

subsection as necessary. 

(g) REPORT.—Every 2 years after the submission of the action 

strategy, the Under Secretary shall prepare and transmit to the 

Congress a report that describes— 

(1) the activities carried out under the Program and the 

budget related to these activities; 

(2) the progress made on implementing the action strategy; 

and 

(3) the need to revise or terminate activities or projects under 

the Program. 

SEC. 603B. REGIONAL RESEARCH AND ACTION PLANS. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—The Under Secretary, through the Task Force 

established under section 603(a), shall— 

(1) identify the appropriate regions and subregions to be addressed by each Regional Research and Action Plan; and 

(2) oversee the development and implementation of the Regional Research and Action Plans. 

(b) CONTENTS.—The Plans developed under this section shall 

identify— 

(1) regional priorities for ecological, economic, and social research on issues related to the impacts of harmful algal blooms 

and hypoxia; 

(2) research, development, and demonstration activities needed to develop and advance technologies and techniques for 

minimizing the occurrence of harmful algal blooms and hypoxia 

and improving capabilities to prevent, predict, monitor, control, 

and mitigate harmful algal blooms and hypoxia; 

(3) ways to reduce the duration and intensity of harmful 

algal blooms and hypoxia, including in times of emergency; 

(4) research and methods to address human health dimensions of harmful algal blooms and hypoxia; 

(5) mechanisms, including the potential costs and benefits of 

those mechanisms, to protect vulnerable ecosystems that could 

be or have been affected by harmful algal blooms and hypoxia 

events; 

(6) mechanisms by which data, information, and products are 

transferred between the Program and State, tribal, and local 

governments and relevant research entities; 

(7) communication, outreach, and information dissemination 

methods that State, tribal, and local governments and stakeholder organizations can undertake to educate and inform the 

public concerning harmful algal blooms and hypoxia; and 

(8) the roles that Federal agencies can play to assist in the 

implementation of the Plan. 

(c) BUILDING ON AVAILABLE STUDIES AND INFORMATION.—In developing the Plans under this section, the Under Secretary shall— 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
25 

(1) utilize and build on existing research, assessments, and 

reports, including those carried out pursuant to existing law 

and other relevant sources; and 

(2) consider the impacts, research, and existing program activities of all United States coastlines and fresh and inland waters, including the Great Lakes, the Chesapeake Bay, and estuaries and tributaries. 

(d) DEVELOPMENT OF PLANS.—The Under Secretary shall develop 

Plans under this section with assistance from the individuals and 

entities described in subsection (g). 

(e) PLAN TIMELINE AND UPDATES.—The Under Secretary, through 

the Task Force established under section 603(a), shall ensure that 

the Plans developed under this section are completed not later than 

24 months after the date of enactment of the Harmful Algal Blooms 

and Hypoxia Research and Control Amendments Act of 2009, and 

updated once every 5 years thereafter. 

(f) REPORTS.—Not later than 6 months after the completion of 

each Regional Research and Action Plan, the Under Secretary shall 

transmit to the Congress a report that provides a summary of such 

Plan, and once every 30 months after the completion of such Plan, 

the Under Secretary shall transmit to the Congress a report that describes— 

(1) the activities taken to implement the Plan, including a description of research funded and actions and outcomes of Plan 

response strategies carried out; and 

(2) Federal funding provided to implement the Plan. 

(g) COORDINATION AND CONSULTATION.—In developing the Plans 

under this section, as appropriate, the Under Secretary— 

(1) shall coordinate with State coastal management and planning officials; 

(2) shall coordinate with tribal resource management officials; 

(3) shall coordinate with water management and watershed 

officials from both coastal States and noncoastal States with 

water sources that drain into water bodies affected by harmful 

algal blooms and hypoxia; and 

(4) shall consult with— 

(A) public health officials; 

(B) emergency management officials; 

(C) science and technology development institutions; 

(D) economists; 

(E) industries and businesses affected by marine and 

freshwater harmful algal blooms and hypoxia; 

(F) scientists, with expertise concerning harmful algal 

blooms or hypoxia, from academic or research institutions; 

and 

(G) other stakeholders. 

øSEC. 604. NORTHERN GULF OF MEXICO HYPOXIA. 

ø(a) ASSESSMENT REPORT.—Not later than May 30, 1999, the 

Task Force shall complete and submit to Congress and the President an integrated assessment of hypoxia in the northern Gulf of 

Mexico that examines: the distribution, dynamics, and causes; ecological and economic consequences; sources and loads of nutrients 

transported by the Mississippi River to the Gulf of Mexico; effects 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
26 

of reducing nutrient loads; methods for reducing nutrient loads; 

and the social and economic costs and benefits of such methods. 

ø(b) SUBMISSION OF A PLAN.—No later than March 30, 2000, the 

President, in conjunction with the chief executive officers of the 

States, shall develop and submit to Congress a plan, based on the 

integrated assessment submitted under subsection (a), for reducing, 

mitigating, and controlling hypoxia in the northern Gulf of Mexico. 

In developing such plan, the President shall consult with State, Indian tribe, and local governments, academic, agricultural, industry, 

and environmental groups and representatives. Such plan shall include incentive-based partnership approaches. The plan shall also 

include the social and economic costs and benefits of the measures 

for reducing, mitigating, and controlling hypoxia. At least 90 days 

before the President submits such plan to the Congress, a summary of the proposed plan shall be published in the Federal Register for a public comment period of not less than 60 days. 

øSEC. 605. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS. 

øThere are authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary of 

Commerce for research, education, and monitoring activities related to the prevention, reduction, and control of harmful algal 

blooms and hypoxia, $15,000,000 for fiscal year 1999, $18,250,000 

for fiscal year 2000, and $19,000,000 for fiscal year 2001, 

$23,500,000 for fiscal year 2005, $24,500,000 for fiscal year 2006, 

$25,000,000 for fiscal year 2007, and $30,000,000 for each of fiscal 

years 2008 through 2010, to remain available until expended. The 

Secretary shall consult with the States on a regular basis regarding 

the development and implementation of the activities authorized 

under this section. Of such amounts for each fiscal year— 

ø(1) $1,500,000 for fiscal year 1999, $1,500,000 for fiscal year 2000, $2,000,000 for fiscal year 2001, and $2,500,000 for each 

of fiscal years 2005 through 2010 may be used to enable the 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to carry out 

research and assessment activities, including procurement of 

necessary research equipment, at research laboratories of the 

National Ocean Service and the National Marine Fisheries 

Service; 

ø(2) $4,000,000 for fiscal year 1999, $5,500,000 for fiscal year 2000, $5,500,000 for fiscal year 2001, and $6,500,000, of which 

$1,000,000 shall be used for the research program described in 

section 603(f)(2)(B), for each of fiscal years 2005 through 2010 

may be used to carry out the Ecology and Oceanography of 

Harmful Algal Blooms (ECOHAB) project under the Coastal 

Ocean Program established under section 201(c) of Public Law 

102–567; 

ø(3) $1,000,000 for fiscal year 1999, $2,000,000 for fiscal year 

2000, $2,000,000 for fiscal year 2001, and $3,000,000 for each 

of fiscal years 2005 through 2010 may be used by the National 

Ocean Service of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to carry out a peer-reviewed research project on 

management measures that can be taken to prevent, reduce, 

control, and mitigate harmful algal blooms and to carry out 

section 603(d); 

ø(4) $5,500,000 for each of the fiscal years 1999, 2000, 2001, 

and $6,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2005 through 2010 may 

be used to carry out Federal and State annual monitoring and 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
27 

analysis activities for harmful algal blooms administered by 

the National Ocean Service of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; 

ø(5) $3,000,000 for fiscal year 1999, $3,750,000 for fiscal year 

2000, $4,000,000 for fiscal year 2001, $4,000,000 for fiscal year 

2005, $5,000,000 for fiscal year 2006, $5,500,000 for fiscal year 

2007, and $6,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2008 through 

2010 may be used for activities related to research and monitoring on hypoxia by the National Ocean Service and the Office 

of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research of the National Oceanic 

and Atmospheric Administration; and 

ø(6) $1,500,000 for each of fiscal years 2005 through 2010 to 

carry out section 603(e).¿ 

SEC. 604. NORTHERN GULF OF MEXICO HYPOXIA. 

(a) TASK FORCE INITIAL PROGRESS REPORTS.—Not later than 12 

months after the date of enactment of the Harmful Algal Blooms 

and Hypoxia Research and Control Amendments Act of 2009, the 

Administrator, through the Mississippi River/Gulf of Mexico Watershed Nutrient Task Force, shall complete and transmit to the Congress and the President a report on the progress made by Task 

Force-directed activities toward attainment of the coastal goal of the 

2008 Gulf Hypoxia Action Plan. 

(b) TASK FORCE 2-YEAR PROGRESS REPORTS.—After the initial report required under subsection (a), the Administrator, through the 

Task Force, shall complete and transmit to Congress and the President a report every 2 years thereafter on the progress made by Task 

Force-directed activities toward attainment of the coastal goal of the 

2008 Gulf Hypoxia Action Plan. 

(c) CONTENTS.—The reports required by this section shall assess 

progress made toward nutrient load reductions, the response of the 

hypoxic zone and water quality throughout the Mississippi/ 

Atchafalaya River Basin, and the economic and social effects. The 

reports shall— 

(1) include an evaluation of how current policies and programs affect management decisions, including those made by 

municipalities and industrial and agricultural producers; 

(2) evaluate lessons learned; and 

(3) recommend appropriate actions to continue to implement 

or, if necessary, revise the strategy set forth in the 2008 Gulf 

Hypoxia Action Plan. 

SEC. 604A. PACIFIC NORTHWEST, ESTUARIES, AND PUGET SOUND HYPOXIA. 

(a) ASSESSMENT REPORT.—Not later than 12 months after the 

date of enactment of this Act, the Task Force established under section 603 shall complete and submit to Congress and the President 

an integrated assessment of hypoxia in the coastal and estuarine 

waters of the Pacific Northwest that examines the status of current 

research, monitoring, prevention, response, and control efforts. 

(b) PLAN.—Not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of 

this Act, such Task Force shall develop and submit to Congress a 

plan, based on the integrated assessment submitted under subsection (a), for reducing, mitigating, and controlling hypoxia in the 

coastal and estuarine waters of the Pacific Northwest. In developing 

such plan, the Task Force shall consult with State, Indian tribe, 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
28 

and local governments, and academic, agricultural, industry, and 

environmental groups and representatives. Such plan shall include 

incentive-based partnership approaches. The plan shall also address 

the social and economic costs and benefits of the measures for reducing, mitigating, and controlling hypoxia. At least 90 days before 

submission of such plan to the Congress, a summary of the proposed 

plan shall be published in the Federal Register. After submission of 

the plan, the Task Force shall provide progress reports on the activities toward attainment of the goals set forth in the plan reduce, 

mitigate, and control hypoxia in the coastal and estuarine waters of 

the Pacific Northwest every 2 years. 

SEC. 605. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS. 

There are authorized to be appropriated— 

(1) to the Under Secretary to carry out sections 603A and 

603B, $35,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2010 through 2014, 

of which, for each fiscal year— 

(A) up to $3,000,000 shall be for the development of the 

Regional Research and Action Plans and the reports required by sections 604 and 604A; 

(B) $3,000,000 shall be for the research and assessment 

activities related to marine and freshwater harmful algal 

blooms at research laboratories of the National Oceanic 

and Atmospheric Administration; 

(C) $8,000,000 shall be used to carry out the Ecology and 

Oceanography of Harmful Algal Blooms Program 

(ECOHAB); 

(D) $5,500,000 shall be used to carry out the Monitoring 

and Event Response for Harmful Algal Blooms Program 

(MERHAB); 

(E) $1,500,000 shall be used to carry out the Northern 

Gulf of Mexico Ecosystems and Hypoxia Assessment Program (NGOMEX); 

(F) $5,000,000 shall be used to carry out the Coastal Hypoxia Research Program (CHRP); 

(G) $5,000,000 shall be used to carry out the Prevention, 

Control, and Mitigation of Harmful Algal Blooms Program 

(PCM); 

(H) $1,000,000 shall be used to carry out the Event Response Program; and 

(I) $3,000,000 shall be used to carry out the Infrastructure Program; and 

(2) to the Administrator to carry out sections 603A and 603B, 

$6,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2010 through 2014, of which 

up to $3,000,000 for each fiscal year shall be for participation 

in carrying out section 603A(e), as described in section 603A(d). 

* * * * * * * 

XX. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

On October 7, 2009, the Committee on Science and Technology 

favorably reported by voice vote the bill, H.R. 3650, as amended, 

to the House with the recommendation that the bill, as amended, 

do pass. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
(29) 

XXI. ADDITIONAL VIEWS

ADDITIONAL VIEWS OFFERED BY REPRESENTATIVES 

RALPH HALL, F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, LAMAR SMITH, 

DANA ROHRABACHER, ROSCOE BARTLETT, VERN 

EHLERS, FRANK LUCAS, BOB INGLIS, BRIAN BILBRAY, 

ADRIAN SMITH, PAUL BROUN AND PETE OLSON 

As a whole, the reauthorization of harmful algal blooms and hypoxia research and development has been a bipartisan effort. This 

bill is the second reauthorization since the original law passed in 

1998. Throughout the committee process, both sides have worked 

well together to put forth a good bill that takes this important research and development (R&D) to the next step. However, some 

concerns remain. 

