Integrated Deepwater Program Reform Act

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 6999) to restructure the Coast Guard Integrated Deepwater Program, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on the pending bill.

Mr. Speaker, this legislation in a previous form passed the House last year by a vote of 426-0. The Senate passed a comparable bill by unanimous consent. The bill before us is a bipartisan compromise between our Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure in the House and the Committee on Commerce, Science, & Transportation in the Senate.

It is a complicated piece of legislation that took a great deal of time to work out. The objective of this legislation is to reform the Coast Guard acquisition program.

Stories began creeping out of mistakes and cost overruns and serious problems within the Coast Guard's Deepwater Program. A closer look by our committee investigative staff found that there were serious flaws in the conduct of this program, and we began an extensive inquiry and investigation into those flaws and into the consequences thereof, the most serious of which was that the first article of the cutter extension program went to sea and cracked in three places, predicted to be problem areas by the chief naval architect of the Navy, in consultation to a whistleblower within the Deepwater Program.

I need not go back and unravel all of the details that led up to that. Suffice it to say that the core of the problem was a self- certification initiative undertaken by the Coast Guard at the direction of the Department of Homeland Security that led to serious flaws, not only in the program but in the construction of these vessels and the extension initiative. The result was that taxpayers have lost over $100 million, the Coast Guard has lost the service of some 49 cutters, and frankly, I think there should have been criminal investigations undertaken by the Justice Department of those engaged in these practices.

Thanks to the leadership of the gentleman from Maryland, the Chair of the Coast Guard Subcommittee, Mr. Cummings, and the staff's relentless pursuit of the facts of the causes of the problems, we held a hearing that went till 11:30 at night, nearly 10 hours of investigative hearing, drew fact after fact out and established causality problems and led the way to solutions. It's not enough just to conduct oversight, to find the flaws, to find the problems; it's important to correct them.

And in that process, we had this blended participation with the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. LaTourette) who has proven himself to be a devotee of the Coast Guard and mastered the issues of the Coast Guard and of this particular contractual undertaking of the Coast Guard.

The result of those hearings was substantial reform of the Coast Guard's acquisition program. The details of the program I will call on the Chair of the subcommittee, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cummings), and ask him to explain the details and how we frankly intend and are going to cure this problem for the future.

It took a great deal of negotiation with the other body and with the Coast Guard to come to the resolution that we bring to the House today, and for that progress, I thank the gentleman from Ohio and the ranking member of the full committee, Mr. Mica, for their patience over many weeks of negotiating out these terms and conditions

that we bring to the House today to cure this program, save the taxpayers money, put the Coast Guard on a sound footing, and assure to the greatest extent that we can that these problems don't extend into the future.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 6999, as amended, the ``Integrated Deepwater Program Reform Act of 2008''. I would like to congratulate the distinguished Chairman of the Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation, Mr. Cummings, as well as Ranking Member Mica and Subcommittee Ranking Member LaTourette for their work on this landmark acquisition reform bill.

Last year, the House passed H.R. 2722, the ``Integrated Deepwater Program Reform Act'', by a vote of 426-0. The Senate subsequently passed its Deepwater Reform bill, S. 924, by unanimous consent. H.R. 6999 is the bipartisan compromise agreement of these two bills of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate.

The Integrated Deepwater Acquisition Program is a $24 billion program to replace all Coast Guard aircraft and cutters that primarily operate more than 50 miles offshore. The Coast Guard has never attempted to replace its whole fleet under one long-term program. The Committee has conducted numerous oversight hearings on this program to understand why there have been cost-overruns and why the Coast Guard spent $100 million to renovate and replace eight of its 110-foot patrol boats-- only to have these renovated boats tied to the dock as unseaworthy.

As I have said many times, if I were adrift in the ocean, there is no one I would want to save me but the U.S. Coast Guard. What they do at sea to save lives is second to none. However, when it comes to managing an acquisition program--the Coast Guard has serious challenges. Just because you can fly an aircraft or drive a cutter, doesn't mean you know how to manage an acquisition to buy that aircraft or cutter. As a result, the Coast Guard's acquisition programs are hundreds of millions of dollars over budget and years behind schedule--including the Deepwater Acquisition program and the Rescue-21 program to install new search and rescue communications systems.

In the past week, we have seen firsthand what happens on Wall Street when there is a lack of oversight, accountability, and standards. But Wall Street doesn't want to be regulated. Neither does the Coast Guard. The Coast Guard wants to have Congress continue to write the checks-- while they say ``trust us'' to spend the taxpayers' money wisely. While I would trust them with my life at sea, I don't think we should continue to write blank checks without demanding standards and accountability.

