[Senate Report 109-114]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
Calendar No. 185
109th Congress
1st Session SENATE Report
109-114
_______________________________________________________________________
COAST GUARD AUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2005
__________
R E P O R T
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
on
S. H.R. deg. 1280
DATE deg.July 28, 2005.--Ordered to be printed
SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
one hundred ninth congress
first session
TED STEVENS, Alaska, Chairman
DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii, Co-Chairman
JOHN McCAIN, Arizona JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV, West
CONRAD BURNS, Montana Virginia
TRENT LOTT, Mississippi JOHN F. KERRY, Massachusetts
KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, Texas BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota
OLYMPIA J. SNOWE, Maine BARBARA BOXER, California
GORDON H. SMITH, Oregon BILL NELSON, Florida
JOHN ENSIGN, Nevada MARIA CANTWELL, Washington
GEORGE ALLEN, Virginia FRANK LAUTENBERG, New Jersey
JOHN E. SUNUNU, New Hampshire E. BENJAMIN NELSON, Nebraska
JIM DeMINT, South Carolina MARK PRYOR, Arkansas
DAVID VITTER, Louisiana
Lisa Sutherland, Staff Director
Christine Drager Kurth, Deputy Staff Director
David Russell, Chief Counsel
Margaret Cummisky, Democratic Staff Director and Chief Counsel
Samuel Whitehorn, Democratic Deputy Staff Director and General Counsel
Calendar No. 185
109th Congress Report
SENATE
1st Session 109-114
======================================================================
COAST GUARD AUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2005
_______
July 28, 2005.--Ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Stevens, from the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation, submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany S. 1280]
The Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, to
which was referred the bill joint resolution deg. (S.
H.R. deg. 1280) TITLE deg. to authorize
appropriations for the United States Coast Guard and other
purposes, having considered the same, reports favorably thereon
with amendments and recommends that the bill joint
resolution deg. (as amended) do pass.
Purpose of the Bill
The purpose of S. 1280, the Coast Guard Authorization Act of
2005, as amended, is to authorize appropriations for fiscal
years (FY) 2006 and 2007 for the United States Coast Guard
covering seven accounts: (1) operation and maintenance
expenses; (2) acquisition, construction, and improvement of
facilities and equipment (AC&I); (3) research, development,
testing, and evaluation (RDT&E); (4) retired pay; (5)
environmental compliance and restoration; (6) alteration or
removal of bridges; and (7) reserve programs. The bill also
authorizes end-of-year military strength and training loads and
includes other provisions to address issues related to the
Coast Guard.
Background and Needs
The Coast Guard was established on January 28, 1915, as part
of the Department of the Treasury, through the consolidation of
the Revenue Cutter Service (established in 1790) and the
Lifesaving Service (established in 1848). The Coast Guard later
assumed the duties of three other agencies: the Lighthouse
Service (established in 1789), the Steamboat Inspection Service
(established in 1838), and the Bureau of Navigation
(established in 1884).
The Coast Guard remained a part of the Department of the
Treasury until 1967, when it was transferred to the newly
created Department of Transportation. Under the Homeland
Security Act of 2002 (Public Law 107-296) the Coast Guard was
transferred to the new Department of Homeland Security on March
1, 2003. The Coast Guard provides many critical services for
our nation grouped into five fundamental roles: maritime
security; maritime safety; maritime mobility; protection of
natural resources; and national defense.
The Coast Guard, the Federal government's principal maritime
law-enforcement agency, is also a branch of the armed forces.
As the fifth armed force of the United States, the Coast Guard
maintains defense readiness to operate as a specialized service
in the Navy upon the declaration of war or when the President
so directs. The Coast Guard has defended the Nation in every
war since 1790. During the recent combat operations in Iraq,
the Coast Guard deployed two 378-foot high endurance cutters,
one 225-foot ocean going buoy tender, one Port Security Team,
and continues to operate six 110-foot Island Class patrol boats
in the Persian Gulf. This was the first deployment of Coast
Guard cutters in support of a wartime contingency since the
Vietnam War.
Under title 14, United States Code, the Coast Guard has
primary responsibility for enforcing or assisting in the
enforcement of all applicable Federal laws on, under, and over
the high seas and waters subject to the jurisdiction of the
U.S.; to ensure safety of life and property at sea; to protect
the marine environment; to carry out domestic and international
icebreaking activities; and to ensure the safety and security
of vessels, ports, waterways, and related facilities. In
carrying out these responsibilities the Coast Guard activities
include commercial and recreational vessel safety inspection,
the rescue of life and property at sea, fisheries law
enforcement, marine environmental protection, and the
interdiction of drug traffickers and illegal alien migrants.
Since September 11, 2001, the Coast Guard's security
responsibilities have increased significantly, with new
authorities provided under the Maritime Security Transportation
Act of 2002.
The Coast Guard is composed of approximately 39,000 active
duty military personnel, 8,100 reservists, 7,000 civilian
employees, and 37,000 volunteers of the Coast Guard Auxiliary.
In 2004, the Coast Guard responded to over 32,000 calls for
assistance, and saved 5,500 lives. In 2004, the Coast Guard
seized 376,000 pounds of illegal narcotics. It also stopped
11,000 illegal migrants from reaching our shores. The Coast
Guard conducted more than 36,000 port security patrols, boarded
over 19,000 vessels, escorted over 7,200 vessels, and
maintained more than 115 security zones. It also conducted
patrols to protect our fisheries stocks and responded to 23,904
pollution incidents.
Integrated Deepwater System
The Committee believes the Coast Guard is an agency
conducting 21st century operations with 20th century
technology. To accomplish its many vital missions, the Coast
Guard needs to recapitalize its offshore fleet of cutters and
aircraft. The Coast Guard operates the third oldest of the
world's 42 similar naval fleets with several cutters dating
back to World War II. These platforms are technologically
obsolete, require excessive maintenance, lack essential speed,
and have poor interoperability which limit their overall
mission effectiveness and efficiency. Compounding the problem
is the fact that they are reaching the end of their serviceable
life just as the Coast Guard needs them the most.
Deepwater, the service's recapitalization project designed to
remedy these issues, poses several areas of concern. The
Committee is particularly concerned about the lengthy timeline
of the Coast Guard's Integrated Deepwater System procurement
which is further compounded by the funding shortfalls it has
faced. This project was conceived as an approximately 20-year,
$15 billion acquisition program to recapitalize its fleet of
offshore cutters and aircraft, based on an annual stream of
$500 million in FY 1998 dollars for the life of the plan.
