VETS Act of 2007

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Mississippi, and before we begin our debate on the Coast Guard Authorization Act for 2008, I yield myself such time as I may consume for the purposes of a colloquy with Mr. Thompson.

Mr. Thompson, would you please join me in remembering the sacrifice of Damage Controlman Third Class Nathan B. Bruckenthal of the U.S. Coast Guard, who was killed off the coast of Iraq on this date in 2004? He was the first U.S. Coast Guardsman to have been killed in battle since the end of the Vietnam War.

I yield to the gentleman from Mississippi.

Reclaiming my time, Petty Officer Bruckenthal is survived by his wife Patricia and their daughter Harper. We all join in thanking them for their sacrifice. Petty Officer Bruckenthal represented the very best of the U.S. Coast Guard and what it has to offer.

With that, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

First of all, let me thank Chairman Thompson for his and his staff's hard work in reporting a bill from our Committee on Homeland Security in September that I believe was the result of solid bipartisan compromise, and for Chairman Thompson's continued cooperation over the past several months as the committee worked to bring this bill to the floor.

Obviously, we have heard from those of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee many of the good things in this bill. I must say, however, I am disappointed that the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee largely ignored the committee on Homeland Security's improvements, particularly to those provisions relating to LNG security.

While our committee's approach was reasonable and risk-based, as we have attempted to approach all of our problems with respect to homeland security, that is with a risk-based approach, the language adopted by the other committee, I fear, abandons the risk-based approach and assumes a cookie cutter, one-size-fits all approach.

My friend from Ohio (Mr. LaTourette) has an amendment that would clarify that State and local resources can be considered when identifying resources available to provide the newly mandated security patrols, and I would hope that his amendment would be adopted.

I am also very concerned about two entire titles that were added to the bill after they were considered by four committees of jurisdiction. A new title X shifts 80 percent of the Coast Guard's Administrative Law Judge resources and several of the Coast Guard's ALJ authorities to the National Transportation Safety Board. This is being proposed as over 1 million TWIC cards are being issued to our rail, truck, and port workers. These are those biometric cards that we have spent so much time developing and hoping that it would finally get in place.

The effect of this provision, I fear, could leave only two ALJs, that is Administrative Law Judges, to hear any appeals to TWIC denials. That has been one of the great concerns we have had. If we have this TWIC system set up, how can people appeal if they have been denied their TWIC cards. This would dramatically slow the appeals process, to the detriment of port security and our Nation's port workers, who are relying on a timely adjudication of a TWIC for their livelihood.

As a recent letter from TSA opposing this proposal states, ``ALJs at the Coast Guard have built up expertise in transportation security matters, and I fear this provision will negatively impact not only TWIC, but other programs as well, including hazardous materials endorsement, and may result in even higher fees for these workers.''

I would be happy to yield, yes.

I hope that is true, reclaiming my time.

Well, the effect of the provision is to take 80 percent of the resources that are currently allocated to the ALJ, Administrative Law Judge program, and that in effect would make it very, very difficult for them to continue, since they have a total of seven ALJs, and if you take 80 percent of the funding, I believe that would leave us with about 20 percent.

I would like to include a copy of this letter from TSA in the Record.

U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Transportation

Security Administration,

Arlington, VA.

Hon. Peter T. King,

Ranking Member, Committee on Homeland Security,

House of Representatives, Washington, DC.

Dear Congressman King: I am writing to express the

Transportation Security Administration's (TSA) strong

opposition to Title X--Appeals to National Transportation

Safety Board (NTSB) of the manager's amendment to H.R. 2830,

the ``Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2007.'' Title X would

transfer

Coast Guard Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) authority for

review of merchant mariner documentation and 80 percent of

the Coast Guard ALJ budget to the NTSB. This could have an

adverse impact upon the adjudication of TSA's civil

enforcement cases and anticipated cases dealing with the

Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC)

program.

TSA questions whether sufficient legal, administrative, and

budget resources will continue to be provided to the Coast

Guard to support its remaining ALJ functions, including

adjudication of TSA security cases.

For more than 5 years, TSA has been extremely well served

by the Coast Guard ALJs as fair, impartial, and responsive

adjudicators in security cases involving individuals in the

transportation sector. Under an interagency agreement, Coast

Guard ALJs play a major role in TSA's enforcement and

security credentialing programs. They adjudicate aviation

security civil penalty cases, Hazardous Materials Endorsement

(HME) and TWIC denials of requests for waivers and appeals

from individuals who have received a Final Determination of

Threat Assessment; appeals by air cargo workers who have

received a Final Determination of Threat Assessment; and

appeals by individuals holding or applying for Federal

Aviation Administration certificates, ratings, or

authorizations who have received a Final Determination of

Threat Assessment.

In the absence of sufficient ALJ legal and administrative

resources at the Coast Guard, TSA does not regard NTSB ALJs

as a good alternative. Coast Guard ALJs have substantial

expertise in fair adjudication of security programs. NTSB

ALJs do not have expertise in transportation security

matters. As TSA continually expands the implementation of the

TWIC program and the Coast Guard enforces it at our Nation's

seaports, TSA and TWIC applicants will benefit from the

substantial experience Coast Guard ALJs have in the maritime

security environment.

In addition, Coast Guard ALJs have been sensitive to the

challenges faced by individuals representing themselves in a

formal administrative process and have worked with TSA to

develop simplified procedures.

TSA and Coast Guard have worked together for years to

establish caseload management procedures, agreements, and

funding processes to efficiently handle TSA cases. For

example, the Coast Guard serves as TSA's Docketing Center for

its formal hearing process. Shifting the workload to ALJs of

another agency would create a huge setback for TSA

enforcement and administration. ALJ coverage, budgeting,

processing time, and even geographic availability would have

to be reassessed and reestablished, a process that may take

several years.