H.R. 6999 reforms the Coast Guard acquisition program. Specifically, the bill:

terminates the use of lead systems integrators beginning on October 1, 2011;

requires that the Commandant, and not the contractor, retain the technical authority to determine when the contract specifications have been met;

requires Early Operational Assessments to be made for all aircraft and cutters after they are designed--but before they are built--to ensure that they will meet the mission requirements of the Coast Guard;

requires all new cutters and aircraft and their engines to be certified by an independent 3rd party to ensure they meet design and performance requirements;

requires the development of workforce policies to ensure that the best qualified individuals are assigned to the acquisition program;

requires the Commandant to establish career paths for military and civilian personnel who wish to pursue careers in acquisition programs;

requires the Commandant to establish a balanced workforce policy to promote a workforce in which women and members of racial and ethnic minorities are appropriately represented in Government service;

establishes a Chief Acquisition Officer for the Coast Guard. The CAO may be a civilian or military officer, but must have a level III acquisition program manager certificate and 10 years of experience in an acquisition position;

requires the Coast Guard to report to Congress when there are cost overruns or program delays; and

requires the Coast Guard to use the Department of Defense's contract management expertise and contracting, where appropriate, to obtain the best possible price for Coast Guard assets.

H.R. 6999, as amended, also contains a provision that makes it unlawful to operate a stateless submersible or submersible vessel on the high seas. Use of submarines has become a new trend with the international drug runners operating out of Columbia. When the Coast Guard interdicts these vessels the smugglers pull a lever to flood and sink the submarine--and then wait for the Coast Guard to ``rescue'' them. However, all of the drugs are on the bottom of the ocean and it makes a prosecution more difficult. So Coast Guard personnel are risking their lives to enter the sinking submarine to get some of the cocaine as evidence. H.R. 6999 will obviate the need to enter the submarine. The Coast Guard can arrest the smugglers and they can be prosecuted for operating these pirate submarines.

Mr. Speaker, this is a landmark bill that will significantly improve the management of the multi-billion dollar acquisition program of the Coast Guard. It is the direct result of the Committee's in-depth investigation of the Deepwater Program. Like H.R. 2722, it deserves the support of every Member of the House.

I strongly urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R. 6999, the ``Integrated Deepwater Program Reform Act of 2008''.

Finally, I insert in the Congressional Record an exchange of letters between Chairman Bennie G. Thompson, Chairman of the Committee on Homeland Security, and me.

House of Representatives,

Committee on Homeland Security,

Washington, DC, September 26, 2008.

Hon. James L. Oberstar,

Chairman, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,

Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC.

Dear Mr. Chairman: I am writing to you regarding H.R. 6999,

Integrated Deepwater Program Reform Act of 2008 introduced by

Mr. Cummings on September 23, 2008.

H.R. 6999 contains provisions that fall within the

jurisdiction of the Committee on Homeland Security. I

recognize and appreciate your desire to bring this bill to

the full House expeditiously. Accordingly, I will not seek a

sequential referral of the bill. However, this decision

should not be construed as the Committee on Homeland Security

waiving, altering, o diminishing its jurisdiction over this

legislation.

Additionally, the Committee on Homeland Security reserves

the right to seek the appointment of conferees during any

House-Senate conference convned on this legislation or on

provisions of this or a similar bill that are within the

jurisdiction of the Committee on Homeland Security. I ask for

your commitment to support any such request by the Committee

on Homeland Security for the appointment of conferees on H.R.

6999 or similar legislation. Finally, I respectfully ask that

you place a copy of your letter and this letter in the

Congressional Record during floor consideration of H.R. 6999.

Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. I look

forward to working with you as we prepare to pass this

important legislation.

Sincerely,

Bennie G. Thompson,

Chairman.

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

I thank the gentleman for those very thoughtful comments.

I was listening with great interest as he moved from deepwater to deep finance and was worried that he was going to suggest that the powers on high give that problem to our committee. Well, we'll build a fence around it, we'll build a bridge over it, we'll build a tunnel through it, we will encapsulate it and subject it to the funding out of the highway trust fund and the problem will be behind us. I think in the end we would have a solution to that problem that everybody could sign onto, but that's not our domain.

And of course we both have reservations about the legislation before us in similar spirit, but I think we go forward with this legislation, hope that the other body moves it through without further--how shall I say? I'll be kind about it--without further changes, and that the bill will move on to enactment, and that someday soon the Lorain Shipyard will build vessels for the Coast Guard. It will be good for the Great Lakes, it will be good for Lorain, Ohio, it will be good for the gentleman from Ohio, and it will be good for the country.