Currently, this program is on a 20-25 year timeframe, costing
between $19-$24 billion. While this program was developed prior
to September 11, 2001, it is needed now more than ever to
enable the Coast Guard to carry out all of its many important
missions.
The GAO has previously testified that the Deepwater program's
growing funding shortfalls ``could jeopardize the Coast Guard's
future ability to effectively and efficiently carry out its
missions, and its law enforcement activities'' that is, drug
and migrant interdiction and fisheries enforcement ``would
likely be affected the most, since they involve extensive use
of Deepwater cutters and aircraft.''
The Committee is very concerned that funding shortfalls will
prevent the Coast Guard from quickly restoring operations in
support of all its missions to their pre-September 11, 2001
levels. It strongly believes the Coast Guard should be provided
with the tools it needs to carry out its homeland security
responsibilities as well as its many other important
traditional missions. Accordingly this bill, as reported, would
authorize $1.1 billion for the Deepwater project for FY 2006
and $1.2 billion in FY 2007.
The Deepwater project is the single largest procurement
program that the Coast Guard has managed to date. A recent
report by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) (GAO-04-
380) entitled ``Coast Guard Deepwater Program Needs Increased
Attention to Management and Contractor Oversight'' outlined
significant concerns with the Coast Guard's oversight and
management of the program, and included numerous
recommendations to improve the situation. The Committee
strongly believes that it is in the best interests of the
Deepwater program for the Coast Guard to implement the GAO's
recommendations promptly, and S. 1280 requires a report from
the Coast Guard on the progress the service is making in
implementing these recommendations. In addition, the GAO is
continuing to examine how the Coast Guard might improve
management of the program.
As a result of the expanded missions that the Coast Guard
finds itself facing in a post-9/11 world, the Coast Guard was
required by the FY 2005 Department of Homeland Security
Appropriations Act to submit a report on the rebaselining of
Deepwater. This rebaseline would reflect the Coast Guard's new
asset requirements (surface & aviation) which would allow the
service to operate in a post-9/11 world. Released on March 25,
2005, this report caused significant concern on the part of
numerous committee members, and the subcommittee on Fisheries
and Coast Guard conducted a hearing on the new baseline on June
21, 2005.
One issue raised at the hearing was the potential need for a
targeted acceleration of Deepwater in order to more quickly
provide the Coast Guard with the assets it needs to fill the
gap between its current capabilities and required mission
demands. Compounding the urgent need for new cutters and
aircraft is the fact that the Coast Guard's legacy assets are
deteriorating much more rapidly than anticipated. A related
concern raised at the hearing was the decision by the Coast
Guard to extend the life of certain legacy assets rather than
replace such assets. Discussion regarding the possible
acceleration of Deepwater is not a new issue. In March 2003,
the Coast Guard released a report, entitled ``Report to
Congress on the Feasibility of Accelerating the Integrated
Deepwater System.'' This Coast Guard report found that the 10-
year acceleration time-line would be feasible, would save an
additional $4 billion (29 percent) in acquisition costs as
compared to the 20-year plan, would provide significantly
increased operational capability sooner, and would provide
approximately 943,000 additional (and more capable) mission
hours above the original 20-year plan. According to the report,
to accelerate the Deepwater program in this timeframe, the
Coast Guard would need an estimated $4 billion in acquisition
funding sooner, but this would be offset by the overall $4
billion savings which would be realized by compressing the
timeline.
GAO testified at the June 21, 2005 subcommittee hearing that
it had concerns that the risks it identified with the Deepwater
program would likely be compounded should the program be
accelerated. However, a witness from the Congressional Research
Service (CRS) suggested that a more narrow, ``targeted''
acceleration of specific assets with proven designs might not
raise the same level of concern. The committee is supportive of
examining whether such a ``targeted'' acceleration of specific
assets might be possible and the potential cost savings it
would yield. S. 1280 includes a provision that would require
the Coast Guard to report on possible acceleration.
Administration's proposed bill
In its FY 2006 budget proposal, the Administration requested
approximately $8.146 billion in funding for the Coast Guard. In
addition, the Administration requested an FY 2006 end-of-year
strength of 45,500 for its active duty military personnel. On
March 17, 2005, the Subcommittee on Fisheries and the Coast
Guard held a hearing on the Coast Guard's FY 2006 Budget
request and heard testimony from Admiral Thomas Collins,
Commandant of the Coast Guard, Master Chief Franklin Welch,
Master Chief of the Coast Guard, and Ms. Margaret Wrightson,
Director of the General Accounting Office's (GAO) Homeland
Security and Justice Team. In addition to FY 2006
authorizations, the bill would provide authorizations for FY
2007, reflecting an 8 percent increase over those amounts
authorized for FY 2006 across the board. The Coast Guard budget
accounts that would be authorized in S. 1280, as reported, are
included in the summary below.
Operating Expenses (OE). The Coast Guard uses over two-thirds
of its total budget conducting operations in support of its
primary mission areas: protecting public safety and the marine
environment; safeguarding our ports, waterways, and coastal
areas; enforcing laws and treaties, including preventing
illegal drug trafficking, interdicting illegal aliens and
enforcing fisheries laws; maintaining aids to navigation; and
preserving defense readiness. For FY 2006, the Administration
requested $5.547 billion for operating expenses, an increase of
approximately $390 million from the FY 2005 appropriated level.
The request assumes that $24.5 million would be transferred
from the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund to the operating
expenses account. S. 1280, as reported, authorizes $5.594
billion for this account, $47.5 million more than the
Administration's request in order to provide funding to the
Coast Guard for the operation and maintenance of the Coast
Guard's icebreaking fleet. The Administration budget requested
these funds in the National Science Foundation budget, with the
intent that they be transferred to the Coast Guard, but did not
guarantee that they would be spent in support of these vital,
national assets. The Committee desires that these funds remain
in the Coast Guard, thus ensuring that they are dedicated to
the operation and maintenance of those vessels designed to
fulfill the icebreaking missions of the Coast Guard. Regardless
of which agency receives these funds, it is the understanding
of this Committee that these funds ($47.5 million) are
designated for the operation and maintenance of U.S. Coast
Guard icebreaking assets.
For FY 2007, S. 1280 authorizes $6.042 billion for this
account. This assumes that $24.5 million would be transferred
from the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund to the operating
expenses account.
Acquisition, Construction, and Improvements (AC&I).--AC&I
funds are used to pay for major capital improvements, including
vessel and aircraft acquisition and rehabilitation, information
management, and construction programs at selected facilities.