H.R. 3650 is intended to address a problem that affects nearly 

every State, however, we want to make sure that the regional research and action plans that are called for are not a top-down mandate, but a true collaboration between the Federal government and 

the States and local areas directly affected by these blooms. We 

want to make sure we are not imposing undue burdens on States 

that they would not voluntarily take on themselves. Although the 

onus is currently on the Federal government, the activities identified in these plans are ones that will most likely be executed by 

State, tribal and local governments. As it is written right now, H.R. 

3650 does not contain any safeguards against unfunded mandates, 

which would result if State, tribal and local governments were 

forced to undertake the activities identified in the plans that the 

Federal government is responsible for developing and implementing. 

During the markup, we offered amendments that would address 

the concern that States not be overly encumbered with potentially 

undesired requirements by the Federal government. The first 

amendment would have prevented any increased financial burden 

to State, tribal or local governments as a result of anything in the 

bill or the law it amends. Despite receiving bipartisan support, the 

amendment was ultimately rejected. A second amendment would 

have required the development and implementation of the plans 

initiated only at the request of the States—not the Federal government’s mandate. Unfortunately, this amendment was also rejected 

after a roll call vote. 

State, tribal and local governments are already shouldering the 

burden of the effects of harmful algal blooms and hypoxia, since 

these events have a direct impact on local and regional economies. 

Furthermore, in the current economic climate, these governments 

are struggling to prioritize and fund the most basic of services. The 

amendments we offered at Committee would ensure that these govVerDate Nov 24 2008 22:49 Jan 15, 2010 Jkt 089006 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6604 E:\HR\OC\HR396P1.XXX HR396P1

smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
30 

ernments would not be forced to choose between cutting necessities 

like teachers or police in order to fund Federal requirements set 

out in the Regional Research and Action Plans. 

We hope as this bill moves forward in the legislative process, 

these basic protections of States’ rights will be incorporated. 

RALPH M. HALL. 

JIM SENSENBRENNER. 

LAMAR SMITH. 

DANA ROHRABACHER. 

ROSCOE G. BARTLETT. 

VERNON J. EHLERS. 

FRANK D. LUCAS. 

BOB INGLIS. 

BRIAN P. BILBRAY. 

ADRIAN SMITH. 

PAUL C. BROUN. 

PETE OLSON. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
(31) 

ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF REPRESENTATIVE GRAYSON 

Mr. Chairman, I would like to take this opportunity to thank you 

and the Committee staff for your commitment to ensure that watershed language be identified in the final report on H.R. 3650, the 

Harmful Algal Blooms and Hypoxia Research and Control Amendments Act of 2009. As we know, watersheds, or drainage basins, 

collect excess water from an area, whether it be rain or melting 

snow, and channel this into a waterway. As this water flows over 

the ground and along rivers, it also has the ability to pick up high 

levels of toxins, agricultural runoff, and other water pollutions 

which have negative implications on the ecological processes and 

wildlife downriver. 

Mr. Chairman, my state of Florida is both surrounded by waters 

that are no stranger to hypoxia, and home to some of the most 

fragile wetlands and watersheds in the country, including roughly 

4 million acres that belong to our national treasure, the Everglades. The agricultural usage of artificial fertilizers high in nitrogen, potassium and phosphorous have continued to threaten both 

humans and the rich flora and fauna ecologies of these invaluable 

wetlands and watersheds. As we take up legislation regarding 

harmful algal blooms and hypoxia, I believe it is essential that we 

not overlook the devastating effects these also play on our inland 

freshwaters such as watersheds. 

As a representative of the state of Florida, I feel it is important 

to identify or include watershed language into the final report, 

which will ensure that watersheds are included along with the research and dissemination of information regarding the monitoring, 

prevention, control, and mitigation of harmful algal blooms and hypoxia to our fresh and inland waters, estuaries, and tributaries. 

ALAN GRAYSON. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
32 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 39 here HR396P1.001
33 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 40 here HR396P1.002
34 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 41 here HR396P1.003
35 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 42 here HR396P1.004
36 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 43 here HR396P1.005
(37) 

XXIII. PROCEEDINGS OF THE MARKUP BY 

THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT ON H.R. 3650, HARMFUL ALGAL 

BLOOMS AND HYPOXIA RESEARCH AND 

CONTROL AMENDMENTS ACT OF 2009 

WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 30, 2009 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT, 

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, 

Washington, DC. 

The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:00 a.m., in Room 

2318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Brian Baird 

[Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding. 

Chairman BAIRD. Good morning. The Subcommittee will now 

come to order. 

Pursuant to notice, the Subcommittee on Energy and Environment meets to consider the following measures: H.R. 3650, the 

Harmful Algal Blooms and Hypoxia Research and Control Amendments Act of 2009; H.R. 3585, the Solar Technology Roadmap Act; 

and H.R. 3598, the Energy and Water Research Integration Act. 

Today we will consider these there bills that cover a wide range of 

topics in this subcommittee’s purview. 

First, the Subcommittee will consider my bill, H.R. 3650, the 

Harmful Algal Blooms and Hypoxia Research and Control Amendments Act of 2009. As we heard in this subcommittee two weeks 

ago, rapid overproduction of algae can have devastating effects on 

aquatic plant and animal life and human health. Unfortunately, 

despite years of research, the frequency and duration of the harmful algal blooms and hypoxia are on the rise, and affecting more of 

our coastlines and inland waters. This bill directs the National 

Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to implement research 

strategies and plans to better understand and respond to these 

blooms and hypoxic events. I look forward to discussing the bill 

more when we call it up for consideration. 

Our third bill will be H.R. 3585. We are changing the order 

slightly in order for Chairman Gordon to make an Energy and 

Commerce markup, so our third bill will be H.R. 3585, the Solar 

Technology Roadmap Act, authored by the Space and Aeronautics 

Subcommittee Chair, Ms. Gabrielle Giffords. This bill instructs the 

Department of Energy to create a comprehensive and updatable 

roadmap for solar research, development and demonstration activities with strong private and public input. This roadmap will be 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
38 

critically important to using our limited research dollars as effectively as possible in harnessing the truly immense solar resources 

we have in the U.S. 

Then our second bill will be H.R. 3598, the Energy and Water Research Integration Act, authored by the Full Committee Chairman, 

Mr. Bart Gordon. A little over a year ago, the Chairman began a 

comprehensive review of our federal research and technology development efforts to improve utilization of our precious water resources. The Committee has since held five hearings and passed 

out of the House three bills pertaining to this important topic. We 

now look forward to hearing from Chairman Gordon on this next 

installment, which addresses the critical linkage between our nation’s energy and water resources and directs the Department of 

Energy to better integrate water into existing federal efforts in this 

field. 

The three bills we have before us today target several important 

research needs. I thank you all for your attendance and participation this morning, and I look forward to a productive markup. 

I recognize Mr. Inglis to present his opening remarks. 

[The prepared statement of Chairman Baird follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN BRIAN BAIRD

I welcome everyone to this morning’s Energy and Environment Subcommittee 

markup. 

Today we will consider three bills that cover a wide range of topics in this subcommittee’s purview. 

First, the Subcommittee will consider my bill, H.R. 3650, the Harmful Algal 

Blooms and Hypoxia Research and Control Amendments Act of 2009. As we heard 

in this subcommittee two weeks ago, rapid overproduction of algae can have devastating effects on aquatic plant and animal life and human health. 

Unfortunately, despite years of research, the frequency and duration of the harmful algal blooms and hypoxia are on the rise, and affecting more of our coastlines 

and inland waters. This bill directs the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to implement research strategies and plans to better understand and respond to these blooms and hypoxic events. I look forward to discussing the bill more 

when we bring it up for consideration. 

Next, we will consider H.R. 3585, the Solar Technology Roadmap Act, authored 

by the Space and Aeronautics Subcommittee Chair, Ms. Gabrielle Giffords. This bill 

instructs the Department of Energy to create a comprehensive, updatable roadmap 

for solar research, development, and demonstration activities with strong private 

and public input. 

This roadmap will be critically important to using our, limited research dollars 

as effectively as possible in harnessing the truly immense solar resources we have 

in the U.S. 

Finally, we will take up H.R. 3598, the Energy and Water Research Integration 

Act, authored by the Full Committee Chairman, Mr. Bart Gordon. In the last Congress the Chairman announced his intention to undertake a comprehensive review 

of our federal research and technology development efforts to improve utilization of 

our precious water resources. We have since held five hearings and passed out of 

the House three bills pertaining to this important topic. 

We now look forward to hearing from Chairman Gordon on this next installment 

which addresses the critical linkage between our nation’s energy and water resources, and directs the Department of Energy to better integrate water into existing federal efforts in this field. 

The three bills we have before us today target several important research needs. 

I thank you all for your attendance and participation this morning, and I look forward to a productive markup. 

Mr. INGLIS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Today we address three 

pieces of legislation that aim to improve the health of our environment, our investment in solar energy and impact of energy use and 

development on water resources. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
39 

The first bill we will look at is the Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research and Control Amendments Act of 2009. It will advance efforts at the federal level to reduce the negative impact that 

algal blooms have on the environment. Every summer we hear stories about the impact of runaway algae growth on local water quality, animal deaths and environmental quality. Not only do these 

blooms impact recreation, they burden marine, commerce and 

human health. This legislation will promote a better understanding 

of algal blooms and will help us effectively prevent and respond to 

blooms and hypoxia. 

Second, we will discuss the Solar Technology Roadmap Act. This 

bill aims to increase the strength of our domestic solar technology 

industry through a coordinated research and development program 

and public-private partnerships. It also requires industry, academia and government researchers to develop a long-term roadmap 

that will advance our clean energy alternatives. I hope we can ensure the roadmap is not focused on technology options we are already aware of but also emphasizes cutting-edge advancements 

that will define the future of solar power. 

Finally, we turn to the Energy and Water Research Integration 

Act, which directs the Department of Energy to take into consider 

energy-related water issues in research, development and demonstration projects. While I agree with the intent of the bill, I am 

concerned that this only reframes existing DOE priorities and ignores the large role that water resource information should play. 

I am looking forward to working together to improve the bill. 

Thank you again, Mr. Chairman, and I look forward to addressing this legislation. 

Chairman BAIRD. Thank you, Mr. Inglis. Members may place 

statements for the record at this point. 

We will now consider H.R. 3650, the Harmful Algal Blooms and 

Hypoxia Research and Control Amendments Act of 2009. I recognize 

myself for five minutes to describe the bill. 

H.R. 3650 reauthorizes the Harmful Algal Blooms and Hypoxia 

Act of 1998. This bill requires the Under Secretary of Commerce for 

Oceans and Atmosphere at NOAA to establish and maintain the 

National Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Program. The Under 

Secretary is required to work cooperatively with other offices, centers and programs within NOAA as well as with the States, tribes, 

non-governmental organizations and other federal agencies to avoid 

duplication of efforts. H.R. 3650 explicitly directs the EPA Administrator and the Under Secretary to coordinate efforts to address 

freshwater harmful algal blooms and hypoxia. The bill requires the 

Under Secretary to transmit to Congress an action strategy that 

outlines the specific activities for the program and also directs the 

Task Force established in the 1998 law to transmit a report to Congress on hypoxia in the coastal and estuarine waters of the Pacific 

Northwest and develop a plan for reducing, mitigating and controlling hypoxia. To accomplish these objectives, the bill provides an 

authorization of $35 million per year over five years for NOAA for 

the overall program and $6 million per year for five years for EPA 

to conduct a freshwater HABs program. 

I am proud to say the bill has been a joint effort with my colleague from Michigan, Mr. Ehlers, or Dr. Ehlers, and I want to 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
40 

particularly commend him for his many years of work on this and 

his commitment to the Great Lakes region on a host of topics. I 

also want to thank him for being a consistent champion for NOAA 

and these related issues. There are also several other co-sponsors, 

Mr. Mack and Ms. Castor of Florida, Mr. Delahunt of Massachusetts and Mr. Kratovil of Maryland. On that note, I would encourage all of my fellow Subcommittee colleagues to co-sponsor this important legislation. I look forward to further improvements as we 

move it to the Full Committee, and I now recognize Mr. Inglis to 

present any remarks on the bill. 

[The prepared statement of Chairman Baird follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN BRIAN BAIRD

H.R. 3650, the Harmful Algal Blooms and Hypoxia Research and Control Amendments Act of 2009, reauthorizes the Harmful Algal Blooms and Hypoxia Act of 1998. 

The Act establishes a National Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Program to develop and coordinate a comprehensive strategy to address harmful algal blooms and 

hypoxia. The Act also mandates the development and implementation of comprehensive regional action plans. 

The Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere is directed to establish and maintain the National Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Program as 

Chair of the Task Force established in the 1998 law. The Act outlines tasks for the 

Under Secretary to ensure are carried out through the Program. The Under Secretary is required to work cooperatively with other offices, centers, and programs 

within NOAA, as well as, with states, tribes, non-governmental organizations, and 

other federal agencies on the Task Force to avoid duplication of efforts. 