The Lorain Shipyard is one of the great assets of this Nation, built extraordinarily successful vessels that are still plying the lakes today, the thousand-footers that carry iron ore from northern Minnesota in my district to the lower lake steel mills, and that have borne the brunt of the forces of nature on the Great Lakes. It was a great shipyard, I've been there several times. It built the Mesabi Miner, by the way, a thousand-footer that is still active, carrying 60,000 tons of iron ore. But, unfortunately, that vessel, if I may digress a moment, and others have had to go out 7,000 tons light because of the drought in the Great Lakes and the failure of the Corps of Engineers to dredge the harbors and the channels of the Great Lakes, meaning that our lakers have to travel three or four extra voyages a year to meet the tonnage requirements, raising the cost of tactonite, and therefore raising the cost of steel production in lower lake steel mills, and why passage of our Water Resources Development Act of last year and the veto override is so critically important and why funding of those projects is so critical. And I'm delighted that the stimulus legislation we passed yesterday has some $5 billion for the Corps of Engineers to undertake projects that can be underway within 90 days. And we all know very well that there are dredging projects all throughout the Great Lakes--and the lower lake harbors, particularly-- that could benefit from that investment.

As Mr. Cummings said moments ago, we didn't get here on our own. Our staffs on both sides of the aisle have worked rigorously in shaping in legislation and in laying the groundwork for the investigation. Clay Foushee, who led the investigative team on our side. And Lucinda Lessley, on Mr. Cummings' committee staff, who championed both the oversight hearings and the legislative hearings. And our chief council on the Coast Guard Maritime Subcommittee, John Cullather--for my money, the finest mind in maritime legislation in the country. And John Rayfield, who is a storehouse of knowledge on the subject, and Eric Nagel on the minority side, all deserve our appreciation and gratitude for the many hours of labor invested in bringing us to this point of the legislation.

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

I yield myself the remaining time to thank the gentleman from California, my colleague in the informal Hip Replacement Caucus, for raising the issue of submersibles and for introducing the bill that he champions that we are happy to incorporate, and which is important to do in this legislation. Again I express my profound respect, appreciation and admiration to the gentleman from Maryland for his leadership of the Coast Guard subcommittee, the gentleman from Ohio for his superb management of the issues on the minority side of the committee on this issue and for the constant communication that we've had. As long as we keep the communications going, as we have done over these 2 years and over the previous years, we will do good work for the country and for the Congress.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I ask for a unanimous vote on this legislation.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 2722) to restructure the Coast Guard Integrated Deepwater Program, and for other purposes, as amended.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, the Integrated Deepwater Program Reform Act, H.R. 2722, which I authored in my capacity as the chairman of the Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation, is a critical piece of legislation that will strengthen the management of the Coast Guard's Deepwater procurement program.

H.R. 2722 passed both the Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation and the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure on a voice vote and has enjoyed bipartisan support from the members of both the subcommittee and the full committee.

I wish to express my deepest appreciation to Chairman James Oberstar for his leadership and support on this measure, and, indeed, for his leadership of our committee.

I also express my appreciation to the ranking member of the full committee, Congressman Mica, and the ranking member of the subcommittee, Congressman LaTourette, for their leadership and the commitment they have shown to the success of our United States Coast Guard through their work on the bill before us today.

Further, I wish to thank Chairman Bennie Thompson for his wise counsel on this bill and for working with us to get this bill to the floor today.

Deepwater is a $24 billion, 25-year procurement effort through which the Coast Guard will replace or rehabilitate all of its cutters and aircraft. Management of the program was awarded in 2002 through a performance-based contract to a private sector team comprised of Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman, now known as the Integrated Coast Guard Systems or ICGS.

Unfortunately, some of the procurements conducted under Deepwater over the past 5 years have experienced unacceptable failures that have delayed the production of needed assets and contributed to a significant shortfall in Coast Guard patrol hours.

Perhaps the most widely publicized failure of the Deepwater program is the failure of the effort to lengthen 110-foot patrol boats already in the Coast Guard's fleet to 123 feet. The lengthening was intended to upgrade these boats and extend their service lives while newer assets were being developed.

Though warned by Navy experts that the proposed designs for the lengthening was inadequate, the Coast Guard proceeded with the effort anyway. Eight boats, which originally cost some $60 million to produce and which had many years of additional service life left, buckled soon after they were lengthened and now sit sadly in the Coast Guard yard in Baltimore waiting for the scrap heap.

Unfortunately, the failure of the 123-foot patrol boats is not the sole failure of the Deepwater program. The initial design of the Fast Response Cutter was also beset by technical failures, though fortunately these were identified before any ships were built. While this acquisition effort has now been revamped, the GAO reported earlier this year that the design failure has delayed the procurement by at least 2 years.

Together, the failed effort to lengthen the 110-foot patrol boats and the failure of the first design of the Fast Response Cutter wasted another $100 million of hard-earned American taxpayer dollars.

Similarly, despite the obligation of another $100 million, the initial design effort on the Vertical Unmanned Aerial Vehicle, which is needed to enhance the surveillance capacity of the National Security Cutter, also failed. This craft had originally been scheduled for delivery in 2007, but the GAO estimates that delivery will now be delayed by as much as 6 years, meaning that the first National Security Cutters will likely enter service without the vehicles.