Major AC&I projects include arming helicopters; recapitalizing
the National Distress and Response System; implementing the
vessel Automatic Identification System (AIS); aircraft sensor,
avionics, and engine upgrades; the Integrated Deepwater System
project; and various shore facility upgrades to those units in
need. For FY 2006, the Administration requested $1.269 billion;
of that amount $966 million would fund the Integrated Deepwater
System and $101 million would fund Rescue 21. The AC&I request
assumes that $20 million would be transferred from the Oil
Spill Liability Trust Fund to the AC&I account. S. 1280, as
reported, authorizes $1.424 billion for this account, with $1.1
billion designated to fund Deepwater ($134 million more than
the President's request). Additionally, $8.7 million is
authorized to be used for the construction of an Aquatic
Training Facility for the Aviation Survival Technician (AST )
``A'' School, located at Coast Guard Air Station Elizabeth
City, NC. Also, $10 million is authorized to complete the
Vessel Traffic System (VTS) upgrade for Puget Sound, located in
Washington, and $3 million is authorized for the construction
of the Sector Operations Building for Group Seattle, located at
Integrated Support Command Seattle, WA.
For FY 2007, S. 1280 authorizes $1.538 billion for this
account, with $1.188 billion designated to fund Deepwater. This
request also assumes that $20 million would be transferred from
the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund to this account.
Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E).--Funds
from this account are used for applied scientific research that
aids in the development of hardware, procedures, and systems
that directly contribute to increasing the productivity of
Coast Guard operating and regulatory programs. The
Administration proposed to consolidate the Department of
Homeland Security's requests into the DHS Science and
Technology Directorate, thereby taking the Coast Guard's
anticipated $24 million in funding and lumping it into this
directorate. In doing this, the Administration violated section
888 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 and put at risk the
Coast Guard's funding for research and development for FY 2006,
since they would have to compete for funding within this
directorate. The Committee wants to ensure that the Coast Guard
is funded for the important research it needs in order to
maintain its mission effectiveness. The Committee does not want
the Coast Guard to have to compete for this funding within DHS
among many other Federal agencies. S. 1280, as reported,
authorizes $24 million for this account with $3.5 million to be
transferred from the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund to this
account.
For FY 2007, S. 1280 authorizes $25.9 million for this
account and assumes that $3.5 million will be transferred from
the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund to this account.
Retired Pay.--Funds from this account are used for retired
pay, annuities, and medical care for retired military personnel
and former Lighthouse Service members, their dependents, and
their survivors under chapter 55 of title 10, United States
Code. The Administration requested $1.014 billion for this
account for FY 2006. S. 1280, as reported, authorizes $1.014
billion for this account for FY 2006, and $1.095 billion for FY
2007.
Alteration of Bridges.--Under the Truman-Hobbs Act, the
Federal government shares with the States the cost of altering
publicly-owned highway and railroad bridges that cause
significant obstruction of the free movement of marine traffic.
The Administration did not request any funding for FY2006
Truman-Hobbs Act projects. S. 1280, as reported, authorizes
$17.4 million for this account for FY 2006 and $18.7 million
for FY 2007.
The Committee directs the Coast Guard to re-evaluate the
categorization of both the Leeville Bridge and the Kerner Ferry
Bridge in Louisiana. The Leeville Bridge provides the only
access to Port Fouchon and Grand Isle, and has been struck 11
times in the past year while the Kerner Ferry Bridge has
experienced several vertical clearance problems. These bridges
are currently categorized as non-hazards to navigation,
therefore making them ineligible for funds under the Truman-
Hobbs Act. The Committee expects to receive the Coast Guard's
findings no later than 90 days after the enactment of this
legislation.
Environmental Compliance and Restoration.--This account
provides resources to bring current and former Coast Guard
facilities into compliance with national environmental
standards. The Administration requested $12 million for FY
2006. S. 1280, as reported, authorizes $12 million for this
account for FY 2006 and $12.9 million for FY 2007.
Reserve Programs.--The Coast Guard Reserve Forces provide
trained and qualified personnel available for active duty in
time of war or national emergency and at such other times as
the national security requires. Reserve personnel maintain
their readiness through realistic coordinated mobilization
exercises, formal military training and duty alongside regular
Coast Guard members during routine and emergency operations.
The Administration's requested level of $119 million provides
resources to fully train, support, and sustain a reserve force
of approximately 8,100 members. S. 1280, as reported,
authorizes $119 million for FY 2006 and $128.5 million for FY
2007.
Military Strength and Training.--This section would provide
the Coast Guard's active duty military personnel end-of-year
strength as well as its average military training student loads
for fiscal year 2006. S. 1280, as reported, would authorize the
Coast Guard's levels of military strength and training for FY
2006 to the following levels:
Active Duty personnel: 45,500
Recruit & Special Training: 2,500
Flight Training: 125
Professional Training: 350
Officer Acquisition: 1,200
Summary of Provisions
S. 1280 authorizes appropriations and levels of military
strength and training for the Coast Guard in FY 2006 and 2007,
and includes other provisions to address issues related to the
Coast Guard.
TITLE I--AUTHORIZATION
S. 1280, as reported, would authorize appropriations for the
Coast Guard accounts covered in the bill totaling $8.2 billion
for FY 2006 and $8.8 billion for FY 2007.
Section 101 would authorize $5.594 billion for operating
expenses (OE) for FY 2006. For FY 2007, $6.042 billion is
authorized, and would authorize $1.424 billion for Acquisition
Construction and Improvements (AC&I) for FY 2006 and $1.538
billion for FY 2007. As a reflection of its support of the
Coast Guard's need to recapitalize its fleet of cutters and
aircraft, the reported bill would authorize $1.1 billion for
Deepwater in FY 2006, $134 million above the President's
request. Deepwater is authorized at $1.188 billion for FY 2007.
Section 103 would provide an authorization of $1,000,000 for
the Coast Guard to continue their development of a web-based
risk management system that links occupational health and
safety databases to reduce accidents and fatalities.
TITLE II--HOMELAND SECURITY, MARINE SAFETY, FISHERIES, AND
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
S. 1280, as reported, would improve the Coast Guard's ability
to conduct marine environmental protection, enforce fisheries
laws and regulations, as well as enhance the service's
capabilities in managing the largest acquisition program in its
history, Deepwater.
Section 202 adds a dimension of enforcement flexibility by
allowing the Secretary to assess a civil penalty for each day
an owner/operator remains non-compliant beyond the first day on
which the violation of the Maritime Transportation Security Act
of 2002 was cited. The total fines per violation would not
exceed $50,000 during FY 2006, $75,000 during FY 2007, and
$100,000 after FY 2007.
