A bill to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 7172 North Tongass Highway, Ward Cove, Alaska, as the 'Alice R. Brusich Post Office Building'.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation designed to finally address one of the most long-standing and difficult problems facing our Nation's first responders--the lack of communications interoperability.

I want to thank Chairman Collins of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, Senator Levin and Senator Akaka for joining me in this effort.

I don't want to be confused with the evil road captain in ``Cool Hand Luke,'' but there is only one way to say this: ``What we have here is a failure to communicate!''

By now, we all know that the inability of first responders to talk to one another when responding to emergencies costs lives during terrorist attacks or natural disasters. According to the 9/11 Commission, the lack of interoperability contributed to the deaths of more than 100 fire fighters in New York on 9/11.

However, this failure to communicate also creates problems during every day emergency operations, endangering both first responders and the public while also wasting precious resources. For example, when law enforcement officers cannot communicate effectively about a suspect fleeing across jurisdictions, criminals can escape.

It is past time we fixed this problem.

Achieving interoperability is the top priority for State homeland security advisors. It is essential for first responders to achieve the national preparedness goals that the Department of Homeland Security has established for the Nation.

However, for most States obtaining the equipment and technology to fulfill this goal remains a challenge. And a major hurdle continues to be lack of sufficient funding. A non-partisan task force of the Council on Foreign Relations recommended spending at least $6.8 billion over five years. DHS has also estimated the cost of modernizing equipment for 2.5 million public safety first responders across the country at $40 billion.

I am convinced that we can achieve interoperability for much less-- but only if strong national leadership drives cooperation and adoption of smart new technology solutions.

Achieving interoperability is difficult because some 50,000 local agencies typically make independent decisions about communications systems. The result is that first responders typically operate on different radio systems, at different frequencies, unable to communicate with one another.

Strong national leadership is necessary to ensure that different jurisdictions come together to work out the often complex issues that prevent interoperability in the first place.

The legislation we are introducing today will provide this much needed Federal leadership and provide dedicated grants, enhance technical assistance to State and local first responders, promote greater regional cooperation, and foster the research and development necessary to make achieving interoperability a realistic national goal.

The ``Improve Interoperable Communications for First Responders Act of 2005'' or the ICOM Act for short, gets us there in three distinct ways.

First, the ICOM Act will provide the Office of Interoperability and Compatibility (OIC) within DHS the resources and authorities necessary to systematically overcome the barriers to achieving interoperability.

ICOM requires OIC to conduct extensive, nationwide outreach and facilitate the creation of task forces in each State to develop interoperable solutions. It requires coordinated and extensive technical assistance through the Office of Domestic Preparedness' Interoperable Communications Technical Assistance Program. OIC will also be charged with developing a national strategy and national architecture so that we systematically move towards a truly national system of public safety communications.

This Act authorizes OIC to fund and conduct pilot programs to evaluate and validate new technology concepts needed to encourage more efficient use of spectrum and other resources and deploy less costly public safety communications systems.

Second, the ICOM Act will identify and answer the policy and technology questions necessary to achieve interoperability by requiring the Secretary to establish a comprehensive, competitive research and development program.

This research agenda will focus on: understanding the strengths and weaknesses of today's diverse public safety communications systems; examining how current and emerging technology can make public safety organizations more effective, and how local, State, and Federal agencies can utilize this technology in a coherent and cost-effective manner; evaluating and validating new technology concepts; and advancing the creation of a national strategy to promote interoperability and efficient use of spectrum.

The legislation authorizes some $126 million for each of fiscal years 2006 through 2009 for the operations of the Office for Interoperability and Compatibility so DHS can finally provide the national leadership necessary to achieve interoperability in the most cost effective manner; for research and development; and to provide enhanced technical assistance to state and local officials around the country.

Third, the ICOM Act will provide consistent, dedicated funding by authorizing $3.3 billion over five years for initiatives to achieve short-term or long-term solutions to interoperability. It authorizes grants directly to States or regional consortium within each State to be used specifically for key aspects of the communications life-cycle, including: State-wide or regional communications planning; system design and engineering; procurement and installation of equipment; training and exercises; or other activities determined by the Secretary to be integral to the achievement of this essential capability.