H.R. 3650 explicitly directs the Administrator of the Environmental Protection 

Agency and the Under Secretary to work together to address the freshwater harmful 

algal blooms and hypoxia. 

H.R. 3650 also requires the Under Secretary to transmit to Congress an action 

strategy that outlines the specific activities to be carried out by the Program, a 

timeline for such activities, and the programmatic roles of each federal agency in 

the Task Force. 

H.R. 3650 directs the Under Secretary to oversee the development and implementation of the Regional Research and Action Plans by identifying the appropriate regions and sub-regions to be addressed by each Plan. The Plans must also identify 

research, activities, and technologies needed to predict, monitor, prevent, control, 

and mitigate harmful algal blooms. and hypoxia. In addition, the Under Secretary 

is directed to utilize and build upon existing research, assessments, and reports in 

the development of these Plans. 

The bill directs the Mississippi River/Gulf of Mexico Watershed Nutrient Task 

Force to transmit a report to Congress on the progress made toward attaining the 

coastal goals of the 2008 Gulf Hypoxia-Action Plan. The reports must include an assessment of the progress made on nutrient load reductions, the response of the hypoxia zone and water quality throughout the Mississippi/Atchafalaya River Basin 

and the economic and social impacts. 

H.R. 3650 directs the Task Force established in the 1998 law to transmit an assessment report to Congress on the hypoxia in the coastal and estuarine waters of 

the Pacific Northwest and develop a Plan for reducing, mitigating, and controlling 

hypoxia. 

Finally, H.R. 3650 provides an authorization of $35,000,000 for each fiscal year 

from 2010 through 2014, to the Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere to implement the Program; $5,000,000 is for each of the fiscal years for 

the development of the Regional Research and Action Plans. H.R. 3650 authorizes 

$6,000,000 for each fiscal year from 2010 through 2014 to the Administrator of the 

Environmental Protection Agency for the freshwater HABs activities of Program: 

This bill has been a joint effort with Mr. Ehlers of Michigan. Thank you for being 

a consistent champion for NOAA and these issues. We also have several co-sponsors 

on this bill—Mr. Mack of Florida; Ms. Castor, also of Florida, Mr. Delahunt of Massachusetts; Mr. Kratovil of Maryland; and thank you all for your support on this 

bill and we hope to move an even better bill at today’s markup. 

I urge the support of all Members of the Subcommittee for this bill. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
41 

Mr. INGLIS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. At our hearing two weeks 

ago, we heard a considerable amount about work being done to understand HABs and hypoxia and to improve national communication about events. We also heard about promising approaches to 

take action to prevent, control and mitigate the negative effects of 

runaway algal growth. H.R. 3650 is the next step in creating response programs nationwide and reducing the negative effects of 

HABs and hypoxia on recreation and our marine economy. 

I would like to thank the Majority staff for working with Minority staff on this legislation and look forward to its passage. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Inglis follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE BOB INGLIS

At our hearing two weeks ago, we heard a considerable amount about work being 

done to understand HABs (pronounced ‘‘habs’’) and hypoxia and improve national 

communication about events. We also heard about promising approaches to take action to prevent, control, and mitigate the negative effects of runaway algae growth. 

H.R. 3650 is the next step in creating response programs nation wide and reducing 

the negative impacts of HABs and hypoxia on recreation and our marine economy. 

I’d like to thank the Majority staff for working with Minority staff on this legislation. 

Chairman BAIRD. Does any other Member wish to be recognized? 

Dr. Ehlers. 

Mr. EHLERS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your kind words and 

thank you especially for your work on this issue. It continues to be 

a major issue and a major danger to much of the life in our seas 

and Great Lakes, and I appreciate the effort you have put into it 

and updating it and improving it from its original form, and thank 

you for all the good work you have done on it. I yield back. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Ehlers follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE VERNON J. EHLERS

H.R. 3650 is an important step in responding to the problem of harmful algal 

blooms and hypoxia, which threaten our coastlines in addition to our inland 

freshwaters. 

This reauthorization will build upon the 1998 Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia 

Research and Control Act and the 2004 reauthorization by establishing a National 

Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Program, along with a number of Regional Research and Action plans to address the unique challenges of harmful algal blooms 

and hypoxia across the country. 

I am proud to co-sponsor this legislation, and I thank Chairman Baird for his 

leadership and willingness to work together in producing this legislation. I urge my 

colleagues to support it. 

Chairman BAIRD. Thank you, Dr. Ehlers. Any other Members 

wish to be recognized? If not, then I ask unanimous consent that 

the bill is considered as read and open to amendment at any point. 

Without objection, so ordered. 

The first amendment on the roster is a manager’s amendment. 

The Clerk will report the amendment. 

The CLERK. Amendment to H.R. 3650, amendment number 036, 

offered by Mr. Baird of Washington and Mr. Ehlers of Michigan. 

Chairman BAIRD. I ask unanimous consent to dispense with the 

reading. Without objection, so ordered. I recognize myself for five 

minutes to explain the amendment. 

The manager’s amendment makes a series of clarifying changes 

throughout the bill, many in response to suggestions made in the 

Subcommittee hearing two weeks ago, and at this point I want to 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
42 

make sure I put into the record our gratitude for the outstanding 

testimony we had from witnesses. We went very carefully through 

all of their written and spoken testimony and believe that the vast 

majority of the recommendations, which were quite sound, have 

been included in the amendment. 

The amendment makes changes to reflect the addition of existing 

NOAA activities to the program and provides for the establishment 

of an Event Response Program and an Infrastructure Program as 

recommended. Deadlines for the reports to Congress are changed 

to allow adequate time for completion of the action strategy, regional plans, and reports while also maintaining a responsible level 

of accountability. Language is also added to ensure that NOAA 

works in coordination with and does not duplicate the efforts of 

other federal agencies. The amendment also expands the authorization of an appropriations section to provide more specificity to the 

direction of the funding in the bill. The amendment again is the 

product of discussions between Majority and Minority staff. It improves the bill and ensures a more effective, efficient and highly 

collaborative program. I urge colleagues to support the amendment. 

Is there further discussion on the amendment? If no, the vote occurs on the amendment. All in favor, say aye. Those opposed, no. 

The ayes have it and the amendment is agreed to. 

The second amendment on the roster is an amendment offered 

by the gentlelady from Maryland, Ms. Edwards. Are you ready to 

proceed with your amendment? 

Ms. EDWARDS. I am, Mr. Chairman. I have an amendment at the 

desk. 

Chairman BAIRD. The Clerk will report the amendment. 

The CLERK. Amendment to H.R. 3650, amendment number 045, 

offered by Ms. Edwards of Maryland. 

Chairman BAIRD. I ask unanimous consent to dispense with the 

reading. Without objection, so ordered. I recognize the gentlelady 

from Maryland for five minutes to explain the amendment. 

Ms. EDWARDS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your important 

leadership on this issue. As you know, these harmful algal blooms 

are having a substantially negative impact on our waterways, and 

as a representative of Maryland, the health and welfare of the 

Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries is a top priority of mine. The 

Chesapeake Bay is the largest estuary in the country and currently 

nitrogen and phosphorus pollution are the most serious problems 

facing the bay. Too much nitrogen and phosphorus cause these 

algal blooms that block sunlight to underwater grasses, and when 

the blooms decompose they consume oxygen and create dead zones 

all through the bay and its tributaries where dissolved oxygen levels are too low to sustain marine life. The impact is negative to the 

plants and the sea life in the bay and its tributaries. For example, 

from the 1950s to the 1970s, the average annual oyster catch was 

about 25 million pounds per year and the blue crab harvest contributed nearly a third of the Nation’s catch. Today the bay’s oyster 

population is a mere two percent of its historic level and reduced 

amounts of the underwater grass habitat in addition to low summer levels of dissolved oxygen continue to keep the crab population 

well below average. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
43 

The health of the Chesapeake Bay is so grave that on May 12, 

2009, President Obama issued Executive Order 13508 to protect 

and restore the Bay watershed. Four federal agencies are tasked 

with looking out for the health of the Chesapeake Bay. 

I wanted to make sure this bill addressed the bay and other similar bodies of water. Therefore, my amendment amends Section 5, 

Regional Research and Action Plans, to require that the Under Secretary consider the impacts, research, and existing program activities of all United States coastlines and fresh and inland waters including the Great Lakes, the Chesapeake Bay and estuaries and 

tributaries in developing the Regional Research and Action Plans. 

Last week in this committee room, the Director of the National 

Oceanographic Atmospheric Administration, NOAA, indicated that 

harmful algal blooms are a threat to the health of Americans and 

to the national economy, which is why we must have a comprehensive and all-inclusive approach at addressing this issue on a national level. 

Again, I thank you for your leadership and look forward to the 

consideration of this amendment, and I urge my colleagues to 

adopt the amendment. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Edwards follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE DONNA F. EDWARDS

Thank you Mr. Chairman for your important leadership on this very important 

issue. 

As you know these harmful algal blooms are having a substantially negative impact on our waterways. As a Representative of Maryland, the health and welfare 

of the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries is a top priority of mine. 

Currently, nitrogen and phosphorus pollution are the most serious problems facing the Chesapeake Bay. Too much nitrogen and phosphorus cause these algae 

blooms that block sunlight to underwater grasses. When the blooms decompose, they 

consume oxygen and create ‘‘dead zones,’’ where dissolved oxygen levels are too low 

to sustain marine life. Marine life cannot survive in these dead zones. The impact 

is negative to the plants and the sea-life in the Bay and its tributaries. For example 

from the 1950’s to the 1970’s the average annual oyster catch was about 25 million 

pounds per year, and the blue crab harvest contributed nearly a third of the Nation’s catch. 

Today, the Bay’s oyster population is a mere TWO PERCENT of its historic level, 

and reduced amounts of the underwater grass habitat, in addition to low summer 

levels of dissolved oxygen, continue to keep the crab population well-below average. 

The health of the Chesapeake Bay is so great that on May 12, 2009, President 

Obama issued Executive Order 13508 to protect and restore the Bay Watershed. 

Four federal agencies are tasked with looking out for the health of the Chesapeake 

Bay. 

I wanted to make sure this bill addressed the Chesapeake Bay and other similar 

bodies of water. Therefore, my amendment amends Section 5 (‘‘Regional Research 

Action Plans’’) to require that the Under Secretary ‘‘consider the impacts, research, 

and existing program activities of all United States coastlines and fresh and inland 

waters, including the Great Lakes, the Chesapeake Bay, and estuaries and tributaries’’ in developing the Regional Research Action Plans. 

Last week, in this committee room, the Director of the National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) indicated that harmful algal blooms are a threat to 

the health of Americans and to the national economy, which is why we must have 

a comprehensive and all inclusive approach at addressing this issue on a national 

level. 

Chairman BAIRD. I thank the gentlelady. The Chesapeake Bay 

has a true champion in Ms. Edwards, and Mr. Kratovil has also expressed his interest in this, but Ms. Edwards, you know we have 

a similar experience up in the Pacific Northwest with the great 

Puget Sound and we also have oysters, crab and shellfish and 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
44 

harmful algal blooms and hypoxia are problematic there too, so I 

share in your commitment to this and applaud your efforts. 

[The prepared statement of Chairman Baird follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN BRIAN BAIRD

Thank you Ms. Edwards for your continuous input on this subcommittee. I understand and support your amendment. It is a simple provision that brings attention 

to the Chesapeake Bay area. This area has many of the same concerns we experience on the west coast and algae has caused tremendous difficulties and problems. 

I thank the gentlelady for this amendment and urge its adoption. 

Chairman BAIRD. Is there any further discussion of the amendments? If no, the vote occurs on the amendment. All in favor, say 

aye. Those opposed, no. The ayes have it and the amendment is 

agreed to. 

Any other Members wishing to comment further? If no, then the 

vote is on the bill, H.R. 3650, as amended. All those in favor will 

say aye. All those opposed, no. In the opinion of the Chair, the ayes 

have it. 

I now recognize myself to offer a motion. I move that the Subcommittee favorably report H.R. 3650 as amended to the Full Committee. Furthermore, I move that staff be instructed to prepare the 

Subcommittee report and make necessary technical and conforming 

changes to the bill in accordance with the recommendations of the 

Subcommittee. 

The question is on the motion to report the bill favorably. Those 

in favor of the motion will signify by saying aye. Opposed, no. The 

ayes have it, and the bill is favorably reported. Without objection 

the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table. Members will have 

two subsequent calendar days in which to submit supplemental Minority or additional views on the measure. 

With that, I thank my colleagues for their input and the outstanding staff for their work on this legislation, and with that, this 

markup stands adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 11:15 a.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.] 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
(45) 

Appendix: 

H.R. 3650, SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS, AMENDMENT ROSTER


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
46 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTShr3650j.eps
47 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTShr3650k.eps
48 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTShr3650l.eps
49 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTShr3650m.eps
50 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTShr3650n.eps
51 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTShr3650o.eps
52 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTShr3650p.eps
53 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTShr3650q.eps
54 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTShr3650r.eps
55 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTShr3650s.eps
56 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTShr3650t.eps
57 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTShr3650u.eps
58 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTShr3650v.eps
59 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTShr3650w.eps
60 

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS OF

H.R. 3650, THE HARMFUL ALGAL BLOOMS AND

HYPOXIA RESEARCH AND CONTROL

AMENDMENTS ACT OF 2009 

The Harmful Algal Blooms and Hypoxia Research and Control Amendments 

Act of 2009 

Purpose: To establish a National Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Program, to 

develop and coordinate a comprehensive strategy to address harmful algal blooms 

and hypoxia and to provide for the development and implementation of comprehensive regional action plans to reduce harmful algal blooms and hypoxia. 