In addition, TSA's HME and TWIC are fee-based programs. TSA

developed its fee models based on Coast Guard cost estimates

and processing models. If conditions necessitate TSA's

seeking ALJ services outside Coast Guard, this could affect

program costs, and consequently, fees for applicants.

I would appreciate your consideration of TSA's concerns

about the potential adverse impact of Title X on the

efficient adjudication of important TSA security cases.

Identical letters have been sent to the Chairman of the

House Homeland Security Committee as well as the Chairman and

Ranking Member of the House Committee on Transportation and

Infrastructure. Please do not hesitate to contact Ms. Claire

Heffernan, Acting Assistant Administrator for Legislative

Affairs, at (571) 227-2717 if you have any questions about

this matter.

Sincerely yours,

Kip Hawley,

Assistant Secretary.

The second new title, title XI, creates an assistant commandant for marine safety and a vast new super structure, including Marine Safety Specialist, that receive special benefits such as geographic stability and special promotion system. It provides for the possibility of additional pay for Coast Guard personnel in the marine safety field. Unfortunately, with no regard for those Coast Guard men and women engaged in other critical, dangerous missions like search and rescue, national defense, and port security. I wonder if we really want to do that.

It appears to elevate the Coast Guard's marine safety mission above all others. Most notably, the Commandant of the Coast Guard has real and serious concerns about this reorganization language that has never been considered by any committee, to my knowledge. I would think we would want to seriously deliberate these provisions in an open forum and give the Commandant an opportunity to voice his concerns to the Congress.

Mr. Broun of Georgia has introduced an amendment stripping these two problematic titles so they can be considered on their merits by the appropriate congressional committee, and I am pleased that his amendment has been made in order.

Other improving amendments offered by the Committee on Homeland Security members include Mr. Bilirakis of Florida, an amendment to make the Coast Guard's incredibly successful biometric identification pilot program more permanent. I hope this amendment is adopted. It will help us positively identify individuals with weapons, drug trafficking, and murder convictions, and help us keep them out of the United States.

Both Mr. Poe and I are offering an amendment with language to make operations of the stealth mini submarines illegal. These subs, which can carry up to 10 tons of cocaine into the United States, and have done so, would be equally capable of transporting weapons of mass destruction or would-be terrorists. They are immediately scuttled, once detected, making prosecution nearly impossible. So I hope that this amendment, when considered, would be approved on this floor.

If these concerns are not adequately addressed here on the House floor, I would look forward to working with the Senate in a conference to ensure that the men and women of the Coast Guard have the resources it needs to continue to protect the citizens of the United States. The Coast Guard is one of the jewels of our overall executive branch, particularly in DHS, and this bill, this reauthorization bill recognizes that. Although it has some defects, as I mentioned, I hope we can work those out.

With that, I would reserve the balance of my time.

At this time, Mr. Chairman, I would like to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I submit for the Record two more letters, one from the Commandant of the Coast Guard and one from four retired admirals of the Coast Guard.

Mr. Chairman, let me just repeat some language contained in the Director of TSA's letter to Congressman King, the ranking member of Homeland Security, about the concern I have again about this ALJ question.

``In the absence of sufficient ALJ legal and administrative resources at the Coast Guard, TSA does not regard the NTSB ALJs as a good alternative. Coast Guard ALJs have substantial expertise in fair adjudication of security programs. NTSB ALJs do not have the expertise in transportation security matters.''

What I have been trying to point out is my concern about the TWIC program, that all of us on a bipartisan basis here in the House and the Senate have tried to get up and running. I am afraid that while I appreciate the gentleman from Minnesota's clarification

of his intent to do something in the future, I am concerned about the expertise being removed at a time when we need it.

U.S. Department of Homeland Security, United States Coast

Guard,

Washington, DC, April 23, 2008.

Hon. James L. Oberstar,

Chairman, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,

House of Representatives, Washington, DC.

Dear Chairman Oberstar: On April 18, the Committee filed

with the Rules Committee an amendment in the nature of a

substitute to H.R. 2830, that would be retitled the ``Coast

Guard Authorization Act of 2008.'' During numerous meetings

and staff-level discussions over several months, we have

described how a number of provisions that appear in this

amendment would compromise organizational efficiency and

operational effectiveness, diminish my command and control,

and ultimately reduce the Coast Guard's effectiveness in

carrying out its safety, security, and stewardship missions.

We have expressed these and other concerns in Department of

Homeland Security views letters concerning earlier bill

language. The amendment also contains provisions neither

previously shared nor discussed with the Coast Guard.

One provision requiring that the Coast Guard provide

security around liquefied natural gas terminals and tankers

is contrary to the existing assistance framework, at odds

with accepted risk management practices, and would divert

finite Coast Guard assets from other high-priority missions.

I recommend a broader' discussion of security measures for

all extremely hazardous cargoes. In the Statement of

Administration Policy on H.R. 2830, the Administration has

stated that, if the bill is presented to the President with

this provision, his senior advisors would recommend that he

veto the bill.

Among the others is one that, while similar to the

Administration's proposal, fails to authorize the President

to appoint officers to positions of importance and

responsibility to accommodate organizational change in the

future (Admirals and Vice Admirals). Others, primarily

involving our important marine safety mission, would

statutorily fix the designation and duties of other senior

Coast Guard officials and officials at all levels of command,

and prescribe inflexible personnel qualification

requirements. Still other provisions would diminish the Coast

Guard's capacity to adjudicate merchant mariner licensing

matters efficiently and effectively and support other vital

security adjudications of the Department of Homeland Security

(Appeals to National Transportation Safety Board). Still more

provisions would prescribe contracting and acquisition

practices for the Deepwater program, thereby increasing the

cost of, and adding delay to, the Deepwater acquisition

process, as well as circumventing the review and approval

authority of Coast Guard technical authorities (Coast Guard

Integrated Deepwater Program).