The bill adopts the same formula for distributing funds in S. 21, the Homeland Security Grants Enhancement Act as reported by the Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee. Each State will receive a minimum baseline amount of 0.55 percent of the total funds appropriated under the bill. States that are larger/and or more densely populated receive a higher baseline amount, based on a formula that combines population and population density.

The remaining funds--over 60 percent of the total--will be distributed based on additional threat and risk-based factors. This will ensure that the majority of funds are distributed to those areas at highest risk, while we systematically ensure that this very basic communications capability is built in every state across our country.

The Secretary will be required to establish a panel of technical experts, first responders, and other State and local officials, to review and make recommendations on grant applications.

This legislation also promotes regional cooperation, consistent with the National Preparedness Goal, which identifies the essential capabilities States and localities need to fight the war on terrorism, rewarding those jurisdictions that join together in robust regional bodies to apply for funds.

Most importantly, this dedicated funding program for interoperability will ensure that jurisdictions can receive and rely on a consistent stream of funding for vital interoperability projects, without also being forced to neglect all of the other essential capabilities DHS has said they need to develop.

This legislation is crucial for the safety of our citizens and the men and women who go to work everyday pledged to protect them. It will ensure that, for the first time, achieving communications interoperability is an achievable national goal, a genuine national priority.

To win the war on terrorism and protect the American people, we cannot have a failure to communicate.

I ask unanimous consent that the text of the legislation be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, my friend and colleague, the senior Senator from Florida, and I are today introducing a far-reaching bill to reauthorize the National Aeronautics and Space Administration for 5 years, from fiscal year 2006 through fiscal year 2010.

This legislation is already the product of close bipartisan cooperation among Republicans and Democrats, which should be a surprise to no one, for space exploration is something that is important to all Americans, and promises and provides benefits to all of us, to all of humanity.

This bill represents an important opportunity for the Congress to play its fundamental role, in conjunction with the executive branch, in establishing the policies and principles that will guide our Nation's exploration and utilization of space.

The President has outlined an ambitious new Vision for Exploration that enables us to see where we can be 30 and 40 years ahead, with a renewed US presence on the Moon and crews and habitats on Mars, and perhaps even beyond. I support and endorse that vision and believe it describes a course America must take into the future.

This legislation expresses the sense of the Congress that such a broad, visionary goal is important and necessary to help stimulate our efforts today to develop the capabilities and the skills to reach that goal, and to reap tremendous benefits and rewards for all of us here on Earth as we do.

The bill authorizes funding for NASA for the next 5 fiscal years, from fiscal year 2006 to fiscal year 2010. The authorized levels are close to those requested in the President's budget request for 2006 and increase at a level to keep pace with estimates of inflation over the subsequent years.

Where the legislation differs from the President's request or from the plans that have been developed at NASA to begin the vision for exploration, we believe the adjustments made in this legislation will improve NASA's capability to carry out those plans and to sustain the high level of public and congressional support necessary for the long- term success of the vision for exploration.

Those differences revolve around two major areas of concern: (1) the need to ensure a sustained, continuous ability for the United States to launch crews and cargo into orbit; and (2) the need to maintain our existing commitments to both our international partners and our scientific partners in the International Space Station.

In other areas of space policy and programs, we have included language which expands on the administration proposals. We provide for the establishment, by the President, of a proposed National Policy for Aeronautics and Aeronautical Research, to provide a framework for making intelligent and far-reaching decisions about this crucial aspect of our Nation's ability to remain competitive in the global market of aeronautics. We must know what capabilities must be retained in our present aeronautics research infrastructure and what may be better served by changes that would remove the competition within NASA for limited resources in a constrained budgetary environment. Difficult choices must be made, but the first step in making informed decisions is to have a comprehensive policy framework to guide those decisions.

We endorse and expand, by repeated references in several portions of the bill, the desire to open the door for greater commercial participation in the exploration and utilization of space and space- based assets, from the development of basic launch capabilities, to crew-capable launch vehicles, to resupply and even research management of the International Space Station, and missions to the Moon and Mars, to Earth observation and remote sensing capabilities.

Commercial capabilities have experienced a dramatic upsurge in the recent past which makes this an especially important and promising aspect of this legislation. Just one year ago, on June 21, 2004, SpaceShipOne, built by the private firm of Scaled Composites, flew into the lower reaches of outer space, making pilot Mike Melvill the first civilian to fly a commercially-built spaceship out of the atmosphere and the first private pilot to earn astronaut wings.