Section 1: Short Title 

The Harmful Algal Blooms and Hypoxia Research and Control Amendments Act 

of 2009 

Section 2: Amendment of Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research and 

Control Act of 1998 

Section 2 explains that the text the bill modifies is the Harmful Algal Bloom and 

Hypoxia Research and Control Act of 1998, unless otherwise expressly stated. 

Section 3: Definitions 

Section 3 provides definitions for the Act, including: Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency; the National Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Program; and the Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere. 

Section 4: National Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Program 

Section 4 directs the Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere, 

through the Interagency Task Force, to establish and maintain a National Harmful 

Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Program. The bill outlines tasks for the Under Secretary 

to ensure the Program: 1) develops a national strategy to address both marine and 

freshwater HABs and hypoxia; 2) coordinates all federal programs related to HABs 

and hypoxia; 3) works with regional, State, tribal, and local government agencies; 

4) identifies additional research needs and priorities; 5) supports international research efforts on HABs and hypoxia; 6) develops and implements of methods and 

technologies to protect ecosystems damaged by HABs; 7) coordinates an outreach, 

education, and training program; 8) facilitates regional, State, tribal, and local efforts to implement response plans, strategies, and tools; 9) provides resources for 

training of regional, State, tribal and local coastal and water resource managers; 10) 

enhances observations, monitoring, modeling, data management, information dissemination, and operational forecasts; 11) oversees the updating of the Regional Research and Action Plans; and 12) administers peer-reviewed, merit-based competitive grant funding. 

In addition, Section 4 directs the Under Secretary to work cooperatively with 

other offices, centers, and programs within NOAA, as well as, with States, tribes, 

non-governmental organizations, and other agencies represented on the Task Force. 

Section 4 also directs the Under Secretary and the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to jointly carry out the duties for the freshwater aspects 

of the Program. 

This bill also requires the Under Secretary to transmit to Congress an action 

strategy that outlines the specific activities to be carried out by the Program, a 

timeline for such activities, and the programmatic roles of each federal agency in 

the Task Force. The action strategy shall be published in the Federal Register and 

be periodically revised by the Under Secretary. Section 4 also requires the Under 

Secretary to prepare a report to Congress describing the budget, activities, and 

progress of the Program. 

Section 5: Regional Research and Action Plans 

Section 5 directs the Under Secretary, through the Task Force, to oversee the development and implementation of Regional Research and Action Plans by identifying the appropriate regions and sub-regions to be addressed by each Plan. The bill 

outlines some contents the Plans should identify, including: 1) regional priorities for 

ecological, economic, and social research related to the impacts of HABs and hypoxia; 2) research, development, and demonstration activities to advance technologies to address the impacts of HABs and hypoxia; 3) actions to minimize the 

occurrence of HABs and hypoxia; 4) ways to reduce the duration and intensity of 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
61 

HABs events; 5) research and methods to address the impacts of HABs on human 

health; 6) mechanisms to protect vulnerable ecosystems that could be or have been 

affected by HABs; 7) mechanisms by which data is transferred between the Program 

and State, tribal, and local governments and relevant research entities; 8) communication, outreach, and dissemination methods used to educate and inform the public; and 9) the roles that federal agencies can play to assist implementation of the 

Plan. 

Section 5 directs the utilization of existing research, assessments, and reports in 

the development of the Plans. Section 5 also provides a list of individuals and entities that the Under Secretary may work with to develop the Plans. The bill also requires that the Plans be completed within 12 months of the date of enactment and 

updated once every five years. Furthermore, Section 5 requires that the Under Secretary submit a report to Congress not later than 12 months after the date of enactment and once every two years after the completion of the Regional Research and 

Actions Plans. 

Section 6: Northern Gulf of Mexico Hypoxia 

Section 6 directs the Mississippi River/Gulf of Mexico Watershed Nutrient Task 

Force to transmit a report to Congress and the President on the progress made toward attainment of the coastal goals of the 2008 Gulf Hypoxia Action Plan. The initial report is required no later than two years after the date of enactment and every 

five years thereafter. The reports are required to assess progress made toward nutrient load reductions, the response of the hypoxia zone and water quality throughout the Mississippi/Atchafalaya River Basin and the economic and social effects. The 

reports shall include an evaluation of current policies and programs and lessons 

learned. In addition, Section 6 requires the reports to recommend appropriate actions to continue to implement or, if necessary, revise the strategy set forth in the 

2008 Gulf Hypoxia Action Plan. 

Section 7: Pacific Northwest, Estuaries, and Puget Sound Hypoxia 

Section 7 directs the Task Force to transmit an assessment report to Congress 

and the President within 12 months of the enactment of the Act on the hypoxia in 

the coastal and estuarine waters of the Pacific Northwest by examining the current 

research, monitoring, prevention, response, and control efforts. Section 7 also requires the Task Force to develop a plan within two years of the enactment of the 

Act for reducing, mitigating, and controlling hypoxia in the Pacific Northwest. In developing the Plan, the Task Force is directed to consult with State, tribal, and local 

governments as well as academic, agricultural, industry, and environmental groups 

and representatives. The Task force is also directed to provide progress reports 

every two years after the submission of the Plan, on the activities toward attainment of the goals outlined in the Plan. 

Section 8: Authorization of Appropriations 

Section 7 provides an authorization of $35,000,000 each of the fiscal years 2010 

through 2014 to the Under Secretary to carry out the Program, of which $5,000,000 

is authorized each of the fiscal years for the development of the Regional Research 

and Action Plans. Section 7 also provides an authorization of $6,000,000 each of the 

fiscal years 2010 through 2014 to the Administrator for the freshwater HABs activities of Program. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
62 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTShr3650a.eps
63 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTShr3650b.eps
64 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTShr3650c.eps
65 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTShr3650d.eps
66 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTShr3650e.eps
67 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTShr3650f.eps
68 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTShr3650g.eps
69 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTShr3650h.eps
70 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTShr3650i.eps
(71) 

XXIV. PROCEEDINGS OF THE FULL COMMITTEE MARKUP ON H.R. 3650, HARMFUL 

ALGAL BLOOMS AND HYPOXIA RESEARCH 

AND CONTROL AMENDMENTS ACT OF 2009 

WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 7, 2009 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, Washington, DC. 

The Committee met, pursuant to call, at 10:38 a.m., in Room 

2318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Bart Gordon 

[Chairman of the Committee] presiding. 

Chairman GORDON. Good morning, everyone. The Committee will 

come to order. Pursuant to notice, the Committee on Science and 

Technology meets to consider the following measures: H.R. 3650, 

the Harmful Algal Blooms and Hypoxia Research and Control 

Amendments Act of 2009, H.R. 3585, the Solar Technology Roadmap Act, and H.R. 3598, the Energy and Water Research Integration Act. 

First, we will consider a bill by the Subcommittee’s Chairman, 

Brian Baird, and co-authored by Research and Science Education 

Ranking Member, Dr. Ehlers. H.R. 3650, the Harmful Algal 

Blooms and Hypoxia Research and Control Amendments Act of 

2009, seeks to address the devastating effects that the rapid overproduction of algae can have on aquatic plant and animal life and 

human health. 

The bill directs the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to implement research strategies to better understand and 

respond to algal blooms and hypoxic events. 

Next, we will consider H.R. 3585, the Solar Technology Roadmap 

Act, authored by the Space and Aeronautics Subcommittee Chair, 

Ms. Gabrielle Giffords. This bill instructs the Department of Energy to coordinate with public and private sector entities in developing a comprehensive, updated roadmap for solar research, development and demonstration activities in the United States. 

This roadmap will be a critical tool in utilizing limited research 

dollars as effectively as possible to harness the truly immense solar 

resources we have in the United States. 

Finally, we will take up H.R. 3598, the Energy and Water Research Integration Act. In the last Congress, this committee undertook a comprehensive review of federal research and technology development efforts focusing in on improving utilization of our precious water resources. We have since held five hearings and passed 

out of the House three bills pertaining to this important topic. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
72 

H.R. 3598, in which we will address the critical linkage between 

our nation’s energy and water resources by directing the Department of Energy to better integrate water into existing federal energy research efforts. 

The three bills we have before us today target several important 

research needs. And as always, we appreciate the Minority offering 

a number of valuable ideas and suggestions, and we have worked 

hard to incorporate almost all of them in an effort to improve these 

bipartisan bills. 

I now recognize Mr. Hall to present his opening remarks. 

[The prepared statement of Chairman Gordon follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN BART GORDON

Good Morning. Today the Committee will consider three bills reported last week 

from the Energy and Environment Subcommittee. 

First, we will consider a bill by the Subcommittee’s Chairman, Dr. Baird, and coauthored by the Research and Science Education Ranking Member, Dr. Ehlers. H.R. 

3650, the Harmful Algal Blooms and Hypoxia Research and Control Amendments 

Act of 2009, seeks to address the devastating effects that rapid overproduction of 

algae can have on aquatic plant and animal life and human health. 

The bill directs the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to implement research strategies to better understand and respond to algal blooms and 

hypoxic events. 

Next, we will consider H.R. 3585, the Solar Technology Roadmap Act, authored 

by the Space and Aeronautics Subcommittee Chair, Ms. Gabrielle Giffords. This bill 

instructs the Department of Energy to coordinate with public and private sector entities in developing a comprehensive, updatable roadmap for solar research, development, and demonstration activities in the U.S. 

This roadmap will be a critical tool in utilizing limited research dollars as effectively as possible to harness the truly immense solar resources we have in the U.S. 

Finally, we will take up my bill, H.R. 3598, the Energy and Water Research Integration Act. In the last Congress this committee undertook a comprehensive review 

of federal research and technology development efforts focused on improving utilization of our precious water resources. We have since held five hearings and passed 

out of the House three bills pertaining to this important topic. 

With H.R. 3598 we address the critical linkage between our nation’s energy and 

water resources by directing the Department of Energy to better integrate water 

into existing federal energy research efforts. 

The three bills we have before us today target several important research needs. 

As always we appreciate the Minority offering a number of valuable ideas and suggestions, and we have worked hard to incorporate almost all of them in an effort 

to improve these bipartisan bills. 

Despite this, I see that the Minority will have a number of amendments. While 

it is unfortunate these concerns could not be resolved before the markup I look forward to a healthy debate on the amendments, and supporting these bills for final 

passage. 

I thank you all for your attendance and participation this morning, and I look forward to a productive markup. 

I now recognize Mr. Hall to present his opening remarks. 

Mr. HALL. I thank you, Mr. Chairman, and today, as you have 

pointed out, we are marking up H.R. 3650, the Harmful Algal 

Blooms and Hypoxia Research and Control Amendments Act of 

2009, H.R. 3585, the Solar Technology Roadmap Act, and H.R. 

3598, the Energy and Water Research Integration Act. I would like 

to thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank your staff for working with 

us, working with the Minority, working with us on these bills and 

you helped us address as much as possible our concerns. Unfortunately, we were not able to come to an agreement on all of our concerns but I realize that that can’t always be the case. I will elaborate on these when the bills are brought up for amendment. We 

will have amendments that address those areas of the bills that we 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
73 

feel still need some attention, and particularly in the solar and energy and water bills. I do hope that the Chairman and other Members of this committee will give our amendments thoughtful consideration as we feel they are intended to improve the bills and enhance support for them. 

With that, I yield back the balance of my time. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Hall follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE RALPH M. HALL

Today, we are marking up H.R. 3650, the Harmful Algal Blooms and Hypoxia Research and Control Amendments Act of 2009, H.R. 3585, the Solar Technology Roadmap Act, and H.R. 3598, the Energy and Water Research Integration Act. I would 

like to thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank your staff for working with us, working 

with the Minority, working with us on these bills and you helped us address as 

much as possible our concerns. Unfortunately, we were not able to come to an agreement on all of our concerns but I realize that that can’t always be the case. I will 

elaborate on these when the bills are brought up for amendment. We will have 

amendments that address those areas of the bills that we feel still need some attention, and particularly in the solar and energy and water bills. I do hope that the 

Chairman and other Members of this committee will give our amendments thoughtful consideration as we feel they are intended to improve the bills and enhance support for them. 

Chairman GORDON. Members may place statements in the record 

at this point. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Mitchell follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE HARRY E. MITCHELL

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Today we will mark up H.R. 3650, the Harmful Algal Blooms and Hypoxia Research and Control Amendments Act, H.R. 3585, the Solar Technology Roadmap Act, 

and H.R. 3598, the Energy and Water Research Integration Act. 

I would like to take a moment to speak about H.R. 3585, the Solar Technology 

Roadmap Act, legislation which I believe is critical in order to spur further research 

and development of solar technology. 