Section 203 would require the Coast Guard to take all
necessary measures to maintain, at a minimum, its current
vessel capacity for carrying out ice-breaking in the Arctic and
Antarctic regions, and for the long-term recapitalization of
such vessels. $100,000,000 is authorized for the Coast Guard in
order to carry out this section.
Section 204 would require the Coast Guard to submit a report
on opportunities for and the feasibility of co-locating Coast
Guard assets and personnel at facilities of other Armed
Services branches, and entering into cooperative agreements for
carrying out Coast Guard missions. The committee directs the
Coast Guard to examine Naval Station Everett, located in
Everett, Washington, for such potential co-location and
operating opportunities. The committee also directs the Coast
Guard to examine the feasibility for the following matters
concerning Naval Station Pascagoula, MS: (1) the clustering of
current and future Coast Guard cutters at the Naval Station;
(2) locating other DHS resources at the Naval Station; and (3)
establishing a DHS training facility at the Naval Station. The
Committee expects to receive the results of the Coast Guard's
examination of these two facilities no later than 90 days after
the enactment of this legislation.
Section 205 establishes a pilot program to conduct mandatory
dockside crew survivability examinations on uninspected U.S.
commercial fishing vessels in at least 5, but no more than 10
fishing ports of the United States over the next five years.
Those ports with the highest number of fatalities associated
with the fishing industry will be targeted, but not those ports
for which a safety program is already established. This program
is aimed to reduce the number of fatalities which have
dramatically risen in recent years. The Committee feels that
this program is a way forward in educating the commercial
fishing fleet and ensuring that those engaged in this dangerous
occupation are competent in all aspects of vessel safety and
crew survivability techniques.
Section 207 allows the Coast Guard to conduct international
training and provide technical assistance to international
navies, coast guards, and maritime authorities during regular
Coast Guard operations without additional requests having to be
filed by other Federal agencies.
Section 209 requires the Coast Guard to submit a report on
the feasibility of using bio-diesel fuel in both new and
existing vessels and vehicles. This report should focus on the
potential benefits bio-fuels could provide the Coast Guard in
terms of fuel supply security, fuel price stabilization,
improved fuel spill safety, and reduced air pollution near
population centers.
Section 212 requires the Coast Guard to submit a report on
the status of their compliance with the GAO's recommendations
outlined in their report entitled ``Coast Guard Deepwater
Program Needs Increased Attention to Management and Contractor
Oversight.'' The report number is GAO-04-380.
Section 213 requires the Coast Guard to submit a report, in
conjunction with the President's FY 2007 budget submission, on
many aspects of the Deepwater Program. Issues such as
acceleration, legacy asset sustainment costs, feasibilty
concerns, and anticipated mission capability deficiencies are
among those which are required to be discussed in detail in
this report. The Committee wants to ensure that Deepwater
produces what the service needs to fulfill its missions to the
nation and requires the information outlined in this report to
assist in doing this.
Section 216 would allow the Coast Guard to continue to use
existing agreements with organizations that assist in providing
safety training and cold water immersion education to fisherman
and children. These public outreach programs enable the Coast
Guard to establish a rapport with local communities, their
community leaders, and those in the boating public which prove
to be invaluable over time.
TITLE III--UNITED STATES OCEAN COMMISSION IMPLEMENTATION
S. 1280, as reported, includes several provisions that
implement recommendations of the Final Report from the United
States Commission on Ocean Policy, dated July 22, 2004.
Section 301 requires the Coast Guard to work with other
local, State, and Federal agencies in developing a process for
determining when a vessel in distress may seek a place of
refuge in the United States.
Section 303 requires the Coast Guard to utilize public
outreach programs for educating the boating public regarding
the pollution hazards of two-stroke engines, and to support
voluntary programs to reduce such pollution and encourage early
replacement of older two-stroke engines. The Committee would
like to ensure that this program educates the public on the
differences between older carbureted two-stroke engines, and
the newer fuel-injected two-stroke engines which operate much
cleaner and efficiently than the older models.
Section 305 requires the Coast Guard to submit a report on
the measures it intends to take that would improve its ability
to detect and interdict those vessels violating the United
States Exclusive Economic Zone, especially in the Western/
Central Pacific area where these known violations are
continuing to escalate each year. This requirement reflects the
committee's concern that from FY 2000 through FY 2004, the
Coast Guard reported a total of 216 suspected illegal
incursions of foreign fishing vessels within the Western/
Central Pacific area of the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone, yet
the Coast Guard detected only three of these incursions and
interdicted none.
TITLE IV--COAST GUARD PERSONNEL, FINANCIAL, AND PROPERTY MANAGEMENT
S. 1280, as reported, authorizes several significant changes
in the way the Coast Guard utilizes it Reserve personnel,
conducts officer promotions, and the process for liability
coverage of equipment used by the Coast Guard Auxiliary.
Section 403 authorizes the Secretary of Homeland Security to
order Coast Guard Reservists to active duty for an increased
period of time of not more than sixty days in any four-month
period and not more than one hundred twenty days in any two-
year period, and expands its ability to use such recalls for a
threat of a terrorist attack. The provision also requires that
for purposes of calculating the duration of active duty, a
period of active duty shall begin on the first day that a
member reports to active duty, including for training.
Section 404 allows personal motor vehicles of Coast Guard
Auxiliary members to be eligible for liability coverage under
Coast Guard claims procedures when the Auxiliary member is
towing, under official Coast Guard orders in support of Coast
Guard missions, trailers that carry government-owned boats or
equipment.
Section 406 waives time in grade requirements for officers in
the rank of Lieutenant (O-3) through Commander (O-5) and
ensures each officer the possibility of being considered for
promotion from below-the-zone (deep selection) at least twice.
Section 410 eliminates the requirement for Senate advice and
consent on officer appointments of Lieutenant (O-3) and below
in both peacetime and wartime. The Committee intends that this
provision be applicable to both regular and reserve
appointments. Additionally, the Committee expects to receive
notification of those appointments which will now require
Presidential approval only in order to be aware of all officer
promotions in the Coast Guard.
TITLE V--TECHNICAL AND CONFORMING AMENDMENTS
S. 1280, as reported, also makes numerous changes in this
title that reflect the Coast Guard's transition from the
Department of Transportation to the Department of Homeland
Security.