As I said earlier, we believe the provisions of this legislation will make it easier for NASA to pursue the vision for exploration. Let me, in conclusion, expand briefly on that statement by referring to two specific areas of interest: the development of a crew exploration vehicle, and the assembly and operation of the International Space Station.

NASA has begun several efforts in the past decade, to develop a replacement vehicle for human space flight, with a view to eventually retiring the space shuttle. Each of them has failed, after considerable expense, to find the technological breakthrough that was necessary for their success. They were focused on new technologies, new systems that were largely untested, and unproven. We are now out of time, and can no longer afford the luxury of attempting to develop a dramatically new and different human space flight capability.

This legislation directs NASA, wherever practical, to use existing technology and industrial capacity, derived from our 24 years of experience with the space shuttle, in developing alternative means for launching crews and cargo into space. This approach promises not only to result in less cost to NASA and less risk of failure in development, but it will enable this nation to avoid an unacceptable--and potentially dangerous--situation where we do not have a capability to launch humans in space, especially at a time when the number of nations who have that capability is increasing, as the entry of China into that long-exclusive ``club'' has demonstrated.

NASA has said it cannot afford to continue to provide for all the research that has been planned for years to be accomplished aboard the International Space Station. It has begun the process of narrowing the scope of the use of the space station to those experiments that can contribute directly to the needs of the vision for exploration, and the support of human missions to the Moon, Mars, and beyond. This legislation states strongly that such a restriction on the range of research disciplines aboard the ISS is not in the best interests of the Nation, or of our partners.

The bill directs NASA to retain and support those ``non-vision'' science disciplines, and authorizes an additional $100 million, initially, for NASA to do that. But more importantly, the bill designates the U.S. portion of the ISS as a national laboratory facility, and directs NASA to provide a plan, by March of next year, which will enable a national laboratory, within NASA, to assume research management responsibility for that on-orbit national laboratory facility.

The potential gain for NASA is that the national laboratory will be empowered to bring other, non-NASA, resources to bear in operating the ISS, thus freeing NASA of much of that operational responsibility, while at the same time allowing it to support the specific research it needs for the vision for exploration.

The legislation provides other authorities, as requested by the administration, to facilitate NASA operations and management, and addresses other issues, such as continued monitoring of safety-related issues. While it adds some reporting requirements for NASA, it also eliminates a number of statutory reporting requirements that are no longer necessary.

This legislation to reauthorize NASA is necessary and vital to the future success of our Nation's effort in the exploration of space, and I take great satisfaction in offering it today for the Senate's consideration. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I am pleased to join Senator Hutchison today in sponsoring a NASA Authorization Act that provides policy guidance for keeping NASA on track to achieve their objectives; and to ensure that there is a good balance between the different activities that NASA performs.

As chair and ranking member of the Commerce Committee's Subcommittee on Science and Space, Senator Hutchison and I believe that through this bill, Congress can provide constructive support to the good work being done by Administrator Michael Griffin, as they begin to implement the President's vision and prepare NASA for the challenges of the future.

This is a 5-year bill, authorizing NASA from 2006 through 2010. It authorizes NASA appropriations in excess of the President's Budget Request.

For fiscal year 2006, the President requested $16.456 billion, which is a 2.4 percent increase over the fiscal year 2005 NASA operating budget. This bill authorizes $16.556 billion for fiscal year 2006, which is a 3.0 percent increase over the fiscal year 2005 NASA operating budget. This bill authorizes increases at a level of about 3 percent each year, consistently providing more funding than the President's budget projection.

Like many of our colleagues, we believe that recent NASA budget requests have been below the levels required for NASA to perform its various missions effectively. Once this bill is enacted, we intend to work with the Appropriations Committee to ensure that adequate funds are provided for NASA to succeed.

This legislation authorizes NASA to return humans to the Moon, to explore it, and to maintain a human presence on the Moon. Consistent with the President's vision, it also requires using what we learn and develop on the Moon as a stepping-stone to future exploration of Mars.