More recently, the Department of Homeland Security's Office of the Inspector General found that the hull fatigue life on the National Security Cutter, the most expensive asset to be procured under the Deepwater program, may not meet contractual requirements. The IG warns that fixing the hulls of the first two NSCs, which are already well into production, will add potentially significant costs to these ships and may even affect their operational capabilities.

Despite this troubling record of failure and waste, during the first 4 years of the Deepwater program, the Coast Guard ranked the contractor performance between ``very good'' and ``excellent'' and awarded the ICGS team some $16 million in award fees; in other words, in bonuses.

Such a situation is ridiculous and intolerable. Having convened now three hearings on Deepwater in the Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation in the 110th Congress and having chaired an investigative hearing on the 120-foot patrol boat program convened in the full Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure by Chairman Oberstar, we have had the opportunity to closely examine the failures in contractor performance and in Coast Guard management that have occurred since 2002.

H.R. 2722 responds directly to these failures by requiring the creation of the management systems and the appointment of the personnel needed to enable the Coast Guard to manage Deepwater as effectively as the service managed the truly amazing rescues of victims during Hurricane Katrina.

Under the leadership of Commandant Thad Allen, the service is already moving decisively to correct past mistakes. Admiral Allen has formed a new procurement directorate to professionalize acquisition management and to put the business practices in place needed to effectively oversee contractor performance and to create lines of strict accountability.

The Coast Guard is now also directly managing the procurement of the Fast Response Cutter, and it has issued a solicitation that includes new measures specifically intended to focus the procurement on producing an asset that will meet all performance requirements.

The Integrated Deepwater Program Reform Act, H.R. 2722, would build on the important reforms Admiral Allen has already enacted by putting in place a comprehensive package of reforms that will strengthen the institutional capacity of the Coast Guard to manage not only Deepwater but all other procurements for years to come.

Specifically, H.R. 2722 will require that the Coast Guard be in charge of all technical decisions on Deepwater and would require the use of full and open competition for the procurement of new assets to ensure that the Coast Guard receives the best value for taxpayers' resources.

H.R. 2722 also sets rigorous new standards for the testing and certification of all Deepwater assets.

The bill requires that all new National Security Cutters procured from the date of enactment be certified by an independent third party to meet all contractual requirements.

The DHS Inspector General has testified before our subcommittee that the four audits of Deepwater he has conducted over the past 2\1/2\ years have revealed the dominant influence of expediency and schedule over performance quality in the management of this program.

Unfortunately, the shoddy results of the prioritization of expediency and schedule can be seen in the 123-foot patrol boats, which cannot float, and the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle, which did not fly.

Professional certification of the design and construction of NSCs 3 through 8 will help ensure that these assets do not have any structural shortcomings, as such certification should be accommodated in all procurement schedules.

Further, given the serious concerns that currently exist over hull fatigue with NSCs 1 and 2, H.R. 2722 requires that the design used in all future NSCs be submitted to an assessment conducted by the Naval Surface Warfare Center, Carderock Division, before construction on the new NSCs begin.

Carderock identified many of the potential hull fatigue problems with NSC 1 and their expertise will help assess whether proposed design changes for subsequent NSCs truly correct design problems that could shorten the hull fatigue life of those ships.

H.R. 2722 requires that all other new cutters acquired under Deepwater be classified by the American Bureau of Shipping, and it requires that all new aircraft and aircraft engines be certified for airworthiness by an independent third party.

Significantly, H.R. 2722 also requires the appointment of a civilian as the head of the acquisitions directorate. Both the DHS Inspector General and the GAO have testified before the Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation regarding the importance of personnel continuity in the effective management of acquisitions contracts.

Appointment of a civilian with a career's worth of experience in procurement will bring to the Coast Guard the level of expertise that simply is not cultivated among the service's uniformed personnel given that the service lacks a career path to train acquisitions professionals. Of course, while the appointment of a civilian to head Coast Guard acquisitions functions cannot guarantee continuity, the appointment of a uniformed servicemember will guarantee turnover on a predictable schedule.

With the implementation of these measures that will prepare the Coast Guard to manage Deepwater, H.R. 2722 requires that private sector contractors be phased out as the lead systems integrator by October 1, 2011. This phase-out can occur prior to that date if the Coast Guard certifies they have the personnel and systems in place they need to perform the lead systems integration function.

Madam Speaker, I remain completely confident in Admiral Allen's leadership of the Coast Guard and in his management of the Deepwater program, but I also believe that Congress must act to build within the Coast Guard the systems that will enable the service to effectively manage procurement efforts, and manage taxpayer resources, long after Admiral Allen has retired.