Legislative History
S. 1280 was introduced in the Senate on June 21, 2005, by
Senator Snowe (and co-sponsored by Senator Stevens, Senator
Inouye, and Senator Cantwell) and referred to the Senate
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. On June 23,
2005, the bill was considered by the Committee in an open
Executive Session. Senator Stevens offered an amendment
regarding officer promotions. The Committee, without objection,
ordered S. 1280 be reported with the amendment.
Estimated Costs
In accordance with paragraph 11(a) of rule XXVI of the
Standing Rules of the Senate and section 403 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee provides the
following cost estimate, prepared by the Congressional Budget
Office:
July 14, 2005.
Hon. Ted Stevens,
Chairman, Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for S. 1280, the Coast
Guard Authorization Act of 2005.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Deborah Reis.
Sincerely,
Douglas Holtz-Eakin,
Director.
Enclosure.
S. 1280, Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2005
Summary: S. 1280 would authorize appropriations for U.S.
Coast Guard (USCG) activities for fiscal years 2006 and 2007.
CBO estimates that appropriation of the authorized amounts
would result in outlays of $4.7 billion in fiscal year 2006 and
$14.6 billion over the 2006-2010 period. (About $500 million of
the authorized amounts would be spent after 2010.) Enacting S.
1280 would have no effect on direct spending. Because the bill
would raise existing civil penalties for violations of the
Maritime Transportation Security Act, its enactment could
affect revenues, but we expect that any resulting increases
would be less than $500,000 annually.
S. 1280 contains no intergovernmental mandates as defined
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA). Any costs to state,
local, and tribal governments would be incurred voluntarily.
S. 1280 would impose private-sector mandates, as defined in
UMRA, on certain mortgage holders of vessels engaged in
commerce in U.S. waters and on persons that transport certain
mooring equipment from one point on the U.S. Outer Continental
Shelf (OCS) to another such point. Based on information
provided by government sources, CBO expects that the aggregate
direct costs of complying with those mandates would be minimal
and fall below the annual threshold established by UMRA for
private-sector mandates ($123 million in 2005, adjusted
annually for inflation).
Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated
budgetary effects of S. 1280 are summarized in the following
table. The costs of this legislation fall within budget
functions 300 (natural resources and environment) and 400
(transportation).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--
-----------------------------------------------------
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION
USCG Spending Under Current Law:
Budget Authority/Authorization Level \1\.............. 6,515 29 29 0 0 0
Estimated Outlays..................................... 6,104 1,932 786 324 135 56
Proposed Changes:
Authorization Level................................... 0 7,293 7,767 4 0 0
Estimated Outlays..................................... 0 4,748 6,421 1,988 969 478
USCG Spending Under S. 1280:
Authorization Level................................... 6,515 7,322 7,796 4 0 0
Estimated Outlays..................................... 6,104 6,680 7,207 2,312 1,104 534
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The 2005 level is the amount appropriated for that year. The $29 million shown for 2006 and 2007 is the
amount already authorized to be appropriated from the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund for Coast Guard operating
expenses and research.
Basis of estimate: For this estimate, CBO assumes that the
amounts authorized will be appropriated for each year. The
total authorization amounts shown in the table for each year
are the sum of all amounts stated in the bill for USCG
discretionary accounts, excluding $29 million to be derived
from the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund (OSLTF). (This amount,
which consists of $24.5 million for operating expenses and $3.5
million for research, is already authorized under existing
law.) Estimated outlays are based on historical spending
patterns for the Coast Guard.
Spending subject to appropriation
For 2006, S. 1280 would authorize the appropriation of over
$5.7 billion for USCG operations (including $119 million for
reserve training and $12 million for environmental compliance)
and nearly $1.5 billion for capital acquisitions and other
multiyear projects (including $24 million for research
activities and $36 million for bridge alterations). For 2007,
the bill would authorize about $6.2 billion for operations and
nearly $1.6 billion for capital and multiyear spending. Of
those amounts, $48.5 million would be derived from the OSLTF,
but $29 million of that amount is already authorized to be
appropriated from the trust fund by the Oil Pollution Act of
1990.
S. 1280 also would authorize appropriations for specific
USCG projects, including $1 million in 2006 for a Web-based
risk management data system, $100 million in 2006 for the
acquisition, maintenance, and operation of icebreakers, and $4
million for each of fiscal years 2006 through 2008 for a pilot
program for long-range tracking of vessels using satellites. In
addition, the bill would authorize the appropriation of $25
million for each of fiscal years 2006 and 2007 to the
Department of Transportation (DOT) for expenses of the LORAN-C
navigation system. DOT would use most of those amounts to
reimburse the Coast Guard for navigation services provided to
the Federal Aviation Administration and other transportation
agencies. The Coast Guard operates the LORAN-C system using a
combination of direct appropriations and reimbursements from
funds appropriated to other agencies.
Finally, S. 1280 would authorize the appropriation of about
$1 billion for 2006 and $1.1 billion for 2007 for Coast Guard
retirement benefits, but those amounts are excluded from this
estimate because such benefits are considered an entitlement
under current law and are not subject to appropriation. Thus,
the authorizations have no additional budgetary impact.
Revenues
S. 1280 would amend the Maritime Security Act to raise
certain civil penalties that may be imposed for violations of
port security laws or regulations. CBO estimates that the
changes made to the act would increase federal revenues from
civil penalties by less than $500,000 annually.
Estimated impact on state, local, and tribal governments:
S. 1280 contains no intergovernmental mandates as defined in
UMRA. Some provisions of title III would require the Coast
Guard to consult with state and local law enforcement agencies,
but any participation by those agencies would be voluntary.
Estimated impact on the private sector: S. 1280 would
impose private-sector mandates as defined in UMRA on certain
mortgage holders of vessels engaged in commerce in U.S. waters
and on persons that transport certain mooring equipment from
one point on the Outer Continental Shelf to another such point.
Based on information provided by government sources, CBO
expects that the aggregate direct costs of complying with those
mandates would be minimal and fall below the annual threshold
established by UMRA for private-sector mandates ($123 million
in 2005, adjusted annually for inflation).
Section 206 would require mortgagees of documented vessels
engaged in coastwise commercial trade and fishing to submit
reports to the Secretary of Transportation. Such reports would
provide information regarding the qualifications their vessels
to engage in the coastwise trade and the fisheries in U.S.
waters. Vessels must have a certificate of documentation from
the Coast Guard to engage in commerce in U.S. waters.