To carry out these missions, our bill requires NASA to develop an implementation plan for the transition from shuttle to crew exploration vehicle, CEV. The plan will help NASA to make a smooth transition from retirement of the space shuttle orbiters to the replacement spacecraft systems. The implementation plan will help make sure that we can keep the skills and the focus that are needed to assure that each space shuttle flight is safe through retirement of the orbiters, and to retain those personnel needed for the CEV and heavy lift cargo spacecraft.

It is essential to our national security that we prevent any hiatus or gap in which the United States cannot send astronauts to space without relying on a foreign country. The Russians have been good partners in construction of the international space station, and the Soyuz spacecraft has been a reliable vehicle for our astronauts. But with all of the uncertainties in our relationship with Russia, we simply cannot allow ourselves the vulnerability of being totally dependent on the Soyuz. We need to maintain assured access to space by U.S. astronauts on a continuous basis. We therefore require in this legislation, that there not be a hiatus between the retirement of the space shuttle orbiters and the availability of the next generation U.S. human-rated spacecraft.

We recognize that NASA has some concerns regarding our position on a hiatus, and we are aware of Dr. Griffin's efforts to reduce the potential for a gap. We will work with NASA as this legislation moves forward to ensure that a compromise is reached that is mutually satisfying. This provision does not unduly tie the Administrator's hands, while still guaranteeing us assured access to space.

Our bill directs NASA to plan for and consider a Hubble servicing mission after the 2 space shuttle return to flight missions have been completed.

Americans are inspired by the images that Hubble produces. The new instruments to be added during the SM-4 Hubble servicing mission will produce higher quality images; enable us to see further into space; and give scientists a better understanding of our Universe's past, and perhaps of our future. The replacement gyroscopes and batteries that are planned for the mission will extend Hubble's life by 5 or more years.

This NASA authorization bill calls for utilization of the international space station for basic science as well as exploration science. It is important that we reap the benefits of our multi-billion dollar investment in the space station. The promise of some basic science research requires a microgravity or a space environment for us to better understand the problem that we are trying to solve. This bill ensures that NASA will maintain a focus on the importance of basic science.

This bill directs NASA to improve its safety culture. According to the Columbia Accident Investigation Board, CAIB, report, the safety culture at NASA was as much a cause of the Columbia tragedy as the physical cause. Low and mid-level personnel felt that you could not elevate safety concerns without reprisals, or being ignored. NASA has already taken significant steps to address these problems, but we need to assure that the safety culture improves as quickly as possible and that it continues to improve.

This legislation proposes that the Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel monitor and measure NASA's improvements to their safety culture, including employees' fear of reprisals for voicing concerns about safety.

It also contains policy regarding NASA's need to consider and implement lessons learned, in order to avoid another preventable tragedy like the Challenger and Columbia disasters.

This authorization bill addresses NASA aeronautics and America's pre- eminence in aviation. The Europeans have stated their intent to dominate the airplane market by 2020. This bill

directs the President, through the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy, OSTP, to work with NASA and other Federal agencies to develop a national policy for aeronautics. It also directs NASA to evaluate its core aeronautics research.

Many people do not realize that NASA does research for improving airplanes. NASA conducts research that makes airplanes safer, quieter, more fuel efficient, and less polluting. This important function of NASA needs to be continued and further developed.

Senator Hutchison and I expect to mark this bill up in the Commerce Committee later this week, and hope to have time to consider it on the floor before the August recess. I will urge all of my colleagues to support this important legislation. NASA has a new direction, and they have outstanding new leadership in Dr. Griffin.

We have an opportunity to authorize NASA for: implementing the Vision for Space Exploration; renewing our commitment to U.S. aviation and NASA aeronautics research; retaining or resurrecting very important science activities at NASA; and assuring that America has continuous human access to space.

By doing so, we will continue to advance our national security, strengthen our economy, inspire the next generation of explorers, and fulfill our destiny as explorers.

Mr. President, I am very pleased to join my good friend, the Senator from Connecticut, Senator Lieberman, in introducing the Improve Interoperable Communications for First Responders Act of 2005. This legislation will strengthen our capabilities to prevent and respond to acts of terrorism. The bill we are introducing will improve communications among the various levels of government and will assist our State and local first responders in upgrading their communications equipment. I thank Senator Lieberman for his efforts in putting together this very important legislation and for working with me to make this bill a bipartisan effort.