Among the new provisions is one that dramatically alters

admission procedures for the U.S. Coast Guard Academy. While

I have discussed Academy admissions several times with

Chairman Cummings and we agree that our process should yield

successful cadets and reflect our diverse society, the

proposed Congressional nomination process deserves full

discussion and deliberate consideration. Other new provisions

that affect how we execute our missions deserve similar

scrutiny. Conversely, the bill omits the Administration

proposal for much needed enhanced authority to prosecute

those who would smuggle undocumented aliens into the United

States by sea (Maritime Alien Smuggling Law Enforcement Act)

and the Administration's proposal to protect seafarers who

participate in investigations and adjudication of

environmental crimes or who have been abandoned in the United

States (Protection of and fair treatment of seafarers).

Over the last year in the course of hearings, personal

meetings with you, and regional forums with industry, as well

as in my public statements, I have assured you and the public

that we share a common objective: a robust marine safety

program suited to meet the evolving demands of industry and

the marine public. I am already taking aggressive steps to

right the balance between our marine safety mission and our

other vital responsibilities, and improve the effectiveness,

consistency, and responsiveness of our marine safety program,

consistent with the framework I presented to you last

September. Legislation such as the provisions I describe

above was unnecessary to start this process. As I have stated

on several occasions. I am the Commandant and am accountable

to you to produce the changes needed to improve program

performance.

Including these provisions and others in an Authorization

Act that would otherwise be welcome compels me to strongly

oppose the bill.

Sincerely,

T.W. Allen,

Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard,

Commandant.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Madam Chairman, this is an important amendment. This is an attempt by us to get our criminal laws to catch up with the technology used by the bad guys, essentially.

If you were to look at one of these in the open sea, you would find out how difficult it is to spot them actually, even from the air. They are a very effective means by which they can deliver illegal drugs to this country, which they have done.

The Coast Guard has done a remarkable job in fighting this. But this law

will give us the ability to prosecute cases that are, we are incapable of prosecuting at the present time.

It will also alleviate the danger that is posed to our members of the Coast Guard in their attempt to retrieve the contraband that is thrown overboard when the perpetrators of these kinds of activities find that they are being chased by the Coast Guard. In this case, it will be illegal to be utilizing these kind of vessels for this type of purpose, but you will not have to prove the contraband actually is there.

This is an effective means by which we are giving an additional tool to our Coast Guard men and women around the world, and also to our prosecutors, to ensure that we deal with the continuing problem of drug trade.

But, in addition to that, as the gentleman from Texas mentioned, this could be used for delivering weapons of mass destruction to our shores. For that reason, if no other, I would hope we would get a unanimous vote in support of this amendment.

Mr. Chairman, let me thank both Chairman Oberstar and of course Chairman Thompson and Subcommittee Chair Elijah Cummings on this Coast Guard bill that all of us have worked on. As the Chair of the Transportation Security Subcommittee of Homeland Security, I can assure you that the idea of overcoming the administration's veto on the question of LNG security is going to be an important stand today as we vote for this bill.

The language that speaks to the LNG security is a fair statement. It gives the Coast Guard flexibility. It allows them to make an assessment, and it is the right thing to do. Coming from the City of Houston, with a very large port, I understand the need to protect the surrounding communities and the importance of LNG security.

In addition, I am grateful that I have an amendment going forward that will help expedite the TWIC card for so many who have not yet gone through the process, to make an assessment by the Coast Guard of the necessity of more resources, of keeping the facility open 24 hours a day and making sure that this TWIC process goes in order to secure those.

I am also grateful that we have increased the Coast Guard overall to 47,000 and that the underlying bill refocuses on the value of the Coast Guard, both in terms of their standard duties, but also the new enhanced duty for security.

I hope that as we move TSA administrative law judges, however, that we will find a way to ensure that TSA is not impacted negatively and that we will have oversight to ensure that this process will continue to work.

Again, Mr. Chairman, this is an important legislative initiative. This again is the Homeland Security Committee and the Transportation Committee and the two chairpersons and committee members working harmoniously together, recognizing that the bottom line of what we do on the floor today and what we do for the American people is to ensure their security. We have done that today.

I ask my colleagues to enthusiastically vote for this legislation.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of H.R. 2830, the Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2007, introduced by my distinguished colleague from Minnesota, Representative Oberstar. This important legislation will provide our Nation's Coast Guard with the resources it needs in order to successfully execute all its missions.

As a member of the Homeland Security Committee, I believe protecting our Nation by air, land, and sea to be critical to our national security interests. This bill, the Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2007, sets forth various provisions that will be beneficial to our maritime interests, and consequently to our national security. Included in the provisions are the establishments of grants for international maritime organizations, the establishment of the Merchant Mariner Medical Advisory Committee, and codified various provisions relating to Coast Guard personnel matters.

For some years now, I have been concerned about the diversion of Coast Guard resources from their historic missions of search and rescue and marine safety, to homeland security missions. Since the creation of the Department of Homeland Security, and the Coast Guard's inclusion in the Department, one of the greatest challenges has been ensuring that the funds that the Coast Guard have traditionally received in order to perform their duties remain intact so that they can fulfill the responsibilities that American citizens rely on them to perform, namely ensuring the safety of our Nation's seas, lakes, rivers, and ports.

Mr. Chairman, we have to ensure that the Coast Guard will get their full funding which is absolutely necessary to carry out their responsibilities, and that is precisely what this legislation does. This act authorizes appropriations for FY2008 for the Coast Guard. Furthermore, this act also authorizes the FY2008 levels of Coast Guard active duty military personnel and average military training student loans, allowing for sufficient human resources for the Coast Guard to achieve its designated goals. This bill explicitly authorizes end- strength by 1,500 members to 47,000 and increasing Coast Guard funding to $8.4 billion which has not been done since the 1970s.