We’re lucky in Arizona to enjoy over 300 days of sunshine. We have a real opportunity to brighten our state’s future by investing in solar energy research and technology. 

As solar technology advances, I believe that Arizona will be a leader in clean, alternative energy production. Refocusing our energy production on alternative 

sources such as solar is critical for our national security and the environment. 

Moreover, investing in solar energy is vital to Arizona’s economy. 

With the help of solar tax credits, Abengoa Solar and Arizona Public Service are 

developing the world’s largest solar energy plant outside of Gila Bend. The Solana 

solar generating station will create 1,500 to 2,000 jobs and provide clean, emissionfree energy for 70,000 homes. Solana is expected to ultimately spur $1 billion in economic development. 

H.R. 3585, the Solar Technology Roadmap Act, would take us one step further toward making large scale solar energy production a reality. Specifically, this legislation would establish a Solar Technology Roadmap Committee tasked with creating 

a Solar Technology Roadmap to evaluate near-term, mid-term, and long-term research, development, and demonstration needs in solar technology. This committee 

would include stakeholders in the solar industry to provide insights on the deployment of this technology. 

I urge my colleagues to support this important measure, and at this time, I yield 

back. 

Chairman GORDON. We will now consider H.R. 3650, the Harmful Algal Blooms and Hypoxia Research and Control Amendments 

Act of 2009. I recognize the Chairman of the Energy and Environment Subcommittee, Dr. Baird, to describe the bill. 

Mr. BAIRD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
74 

H.R. 3650 as amended last week in the Energy and Environment 

Subcommittee markup establishes a national harmful algal bloom 

and hypoxia program. This program is charged with developing a 

comprehensive national strategy in coordinating regional research 

and action plans to address marine and freshwater harmful algal 

blooms and hypoxia. The Act requires the Under Secretary to work 

cooperatively with other offices, centers and programs at NOAA as 

well as with states, tribes, non-governmental organizations and 

other federal agencies on the taskforce and it requires that they 

avoid duplication of efforts with other entities. In addition, the 

Under Secretary is directed to build upon existing research and assessments and consider U.S. waterways such as the Chesapeake 

Bay in the development of the plans. The EPA Administrator and 

the NOAA Under Secretary are instructed to coordinate their efforts to address the freshwater harmful algal blooms and hypoxia. 

The bill directs the Mississippi Gulf of Mexico Watershed Nutrient 

Taskforce to transmit a report to Congress and upon progress made 

towards attaining the goals of the 2008 Gulf Hypoxia Action Plan. 

H.R. 3650 directs the interagency taskforce to transmit an assessment report and plan to Congress addressing hypoxia in the coastal 

and estuarine waters of the Pacific Northwest. 

Finally, the bill provides an authorization, the $35 million a year 

to the Under Secretary for five years for the program and $6 million a year to the EPA Administrator for the freshwater HABs activities of the program. I want to thank particularly my colleague 

from Michigan, Dr. Ehlers, for his work this year and over many, 

many years leading the effort on harmful algal blooms and hypoxia. I also want to acknowledge the involvement of Congressman 

Connie Mack and of Ms. Kosmas, also from Florida. This is a bipartisan bill. It has been a privilege to work on it. In one context, Mr. 

Chairman, the week we were working on this bill, at a lake in my 

District, someone went there with their dog, threw their favorite 

tennis ball in the water. The dog jumped in, grabbed the tennis 

ball, got out of the water and died. That is how serious these harmful algal blooms can be. They are deadly toxins, not only in shellfish but in freshwater, and it was literally that quick, came out and 

died. So I appreciate the Committee’s consideration and urge passage, and I yield back. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Baird follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE BRIAN BAIRD

H.R. 3650, as amended last week in the Energy and Environment Subcommittee 

markup establishes a National Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Program. This 

program is charged with developing a comprehensive national strategy and coordinating regional research and action plans to address marine and freshwater harmful 

algal blooms and hypoxia. 

The Act requires the Under Secretary to work cooperatively with other offices, 

centers, and programs within NOAA, as well as with states, tribes, non-governmental organizations, and other federal agencies on the Task Force, and avoid duplication of efforts with those entities. 

In addition, the Under Secretary is directed to build upon existing research and 

assessments, and consider U.S. waterways such as the Chesapeake Bay, in the development of the Plans. 

The EPA Administrator and the NOAA Under Secretary are instructed to coordinate their efforts to address the freshwater harmful algal blooms and hypoxia. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
75 

The bill directs the Mississippi River/Gulf of Mexico Watershed Nutrient Task 

Force to transmit a report to Congress on progress made toward attaining the goals 

of the 2008 Gulf Hypoxia Action Plan. 

H.R. 3650 directs the Interagency Task Force to transmit an assessment report 

and plan to Congress addressing hypoxia in the coastal and estuarine waters of the 

Pacific Northwest. 

Finally, the bill provides an authorization of $35,000,000 a year to the Under Secretary for five years for the program, and $6,000,000 a year to the EPA Administrator for the freshwater HABs activities of the Program. 

I want to thank my colleague from Michigan, Dr. Ehlers, for working with me on 

this important piece of legislation. I look forward to improving the bill at today’s 

markup. 

Chairman GORDON. I now recognize Mr. Hall to present any remarks on the bill. 

Mr. HALL. I thank you, Mr. Chairman. First I would like to commend my colleagues, Dr. Ehlers and Dr. Baird, for working together to move this bill. They work very well together, and I think 

it is a very important piece of legislation, so much so that the bill 

itself and the manager’s amendments are both at the Subcommittee and now at the Full Committee have been very bipartisan, but most of the issues have been worked out beforehand. 

There are still a few outstanding items. 

Although this bill is intended to address a problem that affects 

nearly every state, we want to make sure that the research and action plans that are called for, that these plans are not a top-down 

mandate but a true collaboration between the Federal Government 

and the states and local areas that have been directly affected by 

these blooms. The bill calls for the development and implementation of these plans. The next obvious step is putting these plans 

into action. We want to make sure that they are not imposing 

undue burdens on states that they would not voluntarily take on 

themselves. 

Finally, we want to make sure that all the groups involved in the 

development of these plans that will have roles in future implementation are ones with the highest levels of integrity. I will be offering an amendment to this bill that addresses our concerns with 

states’ rights. Several of my colleagues on this side of the aisle will 

be offering other amendments that address some of the remaining 

concerns. 

With that, I yield back my time and I thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Hall follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE RALPH M. HALL

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First, I would like to commend my colleagues, Dr. 

Ehlers and Mr. Baird, on working together to move this bill. They worked very well 

together to move this important piece of legislation, so much so that the bill itself, 

and the manager’s amendments at both Subcommittee, and now, Full Committee, 

have been bipartisan. While most of the issues have been worked out beforehand, 

there are still a few outstanding items. 

Although this bill is intended to address a problem that affects nearly every state, 

we want to make sure that the regional research and action plans that are called 

for are not a top-down mandate, but a true collaboration between the Federal Government and the states and local areas that have been directly affected by these 

blooms. The bill calls for the development and implementation of these plans; the 

next obvious step is putting these plans into action. We want to make sure that we 

are not imposing undue burdens on states that they would not voluntarily take on 

themselves. Finally, we want to make sure that all the groups involved in the development of these plans that will have roles in future implementation are ones with 

the highest level of integrity. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
76 

I will be offering an amendment to this bill that addresses our concerns with 

states’ rights. Several of my colleagues on this side of the aisle will be offering other 

amendments that address some of these remaining concerns. 

With that I yield back the balance of my time. 

Chairman GORDON. Does anyone else wish to be recognized? 

Mr. BILBRAY. Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman GORDON. Mr. Bilbray. 

Mr. BILBRAY. Yes, Mr. Chairman, I appreciate—this issue, I notice in the title and everything else that the issue of harmful algae 

blooms was specifically, and I would ask Dr. Baird specifically— 

does this bill recognize that most, if not much of, algae blooms are 

naturally occurring events? 

Mr. BAIRD. It does—well, it varies. I mean, part of the purpose 

of the research is to understand why we have harmful algal blooms 

and why we have. There is no question there are harmful algal 

blooms that have been around for a long, long time, but the scientists who testified at our hearing and the preponderance of the 

scientific literature I am familiar with suggests that there is an increase in many areas in harmful algal blooms believed to be related 

to anthropogenic causes. 

Mr. BILBRAY. I think there is the key, is there are certain areas. 

We have had documentation in California since 1769, the first 

Spanish recognized this. In fact, the local tribe specifically like the 

Lasania or the Kumiai would not stay on the coast during the summers when red tides came in. They actually migrated into the hills 

and basically lived in the hills away from that. So the fact of red 

tide, at least in California, the area I am very much aware of, 

working on water quality, is naturally occurring, has been going on 

for centuries, and actually is something that I want to make sure 

that we identify as being naturally occurring, even though it does 

cause problems. That is why you will see at least in the West, in 

my part of the world, and I assume your part of the world that, 

you know, shellfish collection has never been allowed during the 

summer because of this, and even the Native Americans recognized 

that and summered in the hills just because they didn’t want to 

pick up the abalone during the summer. 

Mr. BAIRD. If the gentleman would yield for a second? Your point 

is very well taken. The bill is not by any means solely or predominantly about identifying what is or is not anthropogenically caused. 

Part of the challenge and part of the progress of the bill over the 

last few years has been, for example, better predicting when naturally occurring harmful algal blooms will occur so you can better 

warn beachgoers, government regulatory agencies that deal with 

clam seasons, et cetera, and we have got some real progress on 

both coasts where research funded under prior iterations of this bill 

has allowed us to make better predictions about when harmful 

algal blooms that are, presumably in these cases, many times naturally occurring, so the gentleman’s point is well taken. 

Mr. BILBRAY. Mr. Chairman, my biggest concern is, the years 

that I served working on air—I mean water quality issues, the 

frustration was Washington designed a system based on experience 

in the Chesapeake and the Eastern Seaboard and its application in 

the Pacific was just absolutely off bounds and the Clean Water Act 

still has problems because it was engineered for the East Coast. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
77 

What is logical in Chesapeake would be absurd in the deep Pacific 

Ocean and so that is—I just want to make sure that we keep on 

that, that the Nation is, you know, global approach on all of this 

but the fact is that when we go to these regulations, we have got 

to give the local flexibility, reflect the environment in the neighborhood rather than just here in D.C., and I yield back. 

Chairman GORDON. Thank you, Mr. Bilbray. I am sure that Dr. 

Baird being a West Coaster will keep that in mind. 

And Dr. Ehlers, the co-sponsor of the bill, is recognized. 

Mr. EHLERS. I just wanted to comment on one of the issues 

raised about whether this is increasing or not. It is increasing. In 

the Gulf Coast area, for example, it is considerably worse than it 

was some years ago, but also it is unique in the sense that we are 

now beginning to discover the same problem in the Great Lakes, 

particularly Lake Erie, and that is a matter of huge concern because they have not seen these sorts of things before in the Great 

Lakes and they are now beginning to see them, so it is whereas it 

used to be a local problem along the East and West Coasts and the 

Gulf Coast, it is now becoming a problem throughout the entire Nation. 

Mr. BAIRD. Will the gentleman yield for one second? 

Mr. EHLERS. I will be happy to yield. 

Mr. BAIRD. The gentleman is absolutely right, and just for those 

of my colleagues who weren’t on the Subcommittee, just to get a 

sense of how particularly the freshwater toxins—we are familiar 

with red tide. The freshwater toxins, if they were to invade your 

primary reservoir, a blue-green algae, all the normal ways we have 

of purifying our water, virtually all don’t work. So we are used to 

killing protozoa with chlorine. We are used to filtering things out 

with filtration. We are used to saying you can boil your water. It 

turns out that if you boil water with blue-green algae in it, you actually concentrate the toxin that is in them, and the scientists actually boil the water. That is how they sort out the toxins. So if 

you get blue-green algae in your freshwater drinking water supply, 

you are in enormous trouble, and that is why it has been such a 

concern of Dr. Ehlers and the Great Lakes. 

Thank you. I yield back. 

Chairman GORDON. I hope no terrorist is hearing that. We better 

be quiet here. Does anyone else wish to be recognized? If not, then 

I ask unanimous consent that the bill is considered as read and 

open to amendment at any point and that the Members proceed 

with the amendments in order of the roster. Without objection, so 

ordered. 

The first amendment on the roster is a manager’s amendment offered by the gentleman from Washington, Dr. Baird. Are you ready 

to proceed with your amendment? 

Mr. BAIRD. Indeed. I have an amendment at the desk. 

Chairman GORDON. The Clerk will report the amendment. 

The CLERK. Amendment to H.R. 3650, amendment number 038, 

offered by Mr. Baird of Washington and Mr. Ehlers of Michigan. 

Chairman GORDON. I ask unanimous consent to dispense with 

the reading. Without objection, so ordered. 

I recognize the gentleman for five minutes to explain the amendment. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
78 

Mr. BAIRD. The manager’s amendment responds to concerns expressed by NOAA, EPA and other expert witnesses at the hearing 

and makes several clarifying changes. 