The men and women of the Coast Guard will rely on the assets procured under Deepwater for decades to come to defend our homeland against an ever-growing range of threats. This is a procurement effort that simply must be managed correctly, and I'm confident that the enactment of H.R. 2722 will ensure that it is.

This bill has enjoyed bipartisan support, both in the Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation and the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. I also note that the Congressional Budget Office has found that enacting this measure will not affect revenues or direct spending in any way and could result in lower procurement expenditures and reduce the long-term costs of the Deepwater program.

In closing, I again commend Chairman Jim Oberstar, chairman of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, for his strong support and his commitment to excellence. Under his inspired leadership, our committee has truly returned oversight and strict accountability to the agenda and is working to enact the ground-breaking policies that are essential to meeting the transportation challenges of the 21st century.

I also commend the ranking member of the full committee, Congressman Mica, for his leadership and support on this measure; and I commend the ranking member of our subcommittee, the distinguished gentleman, Mr. LaTourette, for his hard work and his outstanding leadership on the subcommittee.

I urge my colleagues to demonstrate their commitment to our brave young men and women in our Coast Guard, our thin blue line at sea, by supporting H.R. 2722, as amended.

Madam Speaker, I reserve my time.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on H.R. 2722, as amended.

Madam Speaker, I yield back my time.

Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

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

First, Mr. Speaker, let me tell you what a pleasure it is to see you on a Saturday morning, rather than Monday through Friday.

This is a good bill. It is an important bill. We have some reservations that I'm going to talk about in a moment, but I think the fact that you and I are here together with the full committee chairman and subcommittee chairman on a Saturday morning--and I've been advised we'll be here after 1 o'clock tomorrow afternoon on a Sunday, certainly a rare occurrence in the proceedings of the United States Congress. And I was just talking to my colleague, Mr. Lungren from California, and we wouldn't be here doing this important bill if we had permitted Secretary Paulson and some Members of the other body to perform the bum rush and get us to approve $700 billion of taxpayers' money to bail out people that made bad decisions on Wall Street.

So this is really what we call in Ohio a two-fer, in that we have the opportunity to continue to negotiate in a bipartisan way to attempt to resolve these differences. And, at least from my perspective, those differences need to be resolved, that those who created the mess should clean the mess up and private capital should recapitalize the markets rather than the taxpayer. So hopefully those discussions--you know, we're doing important work here today, but those are on a much higher level, I'm sure.

But, you know, the interesting thing, from just a political standpoint for me today, is there's a commercial running back in northern Ohio--where I happen to be from--condemning me for wanting to write a $700 billion check to Secretary Paulson in this matter. And

here, when I woke up this morning and I watched the news, the national media and the national Democratic Party is condemning me and my colleagues for standing in the way of giving $700 billion to the Treasury. So I'm really at a loss for how these things work.

But I am glad to be here on this bill. And I'm glad that we're here on a Saturday to get this bill done. I have run out of superlatives to talk about the chairman of the full committee, Mr. Oberstar, and I would add to that the chairman of the subcommittee, Mr. Cummings. It is beyond a pleasure to work with these gentlemen.

And I think this piece of legislation is an example of why the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee is far and above better than any other committee in the United States Congress, because I don't love everything in this bill, I'm sure that the chairmen don't love every piece of this bill, but they have always and consistently approached negotiations on legislation in a way that I think that we would be better served if we practiced in all legislation, and that is, they have their ideas, and as the majority party they are certainly in the position to have more of their ideas than we're permitted to have our ideas, but they welcome our ideas.

And the negotiations on this bill not only began as the hearings that Mr. Oberstar detailed and Mr. Cummings detailed, but we were negotiating this bill, this final product, just a couple days ago because they are still willing to listen to suggestions, and I think that that's a credit to the leadership of Mr. Oberstar and Mr. Cummings. And if, in fact, more committees operated like that, we would be a better place.

As I indicated, Mr. Speaker, I support many of the provisions in this bill, H.R. 6999, the Integrated Deepwater Program Reform Act of 2008. This bill will make significant changes to the Coast Guard's Deepwater program and the way the Coast Guard oversees, manages and carries out the program as the service takes on the lead systems integrator responsibilities.

I do have some concerns, as I mentioned, relative to the requirement over the lead system integrator responsibilities being assumed by the Coast Guard within 180 days of enactment. But I'm going to tell you that that really was the last piece of our negotiations. And again, as for the chairman of the full committee and the chairman of the subcommittee, we could have gone to that meeting and they could have said, that's nice that you have concerns, but too bad. And they acquiesced in doubling that time from 90 days to 180 days, and I am more than grateful for that. With the help of Chairman Oberstar and Chairman Cummings, H.R. 6999 will provide more time for the Coast Guard to build up its own staff, resources, and capabilities than was proposed under the Senate bill.