The act also includes provisions regarding shipping and navigation, vessel size limits, maritime drug law enforcement, fishing vessel safety, liability limits for natural gas deepwater ports, claims against the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund, dry bulk cargo rescue, merchant manner matter, and security.

Mr. Chairman, I was pleased to work with Chairman Thompson and offer an amendment during our Homeland Security Committee markup to this important legislation, which I felt improved the bill. My amendment mandated the creation of a strategic plan to utilize assistance programs to assist ports and facilities that are found by the Secretary not to maintain effective anti-terrorism measures. I am also offering an amendment on the House floor today calling on the Secretary of Homeland Security to examine the challenges and delays faced by transportation workers seeking to obtain TWIC cards at enrollment sites and mandates the development of timelines and benchmarks for implementing the findings of this assessment.

Mr. Chairman, every year, 95 percent of the goods coming into the United States arrive at our Nation's seaports. These goods are shipped from ports around the world, some from developed countries and others from developing countries. I am particularly concerned about ports in developing countries. Developing countries have limited resources which means their ability to maintain effective anti-terrorism measures is limited.

We cannot allow terrorists to exploit this limitation. Rather, we should work with developing countries and others to build up their anti-terrorism measures. This assistance will benefit all of us. The developing countries will gain the support they need, and we will close a potential gap in our own supply chain. Every gap we close is one less gap that can be exploited by terrorists. I am pleased that this bill requires the Department of Homeland Security to develop a strategic plan to utilize existing assistance programs to assist foreign ports and facilities that are found by the Secretary not to maintain effective anti-terrorism measured. This bill furthermore authorizes the Coast Guard to lend, lease, and donate equipment and provide technical training to non-compliant foreign ports or facilities. The multiple layers of security enhancement authorized in this legislation will minimize the ability of terrorists to target to maritime commerce and negatively impact the global supply chain.

I am pleased that the Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2007 includes specific provisions relating to Minority Serving Institutions (MSls). Within this legislation, MSls are defined as a historically Black college or university, a Hispanic serving institution, a Tribal College or University, a Predominantly Black institution, or a Native American- serving institution. Section 901 of this important legislation states that the Commandant shall establish a management internship program for students at MSls, enabling them to intern at Coast Guard headquarters or Coast Guard regional offices in an effort to support the development of civilian, career-midlevel, and senior managers for the service. This legislation furthermore instructs the Coast Guard to work with the National Association for Equal Opportunity in Higher Education, the Hispanic Association of Colleges

and Universities, and the American Indian Higher Education Consortium to create this internship program and authorizes $2 million to be appropriated to this program.

Mr. Chairman, I have long stressed the importance of including this Nation's MSIs in the effort to secure our Nation. Section 903 of this legislation states that the Commandant shall establish Guard. Laboratory of Excellence-MSI a Coast Cooperative Technology Program at three minority serving institutions to focus on priority security areas for the Coast Guard, such as global maritime surveillance, resilience, and recovery. It also calls on the Commandant to encourage collaboration among the minority serving institutions selected to participate in the cooperative technology program and institutions of higher education with institutional research and academic program resources and experience. These and other measures included within this bill are absolutely imperative as the Office of Workforce Planning has recently revealed that only 5 percent of the officer corps is African American and only 12 percent of the officer corps is comprised of ethnic minorities, while in the last 3 years the numbers of minority ascensions have actually decreased.

The Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2007 also increases oversight and efficiency of the TWIC program, which was originally mandated 6 years ago, yet continues to flounder. To date only 230,000 out of an estimated 845,000 applicants have enrolled in the TWIC program, while the deadline for enrollment is September 25, 2008. While this provision of the Coast Guard Authorization is both timely and important, there is still more which must be done in order to ensure that the program is both effective and efficient, which is why I have offered an amendment.

I would like to reiterate only a few of the obstacles that workers have faced in my State of Texas as well in my district of Houston. For example, a marine worker enrolled at the Houston Port enrolled on December 13, 2007. To date, he still does not yet have a TWIC card. He remained on hold for 4 hours and 10 minutes and was finally told by the operator that he would have to return to Houston to be fingerprinted again after APR. Incidentally, a representative of Higman Marine Services, Inc. asked the same question about their employee, and she was told that he should not return until June. This blatant inconsistency in service and information is simply unacceptable. Furthermore, another transportation worker went to the Beaumont center about three weeks ago to pick up his TWIC after being notified it was ready. He traveled from Hemphill, TX (117 miles) and was told that the card was accidentally shipped to Houston and he could drive there (85 miles) to pick it up. He presently does not have his card. The list of incidences in which workers have to continually overcome structural impediments is too long for me to name. It is from my concern for these workers that I have introduced my amendment.

My amendment calls for the Secretary of Homeland Security to compile an assessment of the enrollment sites for transportation security cards issued under 7 section 70105 of title 46, United States Code within 30 days of enactment. The assessment should, at a minimum, examine: the feasibility of keeping those enrollment sites open 24 hours per day, and 7 days per week, in order to better handle the large number of applicants for such cards; the feasibility of keeping those enrollment sites open after September 25, 2008; and the quality of customer service, including the periods of time individuals are kept on hold on the telephone, whether appointments are kept, and processing times for applications.

My amendment furthermore calls on the Secretary of Homeland Security to develop timelines and benchmarks for implementing the findings of the assessment as the Secretary deems necessary. By identifying the areas in which enrollment sites for homeland security cards are ineffective and inefficient and creating a timeline through which to implement necessary changes and benchmarks to ensure their progress and accountability, we will make this Nation a safer place accessible to labor and operations alike.