The amendment strengthens and expands Section 4 to provide 

more direction to the Administrator of EPA in addressing freshwater harmful algal blooms. The amendment also clarifies language for the new infrastructure program to be established by the 

Under Secretary. Finally, the amendment makes small adjustments to the authorization section to provide specific direction for 

funding certain internal research efforts of NOAA. The amendment 

is the product again of discussions with Dr. Ehlers and Minority 

staff. It strengthens the bill to ensure an effective approach to both 

marine and freshwater harmful algal blooms. I urge my colleagues 

to support it, and yield back. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Baird follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE BRIAN BAIRD

The manager’s amendment responds to concerns expressed by NOAA, EPA, and 

other expert witnesses at the hearing, and makes several clarifying changes. 

The amendment strengthens and expands the language in Section 4 to provide 

more direction to the Administrator of EPA in addressing the freshwater harmful 

algal blooms. 

The amendment also clarifies language for the new Infrastructure Program to be 

established by the Under Secretary. 

Finally, the amendment makes small adjustments to the Authorizations section 

to provide specific direction for funding certain internal research efforts of NOAA. 

This amendment is the product of discussions Dr. Ehlers and Minority staff, and 

strengthens the bill to ensure an effective approach to addressing both marine and 

freshwater harmful algal blooms. 

I urge my colleagues to support the amendment. 

Chairman GORDON. Is there further discussion on the amendment? 

Mr. HALL. Mr. Chairman? 

Chairman GORDON. Mr. Hall is recognized. 

Mr. HALL. I thank you, and I would like to applaud Dr. Ehlers 

and Dr. Baird for working together so well on this manager’s 

amendment. They work the direct opposites in some ways and yet 

they are so parallel in many ways and they really work well together. It provides greater direction to agencies of the taskforce on 

what are the most important issues they should focus on. Although 

I am not in favor of overly burdensome directives, too much directive allows agencies sometimes to misinterpret the intent of Congress. This amendment walks that very fine line. It balances between too much and not enough. I think Dr. Ehlers might have 

said too much and Dr. Baird not enough, or maybe just the opposite way, but it is a good amendment and I encourage my associates to support it. I yield back. 

Chairman GORDON. It sounds like the baby bear’s porridge there. 

Is there further discussion on the amendment? If no, the vote occurs on the amendment. All in favor, say ‘‘aye.’’ Opposed, ‘‘no.’’ The 

ayes have it and the amendment is agreed to. 

The second amendment on the roster is an amendment offered 

by my friend, the Ranking Member, Mr. Hall. Are you ready to proceed with your amendment? 

Mr. HALL. I have an amendment at the desk. 

Chairman GORDON. The Clerk will report the amendment. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
79 

The CLERK. Amendment to H.R. 3650, amendment number 015, 

offered by Mr. Hall of Texas. 

Chairman GORDON. I ask unanimous consent to dispense with 

the reading. Without objection, so ordered. 

I recognize the gentleman for five minutes to explain the amendment. 

Mr. HALL. Mr. Chairman, this amendment would prevent H.R. 

3650 from forcing State, tribal or local governments to shoulder the 

economic burdens through the requirements of the Federal Government. H.R. 3650 aims to ensure dialogue with State, tribal and 

local governments. However, this bill calls for the development of 

regional research and action plans that will then need to be implemented. This implementation could lead to an unintended financial 

burden on these government entities, and although the onus is currently on the Federal Government, the activities identified in these 

plans are the ones that will most likely be executed by State, tribal 

and local governments. As it is written right now, H.R. 3650 does 

not contain any safeguards against unfunded mandates which 

would result if the State, tribal and local governments were forced 

to undertake the activities identified in the plans that the Federal 

Government is responsible for developing and implementing. That 

is my problem, and I yield back. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Hall follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE RALPH M. HALL

Mr. Chairman, this amendment would prevent H.R. 3650 from forcing State, tribal or local governments to shoulder the economic burdens through the requirements 

of the Federal Government. 

H.R. 3650 aims to ensure dialogue with State, tribal and local governments. However, this bill calls for the development of regional research and action plans that 

will then need to be implemented. This implementation could lead to unintended financial burdens on these governmental entities. Although the onus is currently on 

the Federal Government, the activities identified in these plans are ones that will 

most likely be executed by State, tribal and local governments. As it is written right 

now, the H.R. 3650 does not contain any safeguards against unfunded mandates 

which would result if State, tribal and local governments were forced to undertake 

the activities identified in the plans that the Federal Government is responsible for 

developing and implementing. 

I yield back. 

Chairman GORDON. Is there further discussion on the amendment? Ms. Johnson. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and Ranking 

Member. On yesterday, my Subcommittee had a hearing on this 

very thing, and it is—we have had hearings on most of the large 

bodies of water in the country. All of them are contaminated. We 

do not have the money to correct all of it but what we are attempting to do is get all the stakeholders around like the Chesapeake 

and other large bodies of water and each of them takes some responsibility for keeping it clean. It seems to me that this would 

interfere with that but we know that we cannot clean up the 

Chesapeake without the participation of Pennsylvania, New York 

and all the other places that it touches, and it is the same with 

the Sound in New York, and we talked about trying to develop reasonable plans where these large bodies of water exist because the 

government is not going to be able to do all of it by itself, so we 

are asking local governments to be stakeholders in it. This might 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
80 

interfere with that but it is because of the contamination we are 

experiencing, we talked directly on this wild lily thing and how it 

is causing a number of seafood deaths because it produces a lot of 

nitrogen. For that reason, I have some question on whether this 

would interfere with regional plans. You know, we have got states 

all over the country fussing with each other about water but somehow we have got to pull all that together and get various states to 

work together, and we thought it might be better if it was reasonably organized so that Mr. Bilbray won’t be talking about what the 

Northeast Coast is doing, he will be talking about what the West 

Coast is doing. 

Mr. BILBRAY. Will the gentlelady yield? 

Ms. JOHNSON. Yes. 

Mr. BILBRAY. I agree that the coordination needs to be done. I 

don’t think anyone here would assume that those of us from Texas 

or California care more about Long Island Sound than the people 

that live in New York and New Jersey. So I think that this is one 

of those issues of saying we are-Washington wants to work with 

the local communities but let us not take the position of we know 

better, we care more, we have more of a vested interest and—— 

Ms. JOHNSON. We are speaking to every official that has anything to do with water in each of these states. 

Mr. BILBRAY. And I think that the amendment basically says 

that we will do our part and we will pay for what we think ought 

to be done right but we won’t basically be imposing a cost on the 

states or the local community that basically are the ones who have 

the biggest vested interest, so we work with them and not on top 

of them, and so I appreciate that, but again, I will just say that 

I think the people in the local communities, we ought to give them 

more credit that they have more at stake than we do and work 

with them and not—— 

Ms. JOHNSON. Reclaiming my time. I agree with you. That is why 

we are working with them. We have had roundtables where we just 

sit around the table and talk about it. For example, Connecticut 

and New York are taking the full load right now of that contamination but we know that New Hampshire, Vermont and Massachusetts also have a lot of down flow that provides a lot of the contamination, and if the states’ representatives themselves agree to 

work together to clean it up, I don’t—I would like not to interfere 

with that. Thank you. 

Chairman GORDON. Does anyone else wish to be recognized? Mr. 

Broun. 

Mr. BROUN. Mr. Chairman, thank you. I yield to Mr. Hall. 

Mr. HALL. I thank you, Dr. Broun. You know, local governments 

have fought unfunded mandates against State governments and 

State governments have fought unfunded mandates against the national government. Here we are trying to protect the local governments and the State governments, and my amendment wouldn’t 

prevent stakeholders from pitching in. However, the concern is a 

top-down mandates that forces states to take on too much. It seems 

like it’s a states’ right deal or even the local governments amendment. I can’t answer any better than unfunded mandates that we 

have all fought at one time or another, whether we were taking a 

local government’s position—I have been a State county judge, I 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
81 

have been a State Senator and I am a federal Congressman here, 

and I have fought unfunded mandates all the way up and down the 

road there. This is just another protection for stakeholders. It is 

another protection for local governments and another protection for 

states. It looks like it is okay to me but I recognize and I respect 

the wishes of others and the complaints of others and I am willing 

to let the Committee vote on it. 

Mr. BROUN. Reclaiming my time. I support this amendment. I 

think it is a common sense amendment. Many states like my own 

State of Georgia is having difficulty balancing our budget. We have 

a balanced-budget amendment to our constitution in the State of 

Georgia and what we see is teachers’ salaries are being cut, services are being cut. I was up in the mountains and I just talked to 

some of the Department of Natural Resources folks and they have 

had some of their biologists cut, and adding more unfunded mandates upon the states is going to put more of a financial burden 

upon those states. We in Georgia can’t afford any more unfunded 

mandates from Washington, D.C., and I will continue to try to fight 

to get those unfunded mandate burdens off of my state as well as 

every state in this country. I think it is unfair to the states, it is 

unfair to the taxpayers and this is a common sense amendment. It 

just says the Federal Government is going to do their part. The 

states certainly have the prerogative and they have the interest 

and they have all the—— 

Ms. JOHNSON. Would the gentleman yield? 

Mr. BROUN. If you will give me a half second, I will be glad to 

yield. They have every incentive to try to look at these problems 

but putting unfunded mandates from Washington, D.C., on states 

is unfair to the taxpayers of those states. It is unfair to the communities it affects. So I think it is important for us to stop these unfunded mandates on states from Washington, D.C., and I will yield. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you, sir. As you know, your state, Tennessee, and Florida have been fighting for the last probably 10 

years over water, and we cannot get them together. We had to pass 

legislation to force them to work with each other. I should think 

that everyone ought to be willing to help to clean up the water that 

they drink, and this is a protection against allowing it to get to 

that point. Cleaning up before it gets to that point is much better 

than trying to clean up afterwards, which is what we are trying to 

do all over the country now. So if this does not affect the agreement between these areas, I don’t know if we are going to get our 

states together because they have been fussing too long, but we are 

trying. 

Thank you, and I yield back the time. 

Mr. BROUN. I appreciate the lady’s comments, but as far as I am 

concerned, water that falls on Georgia is Georgia’s until it goes to 

Alabama, Tennessee or to Florida, but the thing is, we have got to 

protect the citizens of our states and the states cannot afford any 

more unfunded mandate, so this is a common sense amendment 

and I highly support it, and I yield back, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. HALL. Will the gentleman yield before he yields back? 

Mr. BROUN. Certainly. 

Mr. HALL. They ought to mention California in those fighting 

battles between north and southern California. If north and southVerDate Nov 24 2008 22:49 Jan 15, 2010 Jkt 089006 PO 00000 Frm 00081 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR396P1.XXX HR396P1

smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
82 

ern California ever got together, they could pass almost anything 

they wanted to here, so it is to our benefit that they continue to 

fight over those water rights out in California. 

Mr. BILBRAY. Absolutely, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. HALL. I yield back. Thank you. 

Mr. BROUN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman GORDON. Five minutes to Dr. Baird to, among other 

things, to clarify whether Georgia can put a pipe in the Tennessee 

River by virtue of this bill. 

Mr. BAIRD. I choose not to go there, Mr. Chairman. I understand 

the gentleman’s intent and I have great respect for the Ranking 

Member. The challenge is, the research we have heard is, I mean, 

these are rivers, so rivers feed into estuaries, feed into the large 

waterways. The dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico is now hundreds 

of kilometers. Anything that swims into it or out of it, you know, 

you go into it, you die, so it is having a profound impact on the 

fisheries there. The coast of Florida, when they get red tides, their 

beaches are shut down, their tourism industry gets killed. So you 

have an unfunded mandate imposed on those states by the upriver 

states whose effluent is contributing to the harmful algal blooms 

and the hypoxia, and the problem is, if you don’t have a Federal 

Government, one upriver state says well, nuts to the guys down 

river, we are just going to, you know, let whatever runs in there 

run in there, we are just not going to add the expense, and they 

pass on what is effectively an unfunded mandate. So it is not like 

a local control issue where you have just got to constrain city council boundaries. You have got a river that flows down into a body 

of water shared by many, many states and downriver folks, and as 

I read this bill, it is saying that—and I guess would just ask the 

gentleman from Texas or some of my colleagues, if we have evidence that something being done upriver is causing a lethal toxin 

to develop downriver, don’t we have a right or a responsibility to 

tell the upriver folks they have to do something about that? 

Mr. HALL. If you are asking me, I would rather withdraw my objection to it than to try to explain. 

Mr. BAIRD. Well, I will reclaim my time. I mean, that is the challenge here. I understand the intent but that is the nature of this 

particular problem and I think we just have to defeat this however 

well-intentioned amendment because I think its adverse consequences will be grave and that we do have downriver impacts, 

and so I would urge its defeat. 

Mr. HALL. On my amendment, I am going to mark ‘‘doubtful’’ by 

your name. 

Mr. BAIRD. You may do so. 

Mr. BROUN. Would the gentleman yield? 

Mr. BAIRD. I would be happy to yield. 

Mr. BROUN. Thank you. This may seem strange from a physician, 

but isn’t that what the court is for is to try to sort all these types 

of things where one entity is harmed by another? 

Mr. BAIRD. Well, if I reclaim my time I—— 

Mr. BROUN. Yes, sir. 