I fully support the inclusion of the language that would give the Coast Guard enhanced authorities to interdict stateless submersibles and semi-submersibles at sea. And a little bit later we're going to hear from our colleague from California (Mr. Daniel E. Lungren) who has been a champion of this issue for a number of years.

In recent years, the Coast Guard has been highly successful in stopping the importation of drugs by sea. I think last year they had a record year. These successes have forced the drug cartels to look at better ways for them to avoid Coast Guard assets on their way to the United States.

Recently, the Coast Guard has witnessed a sudden and dramatic increase in the use of submersibles and semi-submersibles by would-be drug importers. This language will allow the Coast Guard to apprehend and prosecute these individuals without forcing Coast Guardsmen to risk their lives to pull out the bales of illegal drugs from a sinking submarine, as is the case now.

And that's a lot of fancy language, but basically, Mr. Speaker, what's going on is these drug dealers are towing submersibles behind boats that have no flag, that have no certification. And when the Coast Guard is about to close in, they pull the plugs, basically, sink the submarine to the bottom of the Earth, and the way that our laws are currently written is the only way you can prosecute these drug dealers that want to poison our society with cocaine and other drugs is for the Coast Guardsmen to jump on board the sinking submarine and try and pull out a little cocaine so that we can prosecute them. This language--and you will hear from some of the champions of this bill in a minute--is important, and I'm glad it's in the bill today.

Lastly, I do want to note that the Coast Guard has concerns that the independent review requirements may lead to increased costs and delays in the delivery of some deepwater assets. I know that we will continue to work with the majority to closely oversee the impacts of the bill on the Coast Guard and acquisitions as we move forward next year and beyond.

I support this bill and, with the comments that I've made, ask all Members to do the same.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume before I yield to the gentleman from California just to say that the chairman has hit the nail on the head when it comes to Great Lakes shipping. And he, again, deserves great credit for, after 7 years, moving the Water Resources Development Act.

And I would just add to that, the gentleman from Michigan sitting behind me and to my right, Vern Ehlers, and the chairman's work on the Great Lakes Legacy Act, which has the opportunity to clean up the contaminated hotspots within the Great Lakes. And as a result of that-- and I'm not trying to be a pig about it or anything--but as a result of that, one of the first major cleanups was in the Ashtabula Harbor; $53 million, and the Ashtabula Harbor was dredged for the first time in over 35 years.

So when the chairman talks about shallow drafts and the cost that it increases to shipping and having to make three trips instead of one trip, the chairman is exactly right. And I look forward to continuing to work with him in a bipartisan way to move this along.

It is now my pleasure to yield 2 minutes to one of our experts on submersibles, the gentleman from California (Mr. Daniel E. Lungren).

Mr. Speaker, at this time it is my pleasure to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas, a member of the subcommittee, Mr. Poe.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas as well as the gentleman from California.

At this time we are without additional speakers, and I would yield back the balance of my time and urge passage of the bill.

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 1126 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sessions). All time yielded during consideration of the rule is for debate only. I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and insert extraneous materials into the Record.

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

Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 1126 provides for consideration of H.R. 2830, the Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2008, under a structured rule. The rule provides 1 hour of general debate, with 40 minutes controlled by the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and 20 minutes controlled by the Committee on Homeland Security. The rule makes in order 15 of the amendments that were submitted to the Rules Committee.

This rule also takes steps to prevent terrorist acts against our Nation by allowing for the text of H.R. 2399, the Alien Smuggling and Terrorism Prevention Act, to be added upon House passage of the Coast Guard Reauthorization Act, and for the whole package to be sent over to our colleagues in the Senate. The Alien Smuggling and Terrorism Prevention Act, which passed the House on May 22, 2007, by an overwhelming, bipartisan vote of 412-0, provides strong new enforcement tools at the border, including increased criminal penalties for alien smuggling, human trafficking and slavery, drug trafficking, and terrorism or espionage.

It also subjects smugglers and traffickers to even higher penalties for transporting persons under inhumane conditions, such as in an engine or storage compartment, or for causing serious bodily injury.

It directs the Department of Homeland Security to check against all available terrorist watch lists, alien smugglers, and smuggled individuals who are interdicted at the U.S. land, air and sea borders.

And it tightens proof requirements for distinguishing covert transportation of family members or others for humanitarian reasons for which the penalties are less severe.

Since the September 11, 2001, terrorists attacks, the Coast Guard has served as the primary agency responsible for our Nation's maritime security. The fact that the Coast Guard has risen to meet this heightened responsibility, while at the same time continuing to fulfill its nonsecurity missions, is a testament to the commitment and honor to the service men and women of the Coast Guard.