Currently, owners, masters, and charterers of documented
vessels must submit reports regarding the qualifications of
their vessels to engage in such activities--while mortgagees
are not required to submit such reports. The reporting
requirement in the bill would affect mortgagees that are
affiliated with or have an office within the United States.
According to the Coast Guard, the mortgagees would be required
to submit operating documents upon the Secretary's request to
comply with the mandate. Since mortgagees already have such
documentation available to them, CBO estimates the cost to
submit the information would be minimal.
Section 217 would require vessels that engage in the moving
of mooring equipment from one point over or on the OCS to
another such point in connection with exploring or developing
resources on the OCS to be registered in the United States and
have a certificate of endorsement from the Coast Guard.
Currently, most types of vessels transporting merchandise and
personnel to and from the OCS must have a U.S. registry and be
certified by the Coast Guard. The requirement in this section
of the bill would be a mandate as defined in UMRA on any
foreign-flagged vessels engaged in moving certain mooring
equipment to or from the OCS that are affiliated with or have
an office within the United States. According to the Coast
Guard, few, if any, foreign-flagged vessels are engaged in such
activities. Consequently, CBO estimates that the cost to comply
with this mandate would be small.
Previous CBO estimate: On June 10, 2005, CBO transmitted a
cost estimate for H.R. 889, the Coast Guard and Maritime
Transportation Act of 2005, as ordered reported by the House
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure on May 18, 2005.
The two bills contain different authorization levels and
periods. In addition, H.R. 889 contains provisions that would
affect direct spending. Finally, H.R. 889 contains an
intergovernmental mandate (by requiring certain publically
operated ferries to submit to USCG inspections, reporting
requirements, and fees). S. 1280 does not contain those
requirements or any other intergovernmental mandates as defined
in UMRA.
Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Deborah Reis. Impact
on State, Local, and Tribal Governments: Sarah Puro. Impact on
the Private Sector: Craig Cammarata.
Estimate approved by: Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy Assistant
Director for Budget Analysis.
Regulatory Impact Statement
In accordance with paragraph 11(b) of rule XXVI of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee provides the
following evaluation of the regulatory impact of the
legislation, as reported:
NUMBER OF PERSONS COVERED
S. 1280 as reported by the Committee would authorize
appropriations to continue existing Coast Guard programs and
make a number of changes to current law. The bill would have
little, if any, regulatory impact, but a few of the bill's
sections could impact some individuals and businesses, and the
effects of these sections are discussed in the paragraphs
below.
ECONOMIC IMPACT
Section 202 would amend section 70119 of title 46, United
States Code, to permit the Secretary to assess substantial
civil penalties to compel owners and operators of vessels and
facilities to comply with the Maritime Transportation Security
Act of 2002 (MSTA). Enactment of this legislation would expand
the enforcement options available to the Secretary under MTSA,
consistent with other statutes that provide for a separate
violation for each day a violation remains outstanding. The
total fines per violation would not exceed $50,000 during
FY2006, $75,000 during FY2007, and $100,000 after FY2007.
PRIVACY
The reported bill would have little, if any, impact on the
personal privacy of U.S. citizens.
PAPERWORK
The reported bill should not significantly increase paperwork
requirements for individuals and businesses.
Section-by-Section Analysis
Section 1. Short title
This section states that the Act may be cited as the Coast
Guard Authorization Act of 2005.
Section 2. Table of contents
This section states the table of contents for the bill.
TITLE I--AUTHORIZATIONS
Section 101. Authorization of appropriations
This section would authorize funds for fiscal year 2006 and
fiscal year 2007 at the following levels:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY2006 Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Operating Expenses........... $5,594,900,000
Acquisition, Construction, $1,423,852,000
and Improvements.
Research and Development..... $24,000,000
Retired Pay.................. $1,014,080,000
Alteration of Bridges........ $17,400,000
Environmental Compliance..... $12,000,000
Reserve Program.............. $119,000,000
TOTAL........................ $8,206,232,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY2007 Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Operating Expenses........... $6,042,492,000
Acquisition, Construction, $1,538,840,160
and Improvements.
Research and Development..... $25,920,000
Retired Pay.................. $1,095,206,400
Alteration of Bridges........ $18,792,000
Environmental Compliance..... $12,960,000
Reserve Program.............. $128,520,000
TOTAL........................ $8,862,730,560
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 102. Authorized levels of military strength and training
This section would authorize a Coast Guard end-of-year
strength of 45,500 active duty military personnel for fiscal
year 2006. This section would also authorize average military
training student loads for fiscal year 2006 as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Training Student Years
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recruit/Special.............. 2,500
Flight....................... 125
Professional................. 350
Officer...................... 1,200
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 103. Web-based risk management data system
This section would provide an authorization of $1,000,000 for
the Coast Guard to continue their development of a web-based
risk management system that links occupational health and
safety databases to reduce accidents and fatalities.
TITLE II--HOMELAND SECURITY, MARINE SAFETY, FISHERIES, AND
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
Section 201. Extension of Coast Guard vessel anchorage and movement
authority
Section 91 of title 14, United States Code, would allow the
Coast Guard to control the anchorage and movement of any vessel
in the navigable waters of the United States to ensure the
safety and security of any U.S. naval vessel. The purpose of
this section is to extend the seaward jurisdiction from 3
nautical miles to 12 nautical miles from the baseline.
A Naval Vessel Protection Zone (NVPZ), under section 91 of
title 14, United States Code, is the preferred tool for
establishing a protective standoff distance, or exclusion zone,
around any naval vessel in U.S. waters. Under current law,
NVPZs only extend out to 3 nautical miles from the baseline,
unlike other security statutes that provide authority out to 12
nautical miles. Navy Commanders have indicated that increasing
NVPZs coverage out to 12 nautical miles would benefit their
force protection efforts. Whenever a U.S. naval vessel travels
beyond 3 nautical miles from the U.S. baseline, the Navy
currently possesses no explicit statutory authority to enforce
the Federal criminal law intended to protect the vessel's
``safety and security.'' DOD maintains that its personnel
cannot enforce a NVPZ beyond 3 nautical miles from the baseline
until Congress expressly amends section 91 of title 14, United
States Code, to track with the expansion of the territorial sea
to 12 nautical miles. This provision would close a gap in the
Navy's perceived enforcement authority.
Section 202. Enhanced civil penalties for violations of the Maritime
Transportation Security Act (MTSA)
This section would amend section 70119 of title 46, United
States Code, to permit the Secretary to assess substantial
civil penalties to compel owners and operators of vessels and
facilities to comply with MTSA. The amendment would add a
dimension of enforcement flexibility for the Secretary to
assess a civil penalty for each day an owner/operator remains
non-compliant beyond the first day on which the violation was
cited. Currently, the only enforcement alternative is for the
Secretary to order cessation of vessel or facility operation
until the owner or operator corrects the outstanding violation.