According to the 9/11 Commission Report, interoperability--the ability for emergency responders to communicate with one another during an incident--was a serious problem on 9/11. On that fateful day, the NYPD Emergency Service Unit did manage to successfully convey evacuation instructions to personnel in the North Tower after the South Tower's collapse. This was accomplished by a combination of ``1. the strength of the radios, 2. the relatively small numbers of individuals using them, and 3. use of the correct channel by all.'' On the other hand, the 9/11 Commission Report pointed out that ``the same three factors worked against successful communication among FDNY personnel. First, the radios' effectiveness was drastically reduced in the high- rise environment. Second, tactical channel 1 was simply overwhelmed by the numbers of units attempting to communicate on it at 10:00 a.m. Third, some firefighters were on the wrong channel or simply lacked radios altogether.''

In addition, a Government Accountability Office report on interoperable communications released in June 2004 notes that the lives of first responders and those they are trying to assist can be lost when first responders cannot communicate effectively. That is the crux of the matter that the Lieberman-Collins bill seeks to address. A substantial barrier to effective communications, according to the GAO, is the use of incompatible wireless equipment by many agencies and levels of government when they are responding to a major emergency. From computer systems to emergency radios, the technology that should allow these different levels of government to communicate with each other too often is silenced by incompatibility. Clearly, the barrier to a truly unified effort against terrorism is a matter of both culture and equipment. This legislation will help break down that barrier.

The GAO recommends that Federal grants be used to encourage States to develop and implement plans to improve interoperable communications and that the Department of Homeland Security should establish a long-term program to coordinate these same communications upgrades throughout the Federal Government. Our legislation would do much to implement these sensible recommendations.

The National Governors Association recently released a survey of State and territorial homeland security advisors to determine their top 10 priorities and challenges facing states in the future. The number one priority was achieving interoperability in communications.

One of the most persistent messages that I hear from Maine's first responders is strong concern about the lack of compatibility in communications equipment. It remains a substantial impediment to their ability to respond effectively in the event of a terrorist attack. For a State like mine that has the largest port by tonnage in New England, two international airports, key defense installations, hundreds of miles of coastline, and a long international border, compatible communications equipment is essential. Yet it remains an illusive goal.

Maine's firefighters, police officers, and emergency medical personnel do an amazing job in providing aid when a neighboring town is in need. Fires, floods, and accidents are local matters in which they have great expertise and experience. Their work on the front lines in the war against terrorism is, however, a joint responsibility. Maine's first responders, along with first responders across the country, are doing their part, but they need and deserve Federal help.

It is vitally important that we assist the States in getting the right communications technology into the hands of their first responders. That would be accomplished by the interoperability grant program in this legislation. The grant program guarantees every state a share of interoperability funding and makes additional funding available for states with special needs and vulnerabilities. It is designed to get this vital funding to first responders quickly, in coordination with a statewide plan.

A recent study by the Council on Foreign Relations estimates the total cost of nationwide communications compatibility at $6.8 billion.

Our legislation authorizes a total of $3.3 billion over a 5 year period for grants dedicated to achieving communications interoperability. That is a reasonable and necessary contribution by the Federal Government to this important partnership.

The legislation will also help to identify and answer the policy and technology questions necessary to achieve interoperability. It directs the Secretary of Homeland Security to establish a comprehensive, competitive research and development program. This includes conducting research through the Directorate of Science and Technology Homeland Security Advanced Research Projects Agency, (HSARPA) and establishing a Center of Excellence focused on enhancing information and

communications systems for first responders.

The Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2002, P.L. 108-458, which Senator Lieberman and I authored, directs the Office for Interoperability and Compatibility (OIC) in DHS to provide overall federal leadership to achieve interoperability. Our legislative initiative builds on this current policy by providing the OIC the resources and authorities necessary to conduct extensive, nationwide outreach, develop a national strategy and national architecture, and conduct pilot programs to evaluate and validate new technology concepts.

We must all work together to achieve interoperability for all our first responders. Coordination and cooperation among all stakeholders will be imperative if the brave men and women who risk their lives on a daily basis are to be fully prepared.

I urge my colleagues to join us in supporting this legislation to build a better and stronger homeland security partnership with our first responders.

Mr. President, I am pleased to join Chairwoman Snowe to introduce the Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2005.