Mr. BAIRD. The court must operate under laws. We establish 

laws like the Clean Water Act that the court then interprets, unless 

we are to going to somehow imply that there is a tort action from 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
83 

one state against another for the pollution. I mean, we have federal 

laws, and what this bill predominantly is, I want to reiterate, is a 

research bill, but it also has—and I want to underscore something. 

Mr. Bilbray and others have talked about the importance of local 

planning and states’ collaboration. The reason we have a taskforce, 

Mr. Bilbray, is precisely so it is not, say, a Chesapeake Bay solution provided to Sacramento or Los Angeles or Puget Sound. We 

have got regional entities. They are instructed to work with regional governments specifically in the bill, but at some point if you 

reach a point where upriver State activities are imposing undue 

burdens on the downriver states, you have got to have a mechanism to say you all have to cut that out, and the scientists are telling us that some of this hypoxia and harmful algal blooms seem 

to be connected to nitrogen and phosphorus in the water system 

and we are going to have to reduce that or we are imposing a huge 

unfunded mandate on the beaches that Mr. Mack represents or 

that folks in the Gulf represent or conceivably, in Mr. Ehlers’ case, 

in the Great Lakes. So that is why I think we have to move forward, and I yield back. 

Chairman GORDON. Mr. Inglis is recognized. 

Mr. INGLIS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and a question for Dr. 

Baird is, the bill isn’t asserting regulatory control rights so therefore if Mr. Hall’s amendment really doesn’t go to—there is no ability under the bill to mandate something in the scenario just described of downriver, right? 

Mr. BAIRD. Well, let me read the language of the amendment, 

okay? ‘‘Nothing in this Act or the amendments made by the Act 

shall construe to require State, tribal or local government to take 

any action that may result in an increased financial burden to such 

government.’’ The bill does include the development of regional 

plans, and the bill includes regional plans to try to reduce that. My 

concern is that the very broad language, absolute language of the 

proposed amendment would suggest that you can’t require implementation at any point down the road. You might even say if the 

Act is funding research and the research knowledge is pointing to 

a particular pollutant in a particular state, you can’t use that research knowledge generated by the Act to impose some kind of constraint on the behavior, the action, and that is the concern I have. 

I think it is just so broad, somebody is going to say you can’t do 

anything based on this, and at some point you have to say that is 

part of what the Federal Government does is, it looks at these 

broad issues and tries to take action for the benefit of the overall 

good of all the states. 

Mr. INGLIS. There is money in the bill, though, to pay for that 

research, right? So therefore—and to pay for the development of 

those plans, so it is either that we don’t have jurisdiction over what 

Mr. Hall is asserting here because we don’t have regulatory control, 

in which case the amendment would be harmless to the bill except 

for making a point about unfunded mandates. So in that way, I 

wonder if it is maybe acceptable—I mean, I know we are having 

this debate about unfunded mandates but it is really a situation 

where we don’t have jurisdiction over regulation and there is 

money in the bill to pay for the expenses of the plan. 

Mr. BAIRD. Would the gentleman yield? 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
84 

Mr. INGLIS. Sure. 

Mr. BAIRD. As far as the expenses of the plan, absolutely right. 

The money in the bill pays for that. The bill is not mandating that 

the states pay for these research plans. There would be an assumption and a hope that the states have some expertise and knowledge, you know, whether it is their department of fish and wildlife, 

fisheries, agriculture, whatever the State entities are, that they 

would participate. We are trying to cooperate with the states, not 

mandate that they deploy all these folks. If the gentleman’s point 

is that the lack of immediate regulatory authority in the bill obviates the amendment, then we can just withdraw the amendment. 

I am okay with that. If you are saying that the amendment supports this because of the nature of the bill itself, I am certainly 

okay with that. But I am not okay with saying we are going to add 

this on here so that someone can retroactively come back and say 

no, this plan grew out of this bill and any effort to implement this 

plan that grew out of this bill was proscribed by this bill, I can’t 

go with that. 

Chairman GORDON. No further discussion—— 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman GORDON. Mr. Rohrabacher is recognized. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Well, first of all, I want to congratulate—— 

Chairman GORDON. I guess we need to go to this side first since 

that was Mr. Inglis’s—— 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Pardon me. 

Chairman GORDON. But I don’t see anybody here, so Mr. Rohrabacher is recognized. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. First of all, let me congratulate Congressman 

Baird. I think this is an important issue, and the reason Brian 

knows about this and I know about this, we surfed in the red tide 

a lot and you get red skin and it is itchy, but I might note at night 

when you are surfing in the red tide, there is phosphorus and it 

is like a light show as you are going through the waves, but—— 

Mr. BAIRD. How is your hippocampus these days? 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Well, I will tell you, there are dead fish and 

things around as well and so we know this is really a significant 

issue and I want to be very supportive of the base of what you are 

trying to do and I will be supporting the bill. However, Mr. Hall’s 

amendment does make sense. I mean, we are just talking about unfunded mandate. I, for example, have supported—we just were voting on the Chesapeake Bay bill the other day and I joined in with 

some of my other colleagues on both sides of the aisle and supported that because you are trying to what? You are doing something in a body of water that affects different states. Now, we provided money for that. This is saying that if there is an unfunded 

mandate, we should fund it if it is dealing with different states, 

right? I mean, this is—— 

Mr. BAIRD. Would the gentleman yield? 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Yes. 

Mr. BAIRD. The problem with that is, it allows the states to be 

the least common denominator. If a certain upriver state says it is 

for other states to clean up their pollution, we are not going to 

clean up our pollution unless the Federal Government—— 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
85 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. This is my point. My point was that if we indeed are going to be doing something that requires some major expenditure by the states, well, we should just split all the money because by definition it is an interstate issue and not simply a onestate issue, and that is what the Federal Government is here for. 

The Federal Government is here to be involved with interstate 

issues that cost money, and so I don’t see anything wrong with the 

Congressman talking about unfunded mandates to the state because that money should be coming from the Federal Government 

just as we just did with the Chesapeake Bay. 

Mr. BILBRAY. Would the gentleman yield? 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Sure. 

Mr. BILBRAY. I appreciate your bringing up the red tide issue. In 

fact, let me just say to anybody, if you haven’t sailed through a red 

tide on a moonless night—— 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. It is incredible. 

Mr. BILBRAY. It is the closest thing to flying through space with 

fire everywhere. Wherever the boat touches, it lights up and it is 

quite an experience. But I think that the gentlelady from Texas 

and the gentleman from—the doctor points out something that I 

think that everybody has to be aware of is, there is third-party victims in this sometimes. Nobody goes down in history as more of a 

villain in this kind of activity than the city of Chicago. You have 

got Chicago River flowing into your lake, which is your water supply. You have got pollution in our water supply, so what do you do? 

You dig a canal so you can send all—you make the Chicago River 

flow backwards into the Illinois, down the Mississippi and all the 

way to New Orleans and say it is not our problem anymore. So I 

think there is legitimate concern about when the Federal Government should step in. In fact, my wife is from New Orleans and she 

always talks about that she grew up in a city that the water was 

flushed 55 times before it got to her. And I think that Chicago is 

an example of what Dr. Baird is talking about. I only ask that we 

find that fault before we bring down the Federal Government’s involvement to protect the third innocent party. What frustrates me, 

especially working the Clean Water Act authors, is that the third 

parties never existed in certain locations, especially where Hawaii 

is a good example of being required to fulfill the treatment standards and being able to have regulatory oversight by the Federal 

Government over something that didn’t affect anybody but their 

own population. So all I ask is before we make the step to step into 

protect a third party, that the legislature or somebody down the 

line has to assure that there is a third party to be dependent, because right now you have got Hawaii having regulations imposed 

on them that there was never an intention by the authors of the 

Clean Water Act to impose that in those situations, but because it 

was specifically clarified that there needs to be a burden of proof, 

a burden that there is an innocent third party which triggers federal intervention, it always goes the other way. You always trigger 

and it ends up going over all. So I think the amendment is appropriate, Dr. Baird, as long as we ensure that there are going to be 

times that if the studies do—because this is a research bill. This 

research bill will probably bring up items that we do need to have 

the Federal Government intervene but there is many places that 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
86 

we shouldn’t, and all I ask that this time we don’t take this step. 

We use the data and the science here to take the next step when 

the facts are located, and you know, we know where that is going 

to be and why but they are not going to be everywhere and that 

is why I think the amendment is appropriate. 

Mr. HALL. Will the gentleman yield? 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. I have the time. I will be happy to yield. 

Mr. HALL. I just want to point out that the Federal Government 

is going to do the implementation, and that implementation could 

lead to what we would refer to as unintended financial burdens on 

governmental entities, and that is what this is guided toward, and 

the reason is, as it is written right now, H.R. 3650 doesn’t contain 

any safeguards, none, against unfunded mandates. That is the reason for the amendment and that is the sole purpose of the amendment. 

Chairman GORDON. The gentleman’s time is expired. Is there 

still further discussion? 

Mr. BARTLETT. Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman GORDON. Dr. Bartlett. 

Mr. BARTLETT. Thank you. I would just like to ask a procedural 

question. I do not know what rules have been changed. But if the 

rule for this bill does not waive points of order, could not a point 

of order be lodged against the bill if in fact there are unfunded 

mandates exceeding $5 million collectively? 

Chairman GORDON. If the rules are not waived, that is correct. 

Mr. BARTLETT. Would not Mr. Hall’s concern, could it not be addressed on the Floor if the rule did not waive points of order? Why 

would we want on a bipartisan Committee to have a rule that 

waived points of order? 

Chairman GORDON. You have two questions there. 

Mr. BARTLETT. Yes, I would like you to answer both of them. 

Chairman GORDON. First of all, you are correct, and secondly, it 

is the Rules Committee that makes that determination, not this 

committee. 

Mr. BARTLETT. What would the Chair recommend to the Rule 

Committee? 

Chairman GORDON. Do the right thing. 

Mr. BARTLETT. What would the right thing be? 

Mr. HALL. I think a vote will wipe out all these concerns, if you 

want go ahead and call a roll. 

Chairman GORDON. Well, I think Ms. Biggert wants to defend 

Chicago. 

Ms. BIGGERT. Absolutely. Thank you for yielding me the time. 

Actually, talking about going upstream or downstream, we now 

have a problem in Chicago and just outside of Chicago and having 

had to build an electronic barrier to keep the Asian carp out of Chicago and the whole Great Lakes and really it is a very serious 

problem but we do have the Asian carp swimming upstream from 

down states, and it is a real problem right now where we have had 

to have emergency funds because they are really approaching that 

electronic barrier in my District, so I think we should look at both 

upstream and downstream when you are considering this. 

Chairman GORDON. Thank you, Ms. Biggert. 

If there is no further discussion, the Clerk will call the roll. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
87 

The CLERK. Chairman Gordon? 

Chairman GORDON. Excuse me. Pardon me. The vote occurs on 

the amendment. All those in favor, say ‘‘aye.’’ Opposed, ‘‘no.’’ The 

no’s have it. Does the gentleman—— 

Mr. HALL. I ask for a recorded vote. 

Chairman GORDON. The Clerk will call the roll. 

The CLERK. Chairman Gordon? 

Chairman GORDON. No. 

The CLERK. Chairman Gordon votes no. Mr. Costello? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Ms. Johnson? 

Ms. JOHNSON. No. 

The CLERK. Ms. Johnson votes no. Ms. Woolsey? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Wu? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Baird? 

Mr. BAIRD. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Baird votes no. Mr. Miller? 

Mr. MILLER. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Miller votes no. Mr. Lipinski? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Ms. Giffords? 

Ms. GIFFORDS. No. 

The CLERK. Ms. Giffords votes no. Ms. Edwards? 

Ms. EDWARDS. No. 

The CLERK. Ms. Edwards votes no. Ms. Fudge? 

Ms. FUDGE. No. 

The CLERK. Ms. Fudge votes no. Mr. Luja ́n? 

Mr. LUJA ́ N. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Luja ́n votes no. Mr. Tonko? 

Mr. TONKO. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Tonko votes no. Mr. Griffith? 

Mr. GRIFFITH. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Griffith votes no. Mr. Rothman? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Matheson? 

Mr. MATHESON. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Matheson votes no. Mr. Davis? 

Mr. DAVIS. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Davis votes no. Mr. Chandler? 

Mr. CHANDLER. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Chandler votes no. Mr. Carnahan? 

Mr. CARNAHAN. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Carnahan votes no. Mr. Hill? 

Mr. HILL. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Hill votes no. Mr. Wilson? 

Mr. WILSON. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Wilson votes no. Ms. Dahlkemper? 

Ms. DAHLKEMPER. No. 

The CLERK. Ms. Dahlkemper votes no. Mr. Grayson? 

Mr. GRAYSON. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Grayson votes no. Ms. Kosmas? 

Ms. KOSMAS. Yes. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
88 

The CLERK. Ms. Kosmas votes aye. Mr. Peters? 

Mr. PETERS. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Peters votes no. Mr. Hall? 

Mr. HALL. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Hall votes aye. Mr. Sensenbrenner? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Lamar Smith? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Rohrabacher? 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Yes. 

The CLERK. Mr. Rohrabacher votes aye. Mr. Bartlett? 

Mr. BARTLETT. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Bartlett votes aye. Mr. Ehlers? 