Mr. Chairman, the Transportation Security Administration has expressed some concern over Title X of this legislation. Title X would transfer Coast Guard Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) authority to review merchant mariner documentation as well as 80 percent of the ALJ budget to NTSB. I understand the TSA's concern that such a step might have an adverse impact on anticipated cases dealing with TWIC and adjudication of TSA's civil cases, and I am committed to working with TSA to ensure that the execution of this legislation is beneficial to all parties involved.

Long before the horrific events of September 11, 2001, citizens of American relied upon the Coast Guard to ensure the safety of our waterways, and we depend on them still. Therefore, I urge my fellow members of Congress to also support the Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2007 and ensure this rich and necessary tradition remains a thriving and useful part of not only our national defense strategy but also to protect us and the environment from those threats by sea.

I would like to inquire how much time remains on each side.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, could the gentleman yield 15 seconds?

Both gentlemen made a splendid statement on the issue and during the amendment process. Because of the persuasive case you've made, we are prepared to accept your amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

I invite the gentleman to pursue this colloquy.

Most certainly. This is a 120-year-old practice in seafaring, and we ought to address that issue, as the gentleman has rightly raised it.

Of course. Please proceed.

I thank the gentleman for raising this very complex issue on which we've devoted an enormous amount of time and visited with the Norwegian Ambassador and other interests, the American Bureau of Shipping and others, and I'm committed to working with the gentleman to resolve this issue in an equitable and fair manner as we proceed forward with it.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Tauscher).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Richardson).

Mr. Chairman, I yield for the purpose of making a unanimous consent request to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Baird).

(Mr. BAIRD asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.

I first thank the gentleman from Ohio for his very generous and very kind and thoughtful remarks. I greatly appreciate the camaraderie we share and the partnership in doing the work of the committee.

And I want to thank the gentleman from Michigan, who gave most insightful comment on this whole bill. It is a bad day for zebra mussels and spiny echinoderms and a whole host of other invasive species that we're going to deal with severely as this bill moves to enactment.

I do want to observe that the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey) is concerned about five Bay Area lighthouses, Point Montara, Alcatraz Island, Lime Point in Fort Baker, Point

Diablo, and Point Bonita, and we will work with the gentlewoman and the Coast Guard to expedite transfer of those Coast Guard facilities to the U.S. Park Service.

And, again, I want to say, as I did at the outset, we took our time all through last year and part of this year to craft a splendid bill in an inclusive manner, hearing out the concerns of the Coast Guard and addressing extensively the concerns of the Republican members of the committee to be thorough and produce the best bill possible, and we are happy to bring this bill in good time to the House floor today.

Would the gentleman yield?

Just briefly to clarify that point. We do not transfer ALJs from the Coast Guard. We leave those in place, just transfer the venue, and we will provide both in this bill and in the subsequent NTSB authorization funding for additional ALJs at the NTSB, as we did in aviation.

I just tell the gentleman that is the case.

I just wanted to reaffirm for my colleague in the Hip Replacement Caucus from California that when we transferred authority from the FAA to the NTSB for aviation appeals, we provided authority, funding, and we went to the Appropriations Committee to seek additional moneys, and were successful in doing that. We are committed to doing the same in the case of the Coast Guard. Again, we will provide in the NTSB authorization additional ALJ personnel for these appeals.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the manager's amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes.

The manager's amendment authorizes the Coast Guard to delegate to classification societies the Coast Guard's authority for safety plan review and construction inspections of offshore oil structures. It allows this authority to be delegated to foreign classification societies to the extent that the government of the country in which the classification society is headquartered accepts documents prepared by our classification society, the American Bureau of Shipping, on behalf of the leaseholder, and does not limit the ABS to this process.

I also want to thank several colleagues for agreeing to have their amendments incorporated into the manager's amendment to expedite consideration of the bill: The gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Tauscher); the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Loretta Sanchez); the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Kind); the gentlewoman from Guam (Ms. Bordallo); and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Weiner).

The Tauscher amendment requires federally licensed pilots to use portable electronic devices with navigational charts capable of being connected to an Automatic Identification System.

The Sanchez amendment requires the Superintendent of the Coast Guard to prescribe a policy on sexual harassment and sexual violence.

The Kind amendment deals with monthly ballast water treatment reports to the Secretary, requiring them. In addition, the amendment provides that no-ballast-on-board vessels will be required to conduct ballast water treatment, when applicable.

The Bordallo amendment requires Coast Guard vessels homeported in Guam to be repaired at shipyards in the U.S., including Guam shipyards. The same requirement applies to all other Coast Guard cutters homeported elsewhere in the United States.

The Weiner amendment requires the Environmental Protection Agency to conduct a study on health, safety and environmental concerns related to an underground petroleum spill on the Brooklyn, New York, shoreline.

All those amendments are incorporated into the manager's amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Most certainly. I urged the gentleman at Rules in discussions to introduce a bill dealing with this authority under the Clean Water Act so that we would have a very strong authoritative base for the legislation, and that we will move quickly in committee to move it through subcommittee, full committee and to the House floor as promptly as the House legislative schedule will permit.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Loretta Sanchez).

May I inquire whether the gentleman has further speakers.

I yield the balance of our time to the gentleman from Maryland, the Chair of the subcommittee.

Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim time in opposition to the amendment, though I don't intend to oppose it.

I indeed support the amendment offered by the gentleman from Ohio, who is our ranking member on the Coast Guard subcommittee, which he offers in conjunction with the distinguished gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Boustany), also a very good friend and colleague and committee member.

The amendment addresses section 720 of the substitute regarding waterside security around LNG tankers and terminals. It provides that the Coast Guard may consider security assets and personnel provided by State and local officials who are contracted for or otherwise made available to an LNG terminal operator in determining whether security resources are available to carry out our waterside security measures.

The Coast Guard has, as we have so often discussed, limited resources to undertake its many missions. Partnering with State and local officials or contracted waterside security services will be in effect force multipliers for the Coast Guard. So we support that initiative.