The bill that this rule provides for consideration will ensure that the Coast Guard can continue to perform all facets of its mission in an uncompromising way. H.R. 2830 provides the necessary resources by authorizing 1,500 additional Coast Guard personnel and increasing the funding to the Coast Guard by $8.4 billion, $200 billion over the President's request.

The underlying legislation sets requirements for security around vessels that transport, and facilities that process, liquefied natural gas, giving the Coast Guard the responsibility for enforcing security zones and requiring it to certify that State or local governments have the necessary resources before they can assist in security patrols around facilities. It also directs the Department of Homeland Security to analyze the threat of a terrorist attack on gasoline and chemical shipments and report to Congress.

H.R. 2830 will bolster port security and immigration enforcement by establishing an Assistant Commandant for Port and Waterways Security, authorizing additional maritime security teams and by establishing the Waterway Watch Program whereby civilian boaters can notify the Coast Guard of suspicious activity.

The Coast Guard Authorization Act enhances safety standards in one of America's most dangerous occupations--the one portrayed on the popular television series ``The Deadliest Catch''--by increasing safety equipment requirements on fishing vessels, requiring training for vessel operations, and by changing the appeals process for suspending and revoking a mariner's license.

The bill also addresses one of the Coast Guard's Integrated Deepwater Systems Program, which has been beleaguered by several well-publicized delays, cost overruns, and problems with the designs of certain replacement assets. The bill increases accountability for the Deepwater Program by addressing systemic contract management problems and establishing a civilian chief acquisition officer reporting directly to the Coast Guard commandant.

H.R. 2830 also requires ships to begin installing water treatment systems to reduce the spread of invasive species in ballast water carried by the ships. These requirements are a step in the right direction because they will protect the waterways of every State and territory of the United States, and the industries and communities that rely upon them, from aquatic invasive species that enter the waters of the United States via the ballast water systems of commercial vessels. The bill also addresses other environmental concerns by requiring double hulls for U.S. ships carrying over 600 cubic meters of oil and providing for implementation of an international agreement on maritime pollution.

Mr. Speaker, the legislation this rule provides for consideration is the product of extensive hearings and consideration by the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, Homeland Security Committee and the Judiciary Committee. I commend the chairmen and ranking members of those committees for their commitment to addressing the needs of the Coast Guard and our Nation's maritime security.

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

I thank my friend from Texas for his comments.

I would just like to make two points in that regard. The first point is that he mentioned that this bill doesn't deal with the LNG issue. And I would beg to differ. This bill ensures that the Coast Guard will be there to ensure and protect the safety of our liquefied natural gas facilities that are built out in the deep water or out in the ocean. It's critical. Security is absolutely critical to these facilities, and that's exactly what this bill insures.

Secondly, my friend mentions that we have not done anything about energy. Well, I would respectfully say that anyone who says that, I would have to ask them where have they been for the past 16 months. We have done a great deal with respect to energy. The difference is that we haven't done anything to help large oil companies because we believe that they are part of the problem. We have done things to help develop alternative energy, because that is the future of America. It's about making America less dependent on foreign oil and less dependent on the large oil companies. That's what we have done. That's what Democrats believe in, and that's what we will continue to do.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York, a member of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, Mr. Hall.

I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Mississippi, the chairman of the Homeland Security Committee, Mr. Thompson.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland, the chairman of the Coast Guard Subcommittee, Mr. Cummings.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts, chairman of the Subcommittee on Energy Independence, Mr. Markey.

Mr. Speaker, one point that I would like to make at this time is that the gentleman talks about oil and talks about energy, but the thing that he fails to point out is that gas and oil are limited, they are not going to be there forever. We need to stop our reliance upon fossil fuels, upon gas and oil, and start to focus on renewable alternative energy and become less dependent on foreign oil, less reliant upon fossil fuels.

I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan, a member of the Energy and Commerce Committee, Mr. Stupak.

I yield the gentleman 1 additional minute.

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

That is correct. I do not have any additional speakers.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank our chairman for yielding and for all of his hard work and help in making this happen, this legislation happen today.

As chairman of the Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation, I rise today to urge the adoption of the Integrated Deepwater Program Reform Act of 2008, H.R. 6999, as amended. As Chairman Oberstar has stated, this legislation is based on Deepwater reform legislation, H.R. 2722, which passed the House by a vote of 426- 0 last year, and on S. 924, which passed the Senate by unanimous consent.

The manager's amendment amends the underlying bill by making it a crime to operate a submersible vehicle that is not registered in any country. Such vessels are often used to smuggle illegal drugs into the United States. In

fact, just this month the Coast Guard worked with the United States Navy to seize two such submersibles, carrying a combined total of 14 tons of cocaine.

As a representative of the City of Baltimore, I know that every gram of illegal drugs we keep off our Nation's streets is a gram that cannot destroy a life or a community. Therefore, as smugglers develop new ways to bring drugs to our shores, our laws must be updated to enable law enforcement personnel to prosecute these new types of crimes, and this bill does precisely that.