Those of us from coastal States are especially aware of the important role of the U.S. Coast Guard in maritime security, marine safety, and search and rescue of mariners. In addition, the Coast Guard is instrumental in protecting our ocean resources through fisheries enforcement and response to oil spills.

We ask a lot of the Coast Guard, and I am grateful to the men and women of the U.S. Coast Guard for their dedication and hard work. In this bill, I believe we have provided the Coast Guard with direction and authorizations that will help them better serve the public and meet the growing demands of the future.

The bill includes authorizations for Fiscal Year 2006 and 2007 appropriations that are approximately 8 percent higher than for each preceding year. The bill also authorizes a number of important new programs including recommendations of the United States Commission on Ocean Policy, makes a number of changes sought by the Coast Guard for personnel and property management, and makes necessary technical corrections resulting from the Coast Guard's move from the Department of Transportation to the Department of Homeland Security.

I am especially pleased that the committee legislation authorizes $47,500,000 for the Coast Guard's continued operation and maintenance of the Nation's only Polar Ice Breaker fleet. The administration's budget for fiscal year 2006 proposed transferring the funding for operation and maintenance of these vessels to the National Science Foundation, while leaving operational responsibility with the Coast Guard. No other Coast Guard asset is funded in this manner. Subjecting the icebreaker program to the budgeting decisions of another federal agency would definitely lead to an uncertain future for the Coast Guard's three icebreakers, ultimately undermining the ability of the Coast Guard to maintain these assets, and threatening the ability of the United States to maintain a presence in the polar regions over the long term. Section 203 of this legislation specifically calls on the Coast Guard to take all necessary measures to maintain its current fleet of polar icebreakers, rather than transferring this responsibility to the NSF.

This bill includes important funding for additional Coast Guard capital improvement priorities including $10,000,000 for the completion of the vessel traffic system upgrade for Puget Sound, one of two regions nationwide that has not yet benefited from this important upgrade in maritime traffic management and safety. This upgraded vessel traffic system will improve vessel traffic efficiency and safety throughout Washington's coastal waters. This funding also includes $3 million for completion of a Coast Guard administrative building on Pier 36 in Seattle that was badly damaged in the Olympia earthquake in 2001. This building is the Command Center for the Coast Guard's Puget Sound search and rescue and homeland security activities and these funds will greatly improve the Coast Guard's capabilities in this area.

I am also pleased that the bill directs the Coast Guard to report to the Commerce Committee on opportunities for, the feasibility of, co- locating Coast Guard assets and personnel at facilities of other armed services branches, and entering into cooperative agreements for carrying out various Coast Guard missions. One such facility where co- location may prove beneficial to both the Coast Guard and the Navy is Naval Station Everett, which will be included in the Coast Guard's evaluation.

In addition, the bill promotes the use of alternative fuels by requiring the Coast Guard to evaluate the feasibility, costs, and potential cost savings of using bio-diesel fuel in new and existing Coast Guard vehicles and vessels, with a focus on ports such as the Port of Seattle with very high vessel traffic density. Bio-diesel and other alternative vehicle fuels are already used by the Army at Fort Lewis, King County Metro Transit, and several school districts and cities in Washington State.

We have included in the bill a provision that would extend a requirement for non-tank vessels of over 400 gross tons, operating in waters out to 12 miles from the U.S., to prepare emergency response plans for oil spills. As we have learned with unfortunate oil spills in the past, such as the recent Daleo Passage Spill, every second matters. Requiring large vessels operating in coastal waters to have an emergency response plan will help prevent oil spill disasters and, in the event of a spill, mitigate their effects through preparedness.

Finally, the bill makes several important changes to the Coast Guard's management of personnel. One of these changes modifies current Coast Guard rules regarding recalling reservists for acts of terrorism and for longer periods of time. This provision ensures that the clock for the length of the recall begins to run on the first day that a reservist reports to active duty, including for training. Another provision ensures that the director of the Boating Safety Office remains a uniformed officer at the level of captain, in response to concerns from the boating safety community that the Coast Guard was eliminating this billet.

Effective Coast Guard operations are important for the State of Washington and for the Nation. I am pleased to join Senators Snowe, Stevens, and Inouye in introducing this legislation and I look forward to working with my colleagues on the Commerce Committee and with the Coast Guard to move this legislation quickly through the Committee and the Senate.