I reserve the balance of my time.

How much time remains?

I yield such time as he may consume to the distinguished Chair of the subcommittee, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cummings).

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 10 seconds.

Does the gentleman from Ohio have any further speakers?

If the gentleman is concluding, I will conclude on our side.

We accept the amendment on this side, and urge all Members to vote for it.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition to the amendment, although I don't intend to oppose it.

The amendment of the gentlewoman arises out of a very tragic case on which the committee held an extensive hearing, and attempted to address the issue in language within the pending bill.

Her amendment would go to the heart of this issue, establishing a Web site, updated quarterly, aggregated by cruise line, and providing a link to the site on their own Web site. These requirements will allow passengers to review the safety record of a cruise line before booking their cruise. I think that is a very important protection, especially for women who are often alone and can be subjected to violence, as we have seen in the course of these hearings. I support the amendment.

I am delighted to yield to the gentleman from Ohio.

Madam Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguish Chair of the Rail Subcommittee, the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Corrine Brown).

Madam Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Shays).

I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cummings).

Madam Chairman, I claim the time in opposition, though I do not intend to oppose the amendment.

I thank the gentleman from Texas, a member of our committee, for offering this amendment.

The Coast Guard in the past 4 months has had 23 cases involving semi- submersible vessels, and the Coast Guard intelligence sector predicts that 85 cases will occur this year, possibly a projection of 120 such cases next year.

This amendment deals with stateless submersible or semi-submersible vessels on international voyages, and makes it a finding of Congress that they are a serious international problem that facilitates transnational crimes, including drug trafficking and terrorism, a serious threat to U.S. maritime security navigation, and I appreciate the gentleman offering the amendment.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I will reserve the balance of our time. I will yield to the gentleman from Maryland to close on our side. So the gentleman may proceed with his speakers.

The gentleman may close and we will close on our side.

I yield to the gentleman from Maryland, Chair of the Coast Guard Subcommittee, the balance of our time.

I thank the gentleman for yielding time.

It was our purpose from the very outset of crafting the marine safety provisions of this bill to delineate clearly the responsibilities of the Coast Guard on safety, on its safety mission, and on the new emphasis within the Department o Homeland Security on their security responsibilities.

In fact, this was an issue, I would say to the gentleman from Ohio, that then Chairman Young and I raised with the President at the White House some 6 plus years ago when he first proposed the Department of Homeland Security, that the bill, as proposed, the proposition set forth by the administration, did not distinguish between search, rescue, safety responsibilities of the Coast Guard and these new emphasis duties on security. We do that now in this legislation. The amendment of the gentleman from California will further delineate that distinction.

I thank the gentleman for yielding this time, and I thank the gentleman for his amendment.

Madam Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition, though I do not intend to oppose the amendment.

I do support the amendment offered by the distinguished gentleman from Florida with whose father I had the pleasure to serve, a person of great personal distinction who served this body very well and with whom I had a delightful personal relationship. And I always appreciated that friendship.

I thank the gentleman for offering this amendment which requires biometric identification of suspected persons, including terrorists, to strengthen border security. Fingerprinting, digital photos, and other technology can be used to identify illegal migrants, smugglers, and terrorists. It will be useful in establishing a database.

It parallels what we do in the TSA for aviation security and in other areas of security. It will be a valuable asset in the ongoing struggle against terrorism, and I appreciate the gentleman offering the amendment.

I am happy to yield to the gentleman from Ohio.

I yield to close on our side to the gentleman from Maryland.

Madam Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.

Mr. Chairman, at this time, it is my pleasure to yield 3 minutes to a gentleman I mentioned in my opening remarks, the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Boustany), who has been a true leader in the House of Representatives on this issue of shoreside and waterside security for LNG facilities.

I would be happy to yield 15 seconds to the distinguished gentleman from Minnesota.

I thank the Chair.

At this time--if the gentleman is reserving his 2\1/2\ minutes--it's my pleasure to yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Shimkus).

(Mr. SHIMKUS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

May I ask--I know the chairman has 2\1/2\ minutes-- how much time do we have?

I thank the Chair.

Mr. Chairman, I would yield myself such time as I may consume to engage in two short colloquies with the chairman of the full committee, if I may.

Mr. Chairman, first of all, would you be willing to enter into a colloquy regarding the withdrawal of funds from the seamen's accounts authorized under section 405?

Thank you.

Mr. Chairman, it's my understanding that it is current practice for seamen on passenger vessels to be paid in cash. Section 405 authorizes the deposit of their pay into certain approved accounts. The section also requires that those funds be available for withdrawal. I understand that, as a practical matter, many seamen want to make sure that they can make those withdrawals in cash.

Would the chairman and the chairman of the subcommittee be willing to work with us in conference to clarify the amounts that can be withdrawn from those in cash up to the amount of a seaman's pay?

I thank the Chair.

The second colloquy, if you'd be kind enough to engage in a colloquy relative to the delegation of certain functions of the Coast Guard to classification societies.

Mr. Chairman, the unnumbered section in your

amendment that replaces section 318 as reported by the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee adds a new subsection, subsection (d), to section 3316 of title 46 of the United States Code. Under paragraph (2) the Secretary may delegate the Coast Guard's authority to a foreign classification society ``to the extent that'' the government of the society's home country, one, accepts plan review, inspections, or examinations conducted by ABS, and, two, provides to ABS equivalent access to inspect, certify, and provide related services to offshore facilities under that country's jurisdiction.

I understand that some foreign countries do not use a delegation system but instead accept plan reviews, inspections, or examinations performed by classification societies as part of a comprehensive operating plan submitted by the offshore leaseholder. Concerns have been raised that the Secretary may construe acceptance of the ABS plan reviews, inspections, or examinations as part of those comprehensive plans to be something less than full acceptance of plan review, inspections, or examinations in the United States, thus limiting the work that classification societies headquartered in those companies could perform in the United States and limiting the work that ABS can perform in foreign offshore markets.