I recognize and I want to thank again Chairman Oberstar, chairman of our full committee, and also thank the vice chairman of our subcommittee, Mr. Bishop, and Mr. Taylor for their hard work; and I give special thanks, too, to Mr. Mica, to Mr. LaTourette, our ranking member of our subcommittee; Chairman Thompson, the chairman of the Homeland Security Committee, and certainly Representative King, who is the ranking member of Homeland Security; Senators Inouye and Hutchison and Senator Snow; and we want to give special thanks to Senator Cantwell, who has worked very, very hard on this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, since my appointment in January 2007 as chairman of the Subcommittee on the Coast Guard, the subcommittee has exercised careful oversight over the Coast Guard's $24 billion, 25-year Deepwater procurements, through which the Coast Guard is replacing or rehabilitating its cutters and aircraft. Senator Cantwell has been leading a similar aggressive oversight effort on the Senate side.

Unfortunately, many of the acquisitions conducted under Deepwater have miserably failed, including the nearly $100 million effort to lengthen the 110-foot patrol boats, which yielded eight unseaworthy vessels that have been removed from service.

The early Deepwater procurements failed because the Coast Guard did not have the systems and personnel necessary to manage large acquisitions. They failed because the Coast Guard left private sector contractors to police themselves. And they failed because Congress did not require of the Coast Guard full accountability for the billions, the billions of taxpayer dollars appropriated to support such acquisitions.

I'm very pleased that our committee and our subcommittee wrote H.R. 6999 to ensure that all Coast Guard acquisitions meet three key requirements. One, in basic contract law, that we get what we bargain for as a Nation. That we get what we bargain for. That was number one. Number two, that the equipment that we buy would enable the Coast Guard to fulfill its many missions to protect our homeland and to do all the other things that they have to do. And number three, and very interestingly, we wanted to make sure that the equipment that we were purchasing with taxpayers dollars could not bring harm to our very personnel. Those were the three principles that we wrote this legislation on, and I was glad to see that our subcommittee and our committee pretty much adopted them as we went through this legislation.

The Commandant of the Coast Guard, Admiral Thad Allen, has moved to strengthen the service's ability to manage acquisitions, including creating a new acquisitions directorate, and I applaud his efforts.

Under his leadership, the service has taken conditional delivery of the first National Security Cutter, the Bertholf. Having joined the Coast Guard in commissioning the Bertholf this summer, I know it is a fine ship, and it will greatly enhance the service's mission capabilities.

However, the Bertholf experienced significant cost overruns, and the Coast Guard continues to face procurement challenges and not only within Deepwater. For example, the Rescue 21 program, which is intended to upgrade the systems the Coast Guard utilizes to locate those who are distressed at sea, is now hundreds of millions of dollars over budget and years behind schedule.

American taxpayers, who are now being asked to rescue our financial system from the consequences of failed oversight, have already shouldered the burden for the Coast Guard's earlier failed procurements and for failed procurements throughout the Department of Homeland Security, which according to a tally compiled by the Homeland Security Committee have wasted approximately $15 billion.

As a representative elected by the citizens of Maryland's Seventh Congressional District and as subcommittee chairman, I believe that one of our most critical duties at this time is to implement every available measure to ensure that Federal agencies are effective and efficient stewards of the taxpayers' dollars. The legislation before us today implements such measures with regard to the United States Coast Guard.

Specifically, H.R. 6999 requires the Coast Guard to eliminate the use of all private-sector lead systems integrators by October 2011, the same date on which their use is phased out in the Department of Defense.

This bill creates in statute the position of Chief Acquisitions Officer. It requires that it be filled with a fully qualified individual who can, at the Commandant's choosing, be a civilian member of the senior executive service or a uniformed member of the Coast Guard but who must have Level III Acquisitions qualification and 10 years of experience managing acquisition efforts.

The bill requires independent, third-party certification of assets and requires that appropriate testing be performed on asset designs so that problems can be identified before construction of an asset begins.

It also requires a regular submission of acquisition program reviews to Congress, including notification of cost overruns and schedule delays, so that Congress is aware of emerging issues before they become crises.

In short, this bill brings commonsense oversight and management reform measures, many of them based on current practices within the DOD, to the Coast Guard. It also requires strict and appropriate accountability from the service and demands that it be an effective and efficient steward of our taxpayers' hard-earned dollars.

All of these measures are critical to ensure that through the remaining Deepwater procurements, the nearly 42,000 men and women, who I call our thin blue line at sea, will be equipped with state-of-the- art assets equal to the missions they perform and the challenges they will face in the 21st century.

I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 6999, and I thank the minority for their wonderful participation in making this happen. I thank all of those, our staffs, who have worked so hard to make this happen.