Enactment of this legislation would expand the enforcement
options available to the Secretary under MTSA, consistent with
other statutes that provide for a separate violation for each
day a violation remains outstanding. The total fines per
violation would not exceed $50,000 during FY2006, $75,000
during FY2007, and $100,000 after FY2007.
Section 203. Icebreakers
This section would require the Coast Guard to take all
necessary measures to maintain, at a minimum, its current
vessel capacity for carrying out ice-breaking in the Arctic and
Antarctic regions, and for the long-term recapitalization of
such vessels. $100,000,000 is authorized for the Department in
which the Coast Guard is operating in order to carry out this
section.
Section 204. Cooperative arrangements
This section would require the Coast Guard to submit a report
on opportunities for and the feasibility of co-locating Coast
Guard assets and personnel at facilities of other Armed
Services branches, and entering into cooperative agreements for
carrying out Coast Guard missions.
Section 205. Pilot program for dockside no fault/no cost safety and
survivability examinations for uninspected commercial fishing
vessels
This section would authorize the Secretary to establish a
pilot program to conduct mandatory dockside crew survivability
examinations on uninspected U.S. commercial fishing vessels in
at least 5, but not more than 10 fishing ports of the country
over the next 5 years. The ports selected would be ones in
which there are a high number of fatalities on uninspected
vessels but would not include ports that already have a fishing
vessel safety program. The purpose and scope of the pilot
program would be to examine fishing vessels and their crews
dockside, to ensure required safety equipment is on board the
vessel and that the crew is trained in its proper use.
Section 206. Reports from mortgagees of vessels
This section would add ``mortgagees'' to section 12120 of
title 46, United States Code, and would give the Coast Guard
the authority to seek information and reports from foreign
mortgage holders as well as ``owners and masters'' and
``charterers'' of Jones Act vessels for the purposes of
ensuring Jones Act ownership requirements.
Section 207. International training and technical assistance
This section would allow the Coast Guard to conduct
international training and provide technical assistance to
international navies, coast guards and maritime authorities
during regular Coast Guard operations without requiring a
specific request from a third party U.S. Government agency.
Section 208. Reference to trust territory of the Pacific Islands
This section would remove the reference to the Territory of
the Pacific Islands from the definition of ``State'' and
``United States'' for purposes of recreational boating
programs. The Trusteeship Agreement for the Pacific Islands was
terminated on October 1, 1994. Once this agreement ended and
new ``Compacts of Free Association'' were entered into with the
United States, there was no request for approval of a numbering
system for undocumented vessels or participation in the State
Recreational Boating Safety (RBS) Compacts that would allow
territories to continue to participate in the programs.
Section 209. Bio-diesel feasibility study
This section would require the Coast Guard to submit a report
on the feasibility of using bio-diesel fuel in both new and
existing vehicles and vessels. The report would include
anticipated costs associated with implementing the use of bio-
diesel, as well as predicted cost savings.
Section 210. Certification of vessel nationality in drug smuggling
cases
This section would amend The Maritime Drug Law Enforcement
Act (MDLEA) to close a loophole in criminal enforcement
evidentiary rules for drug smuggling cases. The lack of
jurisdiction by another flag State is often the critical
element in establishing U.S. jurisdiction for a violation of
the MDLEA. This amendment would allow the U.S. to prove that a
flag State which the defendant alleged has jurisdiction does
not have such jurisdiction if the flag State, in response to a
U.S. inquiry, states that it ``can neither confirm nor deny'' a
suspect vessel's nationality.
Section 211. Administrative Jones Act waivers
This section would establish a waiver that would allow
vessels not built in the United States to transport fish and
shellfish within the coastal waters of the State of Maine if
they meet the criteria outlined in the section. The criteria
include that such a vessel must meet the other requirements
section 27 of the Merchant Marine Act of 1920 (46 U.S.C. App.
802), be ineligible for documentation under chapter 121 of
title 46, United States Code, because it measures less than 5
net tons, has transported fish or shellfish within the coastal
waters of the State of Maine prior to December 31, 2004, and
has not undergone a transfer of ownership after December 31,
2004.
Section 212. Deepwater oversight
This section would require the Coast Guard to submit a report
on the status of their compliance with the GAO's
recommendations in report GAO-04-380, ``Coast Guard Deepwater
Program Needs Increased Attention to Management and Contractor
Oversight.''
Section 213. Deepwater report
This section would require the Coast Guard to submit, in
conjunction with the President's Fiscal Year 2007 budget, a
report that discusses possible acceleration of the Deepwater
program, including legacy asset sustainment issues and costs,
feasibility concerns, anticipated mission deficiencies,
projected capabilities, and required funding levels.
Section 214. LORAN-C
This section would authorize the Department of Transportation
to transfer $25,000,000 in Fiscal Year 2006 and in Fiscal Year
2007 from the Federal Aviation Administration to the Coast
Guard for recapitalization of the LORAN-C radio navigation
system.
Section 215. Long-range vessel tracking system
This section would authorize a pilot project that would allow
the Coast Guard to conduct a program for long-range tracking of
up to 2,000 vessels using a satellite tracking system. This
project would be conducted with the assistance of an existing
non-profit maritime organization that has a demonstrated
capability of operating satellite communications systems able
to transmit this type of data in an effort to aid the Coast
Guard in responding to maritime emergencies and threats to
maritime security.
Section 216. Marine vessel and cold water safety education
This section would allow the Coast Guard to continue to use
existing agreements with organizations that provide marine
vessel safety training and cold water immersion education to
fishermen and children.
Section 217. Suction anchors
This section would create parity for vessels utilizing
suction anchors with those vessels using normal anchors.
TITLE III--UNITED STATES OCEAN COMMISSION IMPLEMENTATION
Section 301. Place of refuge
This section would require the Coast Guard, working with
other Federal, State, and local agencies and marine salvage
companies, to establish a process for determining when a vessel
in distress may seek a place of refuge in the United States.
The Coast Guard would be required to submit a report to
Congress summarizing such process.
Section 302. Implementation of international agreements
This section would require the Coast Guard, in conjunction
with other appropriate Federal agencies, to work with the
responsible officials of other nations to accelerate efforts at
the International Maritime Organization (IMO) to enhance flag
State oversight and enforcement of security, environmental, and
other agreements adopted within the IMO.