Would the Chair be willing to work in conference to clarify what constitutes fair and full access by ABS to work in foreign offshore markets and by foreign classification societies headquartered in countries which do not use delegation schemes to work domestic offshore markets?

I thank the Chair.

Mr. Chairman, at this time I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, to close the debate on our side, and I hope that Homeland Security, if they don't use all their time, can give him more time, I yield 30 seconds to a distinguished member of the full committee, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Ehlers).

Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to control the time in opposition to the amendment, although I don't oppose the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I have asked for the time in opposition to the amendment for the purpose of engaging the distinguished chairman of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee in a colloquy relative to the issue of recreational boating.

Mr. Chairman, as you know, during the consideration of this measure before the Rules Committee, I offered several amendments related to discharges from recreational vessels. Those amendments were not made in order under the rule.

I am still concerned about the impact the proposed regulations may have on more than 16 million recreational boaters in the United States. At the Rules Committee, you were more than gracious in suggesting that we would work together to develop legislation, hold hearings in the committee and move legislation quickly to the House on this subject.

I would ask the chairman, and in saying this I also want to give a tip of the hat to Candice Miller of Michigan, who has been a real champion on this issue as well, but I would ask the chairman if you would be willing to work with us to bring legislation to the House floor and to get it prompt consideration, as this deadline is now approaching in September?

I yield to the gentleman from Minnesota.

Reclaiming my time, I thank the chairman very much. I want to thank the chairman for not only his work on the bill, the manager's amendment, but also this issue. I look forward to working with him to solve this problem which is looming out there for these 16 million boaters that never thought they would need a discharge petition when they went walleye fishing on Lake Erie.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

I would advise the distinguished chairman, I have no other speakers and am prepared to yield back whenever you are finished.

Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk made in order under the rule.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I might consume.

Mr. Chairman, I indicated during the opening remarks general debate on this bill that this is an amendment which I cosponsored with Representative Boustany, and it would authorize the Coast Guard to consider qualified State and local security assets, personnel and resources, made available to a liquefied natural gas terminal when determining whether security resources are available to carry out necessary security measures.

This language carries out an agreement that was developed in a colloquy with Chairman Cummings during our subcommittee's and the full committee's consideration of the bill.

Mr. Chairman, all of us want to ensure the highest levels of security at LNG terminals and other at-risk assets. This amendment would do that by leveraging the collective resources of Federal, State, local, and private sector officials. I urge all members to support this amendment.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, at this time it is my pleasure to yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from New Jersey, a valuable member of the full committee, subcommittee, and the former Chair of the Coast Guard Subcommittee, Mr. LoBiondo.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I might consume to, one, thank the distinguished chairmen of the subcommittee and the full committee for working with us to massage this language and for accepting our amendment.

It is now my pleasure to yield 1 minute to the coauthor of the amendment with me, who spoke during the course of the general debate and who, when this issue was coming up, because of the importance of natural gas and because of the importance of natural gas in the gulf coast, immediately came to me and said, can we continue to work on this as we bring it to the floor? And I again want to commend Mr. Boustany and his colleagues from the gulf coast for bringing this to our attention.

I would advise that I am prepared to close if the gentleman is.

It's a good amendment. I hope we can all vote for it.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Would the gentleman yield?

I thank the gentleman. I had intended to claim the time in opposition, even though I am not opposed to the amendment. I would indicate to the chairman and the sponsors of the amendment that we are prepared to accept the amendment.

I do have some concerns about the scope of the alleged incidents that will be reported via the Web site and the manner in which it will be presented, but I pledge to work with the amendment's sponsors as we move this bill to conference to facilitate those.

Madam Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to control the time in opposition, even though I am not opposed to the amendment.

Madam Chairman, we are prepared to accept this amendment. The Coast Guard is a multi-mission military service that must have the ability and flexibility to respond to numerous concerns and threats in the maritime domain.

We share the concern of the sponsor that no one Coast Guard mission should be elevated in precedence to the expense of the service's many other responsibilities.

I want to congratulate Mr. McNerney, a new Member of the House, for bringing this amendment to the floor, bringing it to our attention.

I would be happy to yield to the distinguished chairman for any observations he would have.

I would ask the chairman of the subcommittee, Mr. Cummings, do you want to say anything about the amendment?

I would be happy to yield to the gentleman from Maryland.

I thank both chairmen and want to again congratulate Mr. McNerney on his amendment.

I would yield back the balance of my time.

I want to congratulate Mr. Bilirakis on this amendment, and we all had the privilege of serving with his dad, Mike, and he's a ``Gus'' off the old block, and he's doing a fine job not only in this amendment but also the Waterway Watch program.

We're prepared to accept the amendment. The Coast Guard has operated a pilot program in Mona Pass, Puerto Rico. It has been extremely successful. We're aware that the Coast Guard intends to expand the program in the Caribbean Basin to make it a permanent program. His amendment would accomplish these goals.

For that reason, I support the amendment and congratulate Mr. Bilirakis.

Mr. Chairman, the House has under consideration the bill H.R. 2830, the Coast Guard Reauthorization Act of 2007. Mr. Chairman, I want to highlight an amendment that I offered which has been included in Chairman Oberstar's amendment before the House. It directs the Environmental Protection Agency to conduct a study of the Greenpoint, Brooklyn, New York underground oil spill at Newtown Creek.

Newtown Creek is a 3.5 mile-long waterway that flows from the East River and separates the boroughs of Brooklyn and Queens. It is the single most polluted waterway in New York City, a legacy left by more than a century of heavy industrial activity. The creek's banks are home to the largest oil spill in the United States, which dates back to the 1950s and is estimated to be 150 percent of the size of the Exxon- Valdez spill.