Mr. EHLERS. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Ehlers votes aye. Mr. Lucas? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Ms. Biggert? 

Ms. BIGGERT. Aye. 

The CLERK. Ms. Biggert votes aye. Mr. Akin? 

Mr. AKIN. Yes. 

The CLERK. Mr. Akin votes aye. Mr. Neugebauer? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Inglis? 

Mr. INGLIS. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Inglis votes aye. Mr. McCaul? 

Mr. MCCAUL. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. McCaul votes aye. Mr. Diaz-Balart? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Bilbray? 

Mr. BILBRAY. Bilbray votes aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Bilbray votes aye. Mr. Adrian Smith? 

Mr. SMITH OF NEBRASKA. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Adrian Smith votes aye. Mr. Broun? 

Mr. BROUN. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Broun votes aye. Mr. Olson? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Wu is not recorded. 

Mr. WU. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Wu votes no. Mr. Costello is not recorded. 

Mr. COSTELLO. Votes no. 

The CLERK. Mr. Costello votes no. 

Mr. ROTHMAN. Mr. Chairman, I would like to be recorded ‘‘no’’ 

please. 

The CLERK. Mr. Rothman votes no. 

Chairman GORDON. If no one else is available, then the Clerk 

will report. 

Mr. MITCHELL. Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman GORDON. Oh, I am sorry. 

The CLERK. Oh, I am sorry. 

Chairman GORDON. Clerk, you need to—— 

The CLERK. Mr. Mitchell? 

Mr. MITCHELL. Yes. 

The CLERK. Mr. Mitchell votes aye. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
89 

Chairman GORDON. Would the Clerk clarify Mr. Mitchell’s vote? 

It wasn’t well heard up here. 

The CLERK. Mr. Mitchell was recorded as voting aye. Are you 

ready for the roll? 

Chairman GORDON. Yes. 

The CLERK. Mr. Chairman, 13 Members vote aye and 22 Members vote no. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTShr3650ww.eps
90 

Chairman GORDON. The amendment fails. Somewhat out of 

order, let me also suggest that the Committee would like to wish 

our best on to Mr. Neugebauer. Hopefully he will be back with us 

soon, so if his staff is here, please convey that on behalf of the entire Committee. 

The third amendment on the roster is an amendment offered by 

the gentleman from Nebraska, Mr. Smith. Are you ready to proceed 

with your amendment? 

Mr. SMITH OF NEBRASKA. Yes, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman GORDON. The Clerk will report the amendment. 

The CLERK. Amendment to H.R. 3650, amendment number 001, 

offered by Mr. Smith of Nebraska. 

Chairman GORDON. I ask unanimous consent to dispense with 

the reading. Without objection, so ordered. 

I recognize the gentleman for five minutes to explain the amendment. 

Mr. SMITH OF NEBRASKA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This 

amendment would insert the phrase ‘‘at the request of the states’’ 

in two parts of the bill. The first is where H.R. 3650 outlines the 

duties of Under Secretary as head of the taskforce and requires the 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to oversee the 

development and the implementation and review and periodic updating of the regional research and action plans. The second is 

where H.R. 3650 describes the plan details including the fact it is 

the Under Secretary who is responsible for overseeing the development and implementation of the plans. Inserting this phrase would 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTShr3650xx.eps
91 

ensure the states as part of regions affected by harmful algal 

blooms and hypoxia would be involved from the ground up in 

ascertaining there was a problem and identifying potential solutions. 

The intent of H.R. 3650 is for NOAA to be responsible for the ultimate development and implementation of the plans. Although the 

bill requires NOAA to coordinate with State, tribal and local officials through this process, my amendment would strengthen the 

concept of states maintaining primacy over their freshwater and 

coastal resources by requiring states initiate the process, start with 

requesting the plans instead of having the plans forced upon them. 

It is not anticipated any state would refuse to request such a plan. 

Considering the widespread economic and environmental impacts 

blooms and hypoxia can impose, some states are already encouraging some sort of action on this issue. Compelling NOAA to wait 

until the states in each region request a plan would preserve State 

control over their freshwater and coastal resources. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Smith follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE ADRIAN SMITH

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, 

This amendment would insert the phrase ‘‘at the request of the States’’ in two 

parts of the bill. The first would be where H.R. 3650 outlines the duties of Under 

Secretary as head of the Task Force and requires the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to ‘‘oversee the development and implementation, review and 

periodic updating of the Regional Research and Action Plans.’’ The second place 

would be where H.R. 3650 describes the plan details, including the fact it is the 

Under Secretary who is responsible for overseeing the development and implementation of the plans. 

Inserting this phrase would ensure the states, as part of regions affected by harmful algal blooms and hypoxia, would be involved from the ground up, in ascertaining 

there was a problem and identifying potential solutions. 

The intent of H.R. 3650 is for NOAA to be responsible for the ultimate development and implementation of the plans. Although the bill requires NOAA to coordinate with State, tribal and local officials through this process, my amendment would 

strengthen the concept states maintain primacy over their freshwater and coastal 

resources by requiring states initiate the process; start with requesting the plans 

instead of having the plans forced upon them. 

It is not anticipated any state would refuse to request such a plan. Considering 

the widespread economic and environmental impacts blooms and hypoxia could impose, some states are already encouraging some sort of action on this issue. However, compelling NOAA to wait until the states in each region request a plan would 

preserve State control over their freshwater and coastal resources. 

Chairman GORDON. Dr. Baird is recognized. 

Mr. BAIRD. This amendment, though well intentioned, raises 

many of the same issues we just went over so I won’t belabor those. 

The bill, as the gentleman mentioned, specifically instructs collaborative efforts with the States. My concern about the amendment is 

would effectively give one State or another veto power, and if that 

state happens to be a major contributor in some fashion to the factors that exacerbate harmful algal blooms, either fresh or saltwater, they would basically have veto power over the taskforce and 

I think that is a mistake, so I would urge its defeat. 

Chairman GORDON. Is there further discussion? 

Mr. SMITH OF NEBRASKA. Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman GORDON. Without—okay. Mr. Rohrabacher. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
92 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. I request time. I yield to my colleague. 

Mr. SMITH OF NEBRASKA. Thank you. I would just add that I 

would hope that this whole notion would not be the heavy hand of 

a Federal Government that comes down and that we urge states 

to step up. I guess it boils down to basic philosophy but certainly 

I think that this amendment would encourage states to work together that I think will bring about a much more effective product, 

work product in resolving these issues rather then encouraging 

states to pit one against another. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield 

back. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. I yield back my time. 

Chairman GORDON. If there is no further discussion, the vote occurs on the amendment. All in favor, say ‘‘aye.’’ Those opposed, 

‘‘no.’’ The nays have it. 

Mr. SMITH OF NEBRASKA. Mr. Chairman, I ask for a recorded 

vote, please. 

Chairman GORDON. The Clerk will call the roll. 

The CLERK. Chairman Gordon? 

Chairman GORDON. No. 

The CLERK. Chairman Gordon votes no. Mr. Costello? 

Mr. COSTELLO. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Costello votes no. Ms. Johnson? 

Ms. JOHNSON. No. 

The CLERK. Ms. Johnson votes no. Ms. Woolsey? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Wu? 

Mr. WU. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Wu votes no. Mr. Baird? 

Mr. BAIRD. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Baird votes no. Mr. Miller? 

Mr. MILLER. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Miller votes no. Mr. Lipinski? 

Mr. LIPINSKI. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Lipinski votes no. Ms. Giffords? 

Ms. GIFFORDS. No. 

The CLERK. Ms. Giffords votes no. Ms. Edwards? 

Ms. EDWARDS. No. 

The CLERK. Ms. Edwards votes no. Ms. Fudge? 

Ms. FUDGE. No. 

The CLERK. Ms. Fudge votes no. Mr. Luja ́n? 

Mr. LUJA ́ N. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Luja ́n votes no. Mr. Tonko? 

Mr. TONKO. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Tonko votes no. Mr. Griffith? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Rothman? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Matheson? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Davis? 

Mr. DAVIS. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Davis votes no. Mr. Chandler? 

Mr. CHANDLER. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Chandler votes no. Mr. Carnahan? 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
93 

Mr. CARNAHAN. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Carnahan votes no. Mr. Hill? 

Mr. HILL. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Hill votes no. Mr. Mitchell? 

Mr. MITCHELL. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Mitchell votes no. Mr. Wilson? 

Mr. WILSON. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Wilson votes no. Ms. Dahlkemper? 

Ms. DAHLKEMPER. No. 

The CLERK. Ms. Dahlkemper votes no. Mr. Grayson? 

Mr. GRAYSON. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Grayson votes no. Ms. Kosmas? 

Ms. KOSMAS. No. 

The CLERK. Ms. Kosmas votes no. Mr. Peters? 

Mr. PETERS. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Peters votes no. Mr. Hall? 

Mr. HALL. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Hall votes aye. Mr. Sensenbrenner? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Lamar Smith? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Rohrabacher? 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Yes. 

The CLERK. Mr. Rohrabacher votes aye. Mr. Bartlett? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Ehlers? 

Mr. EHLERS. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Ehlers votes aye. Mr. Lucas? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Ms. Biggert? 

Ms. BIGGERT. Aye. 

The CLERK. Ms. Biggert votes aye. Mr. Akin? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Neugebauer? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Inglis? 

Mr. INGLIS. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Inglis votes aye. Mr. McCaul? 

Mr. MCCAUL. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. McCaul votes aye. Mr. Diaz-Balart? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Bilbray? Mr. Bilbray? 

Mr. BILBRAY. Pass. 

The CLERK. Mr. Bilbray passes. Mr. Adrian Smith? 

Mr. SMITH OF NEBRASKA. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Adrian Smith votes aye. Mr. Broun? 

Mr. BROUN. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Broun votes aye. Mr. Olson? 

[No response.] 

Chairman GORDON. How is Mr. Rothman recorded? 

The CLERK. Mr. Rothman is not recorded. 

Mr. ROTHMAN. I would like to be recorded as no, please. 

The CLERK. Mr. Rothman votes no. 

Chairman GORDON. And how is Mr. Akin recorded? 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
94 

The CLERK. Mr. Akin is not recorded. 

Mr. AKIN. I would like to be recorded as aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Akin votes aye. 

Chairman GORDON. And how is Mr. Matheson recorded? 

The CLERK. Mr. Matheson is not recorded. 

Mr. MATHESON. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Matheson votes no. 

Chairman GORDON. And Mr. Bilbray, how is he recorded? 

The CLERK. Mr. Bilbray is reported as pass. 

Mr. BILBRAY. Make that an aye, please. 

The CLERK. Mr. Bilbray votes aye. 

Chairman GORDON. Is there anyone else that hasn’t been recorded? Ms. Edwards, were you recorded? Okay. The Clerk will report. 

The CLERK. Mr. Chairman, 10 Members vote aye and 24 Members vote no. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
95 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTShr3650yy.eps
96 

Chairman GORDON. The amendment fails. 

The fourth amendment on the roster is an amendment offered by 

the gentleman from Georgia, Dr. Broun. Are you ready to proceed 

with your amendment or—— 

Mr. BROUN. Mr. Chairman, I withdraw my amendment. 

Chairman GORDON. Thank you, Mr. Broun. The Clerk will—so 

the vote is now on the bill, H.R. 3650 as amended. All those in 

favor will say ‘‘aye.’’ All those opposed, ‘‘no.’’ In the opinion, the 

ayes have it. And the ayes have it. I now recognize myself for a 

motion. 

I move the Committee favorably report H.R. 3650 as amended to 

the House with the recommendation that the bill be passed. Furthermore, I move that staff be instructed to prepare the Committee 

legislative report and make necessary technical and conforming 

changes and that the Chairman take all necessary steps to begin 

to bring the bill before the House for consideration. 

The question is now on the motion to report the bill favorably. 

Those in favor of the motion will signify by saying ‘‘aye.’’ Opposed, 

‘‘no.’’ The ayes have it. The bill is favorably reported. 

Without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table. 

The Members will have two subsequent calendar days in which to 

submit supplemental Minority or additional views on this measure. 

I want to thank the Members for their attendance and the staff 

on both sides for their good work. This concludes our Committee 

markup. 

[Whereupon, at 3:55 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.] 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTShr3650zz.eps
(97) 

Appendix: 

H.R. 3650 AS AMENDED, AMENDMENT ROSTER


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
98 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTShr3650x.eps
99 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTShr3650y.eps
100 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTShr3650z.eps
101 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTShr3650aa.eps
102 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTShr3650bb.eps
103 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTShr3650cc.eps
104 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTShr3650dd.eps
105 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTShr3650ee.eps
106 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTShr3650ff.eps
107 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTShr3650gg.eps
108 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTShr3650hh.eps
109 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTShr3650ii.eps
110 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTShr3650jj.eps
111 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTShr3650kk.eps
112 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTShr3650ll.eps
113 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTShr3650mm.eps
114 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTShr3650uu.eps
115 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTShr3650vv.eps
116 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTShr3650pp.eps
117 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTShr3650qq.eps
118 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTShr3650rr.eps
119 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTShr3650ss.eps
120 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTShr3650nn.eps
121 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTShr3650oo.eps
122 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTShr3650tt.eps