Section 303. Voluntary measures for reducing pollution from
recreational boats
This section would require the Coast Guard to utilize public
outreach programs for educating the boating public regarding
the pollution hazards of two-stroke engines, and to support
voluntary programs to reduce such pollution and encourage early
replacement of older two-stroke engines.
Section 304. Integration of vessel monitoring system data
This section would require the Coast Guard to integrate
vessel monitoring system data into its maritime operations
databases in order to improve its monitoring and enforcement of
Federal fisheries laws.
Section 305. Foreign fishing incursions
This section would require the Coast Guard to submit a report
to Congress, to be updated biannually, on the measures it
intends to take to significantly improve the Coast Guard's
detection and interdiction of foreign fishing vessel incursions
in the United States Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), focusing on
areas such as the Western/Central Pacific where such incursions
have been occurring but have gone undetected by the Coast
Guard.
TITLE IV--COAST GUARD PERSONNEL, FINANCIAL, AND PROPERTY MANAGEMENT
Section 401. Reserve officer distribution
This section would amend section 724 of title 14, United
States Code, to link Coast Guard Reserve officer authorization
levels to Active Duty officer authorization levels for grades
O-6 and below in order to properly distribute the numbers of
Reserve officers in those grades. The proposal would also make
clear that Reserve officers in an active status are counted
only against the Reserve component strength.
Section 402. Coast guard band director
This section would amend section 336 of title 14, United
States Code, to allow the Secretary to appoint the United
States Coast Guard Band Director at a rank commensurate with
the person's experience and training, rather than requiring the
Director to be appointed as a junior officer. The proposal
would also allow the Secretary to appoint the Band Director
from any source rather than only from among members of the
Coast Guard.
Section 403. Reserve recall authority
This section would amend section 712 of title 14, United
States Code, to allow the Secretary of Homeland Security to
order Coast Guard Reservists to active duty, (1) for an
increased period of time--of not more than sixty days in any
four-month period and not more than one hundred-twenty days in
any two-year period, and (2) for a threat of a terrorist
attack. The provision would require that for purposes of
calculating the duration of active duty, a period of active
duty shall begin on the first day that a member reports to
active duty, including for training.
Section 404. Expansion of equipment used by auxiliary to support Coast
Guard missions
This section would allow personal motorized vehicles of the
Coast Guard Auxiliary, in limited circumstances, to be eligible
for liability coverage under Coast Guard claims procedures when
an Auxiliary member is towing, under official Coast Guard
orders in support of Coast Guard missions, trailers that carry
government-owned boats and other equipment.
Section 405. Authority for one-step turnkey design-build contracting
This section would amend title 14, United States Code, by
adding a new section 677 which would permit the Secretary to
award consolidated Design-Build contracts using a one-step
turn-key selection procedure similar to the authority found in
section 2862 of title 10, United States Code. One-step turn-key
authority would permit the selection of a contractor on the
basis of price and other evaluation criteria through a single
proposal, in accordance with the provisions of a firm fixed-
price contract, for both the design and construction of a
facility using performance specifications.
Section 406. Officer promotion
This section would amend section 257 of title 14, United
States Code, to allow the Secretary of the Department in which
the Coast Guard is operating to waive time in grade
requirements for officers O-3 through O-5. Title 10, United
States Code, allows the Secretary of Defense this same
authority.
Section 407. Redesignation of Coast Guard law specialists as judge
advocates
This section would redesignate Coast Guard ``law
specialists'' as ``judge advocates.'' The Coast Guard is
currently the only military service that does not use the title
``judge advocate'' for its military attorneys.
Section 408. Boating Safety Director
This section would ensure that the individual who is assigned
as the Coast Guard Boating Safety Director will be a uniformed
officer in the rank of Captain.
Section 409. Hangar at Coast Guard air station Barbers Point
This section would require the Coast Guard to submit a report
that includes a proposal and cost analysis for constructing an
enclosed hangar at Coast Guard Air Station Barbers Point. The
current station is not enclosed, and is not large enough to
house a single C-130 aircraft.
Section 410. Promotion of Coast Guard officers
This section removes the advice and consent of the Senate for
officer appointments to the rank of Lieutenant (O-3) and below
in both peacetime and wartime.
TITLE V--TECHNICAL AND CONFORMING AMENDMENTS
Sections 501-518, 520-521
These sections would make technical corrections and
conforming amendments that update various sections of the
United States Code to reflect the transfer of the Coast Guard
from the Department of Transportation to the Department of
Homeland Security (DHS). This transfer was mandated by the
Homeland Security Act of 2002, Public Law 107-296, and the
Coast Guard transferred to DHS effective March 1, 2003. The
corrections and amendments in this title are non-substantive,
for example replacing ``Secretary of Transportation'' with
``Secretary of Homeland Security.''
Section 519. Nontank vessels
This section would clarify the applicability of section 701
of P.L. 108-293 (Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Act of
2004) to nontank vessels within 12 nautical miles of the United
States.
TITLE VI--EFFECTIVE DATES
Section 601. Effective dates
This section would provide that the Act would take effect on
the date of enactment, except that the technical amendments of
sections 501-518 would take effect on March 1, 2003.
Rollcall Votes in Committee
In accordance with paragraph 7(c) of rule XXVI of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee provides the
following description of the record votes during its
consideration of S. 1280:
By a roll call vote of 22 yeas and 0 nays as follows, the
bill was ordered reported:
YEAS--22 NAYS--0
Mr. Stevens
Mr. McCain\1\
Mr. Burns
Mr. Lott
Mrs. Hutchison
Ms. Snowe
Mr. Smith
Mr. Ensign\1\
Mr. Allen
Mr. Sununu
Mr. DeMint\1\
Mr. Vitter\1\
Mr. Inouye
Mr. Rockefeller\1\
Mr. Kerry\1\
Mr. Dorgan\1\
Mrs. Boxer\1\
Mr. Nelson of Florida
Ms. Cantwell
Mr. Lautenberg
Mr. Nelson of Nebraska
Mr. Pryor
\1\By proxy
Additional, Supplemental, or Minority Views deg.
Changes in Existing Law
In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee states that the
bill as reported would make no change to existing law. deg.
In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, changes in existing law made by
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law
proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new
material is printed in italic, existing law in which no change
is proposed is shown in roman): deg.
In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the Standing
Rules of the Senate, the Committee states that, in its opinion,
it is necessary to dispense with the requirements of that
paragraph in order to expedite the business of the Senate.