In 1978, a Coast Guard patrol detected petroleum on the surface of Newtown Creek and identified a spill that spreads from the banks of the creek through the Greenpoint neighborhood in Brooklyn. Evaluations at that time identified a spill totaling 17 million gallons attributed to refineries operated along the banks of the creek by the predecessors to ExxonMobil, BP/Amoco and Chevron-Texaco. To date, 9.4 million gallons have been cleaned, primarily conducted by ExxonMobil under a 1990 consent agreement with the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation that sets no timetable for completion and includes no meaningful criteria for compliance. Estimates indicate that it will take until at least 2026 to finish the remediation, almost 50 years since we discovered the spill.

Today, even though it has been 30 years since the oil spill was detected, the best information on the spill's size are estimates. While we have evidence that the spill is 17-30 million gallons, covering 55 to 70 acres, the full-extent of the spill remains unknown.

This information is critical. More than 200 observation wells and 35 recovery wells have been installed since 1978, but until we know the full extent of the problem, we may be wasting time.

In 2006, Congress directed the Environmental Protection Agency to revisit the findings of the United States Coast Guard's July 1979 report entitled ``Investigation of Underground Accumulation of Hydrocarbons along Newtown Creek.'' The 2006 study did not collect new data, determine the size or location of the spill, or conclusively assess its impact on public health and safety. It recommended reevaluating the entire plume.

Given this, the provision included in Chairman Oberstar's amendment instructs the Environmental Protection Agency to conduct a full-site characterization of the Greenpoint, Brooklyn underground oil spill.

This study is to be driven by the collection of new field evidence and will not be limited to the review or co-review of existing or scheduled data collection by private parties or state and municipal entities. This new evidence includes the collection of data from new product, groundwater and soil monitoring wells, as well as from existing groundwater and soil monitoring wells at the Greenpoint Oil Spill site. This site is loosely bound by Newtown Creek on the northeast, the Brooklyn-Queens Expressway on the east and south, North Henry Street on the west, and Greenpoint Avenue on the north.

Specifically, the full-site characterization is to include:

The investigation, collection, and analysis of data on the full extent of the free-product plume, or the portion of the underground petroleum plume that floats on top of the site's groundwater in its refined state or crude state, including any historic remnants currently distinct or fragmented from current spill delineations.

The investigation, collection, and analysis of data on the full extent of the dissolved phase of the plume, or the portion of the underground petroleum plume that has dissolved into the groundwater, including the geographic extent and concentrations of groundwater contamination.

The investigation, collection, and analysis of data on the full extent of soil contamination, including current and historic smear zones, or the area of soil contamination that may exist within the zone of horizontal and vertical water table fluctuations that have occurred since the time of the petroleum release.

The investigation, collection, and analysis of data on the full extent of soil vapor contamination, including vertical and horizontal pathways within the vadose zone, or the area between the land surface and the water table.

The evaluation of the entire spill area, covering both the free- product and dissolved plume, using three-phase numerical modeling techniques simulating the movement and interaction of water, oil, and vapor in a geologic medium, and use of such model to make an estimate on the length of time that will be required to recover free product, contaminated groundwater and contaminated soil from the underground plumes.

The investigation and collection of data on monthly groundwater levels over a representative area of the free product and dissolved phase contamination areas to establish background water levels.

The investigation, collection, and analysis of data on current and historic groundwater pathways in the region.

The investigation, collection, and analysis of data on the impact of tidal fluctuations on groundwater levels in the region.

The investigation, collection, and analysis of data on seepage of free product and dissolved phase groundwater into Newtown Creek along the full spill area shoreline.

Chemical analysis and description of the oil product in the Newtown Creek region in its free product phase, its dissolved phase, and its smeared phase.

An investigation of reports of oil in building foundations in the area of Roebling Street and North Eleventh Street in Brooklyn, New York, to determine whether those oil pockets are distinct from the Greenpoint Oil Spill, are historic remnants of the Greenpoint Oil Spill, or remain hydrologically connected to the Greenpoint Oil Spill.

A detailed, three-dimensional representation reflecting the latitudinal and longitudinal location of the oil spill in the Newtown Creek region and also the observed and corrected thickness of the spill.

A revised estimate of the volume and area of the spill in its three phases: free product, polluted groundwater, and smeared soils, and evaluate the remaining plume volume using corrected product thickness values.

There is no geographic limit to the study. Testing is to be performed at potential, historic migration pathways and currently or newly detected product and groundwater contamination areas near the Greenpoint oil spill. The study will begin with areas to the north, south, southeast, and east of the current published spill location. Emphasis is to be placed on the path the spill may have taken when it was subject to hydrologic pressures related to groundwater withdrawals in the early-to-mid part of the 20th Century.

As outlined in the amendment, this study is to be completed no later than one year after enactment of this law.

I would like to express my thanks to Chairman Oberstar and Chairman Cummings for their willingness to work with me on this project. Furthermore, I would like to commend Mrs. Velazquez, who represents the people of Greenpoint, and has worked closely with me on this initiative.

Additionally, I would like to thank the staff of the Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittees on Water Resources and Environment and Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation, particularly Ryan Seiger, John Cullather, Lucinda Lessley, and Ben Webster, who have worked with me to address this critical, but often overlooked, issue.

I'd also like to thank Riverkeeper Incorporated, and its chief investigator, Basil Seggos. This organization's dedication and advice on remediating the Newtown Creek oil spill over the last six years has been an invaluable asset.

Finally, I'd like to thank Dori Friedberg of my staff for her time, work, and counsel on this issue.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the leadership of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee for their hard work shepherding through the Coast Guard Reauthorization Act of 2007, and express my strong support for this bill.