species. NOAA continues to work with local communities to formulate and oversee policies and programs to address fishery resource disasters in the Pacific Northwest, the Northeast, and the Gulf of Mexico. Lastly, NOAA provides technical assistance and financial support for the development and implementation of state coastal zone management plans through a unique state-federal partnership with coastal states. NOAA depends strongly on universities to help accomplish science objectives in its mission areas. NOAA and university scientists collaborate on severe weather, climate, and fisheries research via a network of Joint and Cooperative Institutes at universities. NOAA also funds academic researchers through competitive, peer-reviewed programs, including the Climate and Global Change Program, Coastal Ocean Program, the National Estuarine Research Reserve System, the National Sea Grant College Program, the National Undersea Research Program, the Saltonstall-Kennedy grants program, and the Cooperative Program for Operational Meteorology Education and Training. NOAA has established a NOAA-University partnership to enhance collaboration with universities, and will host a series of workshops during 1997 with a broad range of both academic and other constituents to provide for constituent input and feedback into NOAA's strategic planning and budget formulation process.

Weather and climate services are provided to the public and industry through a unique partnership between the NWS and the private meteorological sector. The NWS provides forecasts and warnings for public safety, and the private sector promotes dissemination of forecasts and the tailoring of basic information for business uses. NOAA generally is seeking to reduce the costs of environmental data collection and to improve access to space-based and other environmental monitoring technologies by utilizing existing federal and international assets, and planning for the next generation of polar-orbiting satellites.

CONCLUSION

As I have discussed above, NOAA's FY 1998 budget represents the most cost effective means to promote the Nation's environmental and economic advantage, while maintaining an appropriate balance among the environmental assessment and prediction and environmental stewardship needs of the Nation. We welcome the coming discussions on our goals, priorities, and operations with the Congress, our constituents and the public. We believe that our budget will be well received by all these groups because our budget represents appropriate levels of investment to generate major economic returns. Every day, in some way, every person in the U.S. is affected by the mission of NOAA. Our budget enables us to continue this service.

Thank you. If you have any questions, I am prepared to answer them at this time.

SEP 02 '97 13:29

P.2

Dr. D. James Baker

Administrator, NOAA

Dr. D. James Baker was appointed in May 1993 as Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere and Administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). NOAA is comprised of the National Weather Service, the National Marine Fisheries Service; the National Ocean Service; the National Environmental Satellite. Data, and Information Service; and the Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research. NOAA is also involved in interagency activities such as the U.S. Global Change Research Program and the High Performance Computing and Communications initiative.

From 1983 to 1993. Dr. Baker served as President of Joint Oceanographic Institutions (JOI) Incorporated, a non-profit corporation based in Washington, DC.. which represents the ten largest U.S. academic oceanographic programs ranging from deep sea drilling to global ocean ecosystems. Dr. Baker led JOI from a narrowly based research group to a broad one involved with many aspects of environmental science. technology, and policy.

Dr. Baker developed the concept and initiated the formation of the Council on Ocean Affairs (COA). a Washington-based organization representing 55 institutions which provides information on coastal and global ocean issues. COA serves an important function in providing science-based options for policy decisions. Dr. Baker was a co-founder of the Oceanography Society and served as President and Past-President. He is also a former member of the Council of the American Meteorological Society.

Before joining JOI in 1983, Dr. Baker was co-founder and first Dean of the College of Ocean and Fishery Sciences at the University of Washington in Seattle, Washington. In that capacity he was involved in issues ranging from ocean policy and fisheries management to ocean and fisheries research and technology Dr. Baker previously served as Leader of the Deep-Sea Physics Group at the NOAA Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory and as a member of the NOAA/University of Washington Joint Institute for the Study of the Atmosphere and Ocean While working for NOAA, he served as an adviser on oceanographic, climatic, and fisheries issues. He has also been a member of the faculty at Harvard University and a post-doctoral fellow at the University of California, Berkeley, and the University of Rhode Island.

Dr. Baker was elected a Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science in 1988 "for research in ocean circulation and air-sea interaction, and for initiating and coordinating major programs in marine science from ocean drilling to satellites." He has published more than 80 papers on ocean circulation. climate, polar oceanography, ocean instruments, and satellites, and is author of the book Planet Earth-The View from Space. published by Harvard University Press. He has participated in research expeditions to most of the major oceans and holds a joint patent for a deep-sea pressure gauge.

He has served on numerous advisory panels, most recently, he served on the Transition Team for the Clinton-Gore Administration as Deputy for Science, Space, and Technology to Dr. Sally Ride. He has also advised the White House, the National Academy of Sciences. various Federal agencies, and international bodies on the subjects of science and policy management, climate and global change, oceanography, data management, ships and other large facilities, Arctic and Antarctic research, and space measurements and technology. He has testified frequently to various congressional commit

tees.

He received his Ph.D. in physics from Cornell University and his B.S. in physics from Stanford University. He is married to Emily Lind Baker and resides in Washington, D.C.

WEATHER OFFICE CLOSINGS

Chairman CALVERT. Thank you, Doctor.

We did enjoy our visit the other day at NOAA. I especially enjoyed listening to some of the information that we received as far as the extended notification time on tornados that obviously saved lives.

Obviously we cannot stop tornados, but we can get out and warn people of their coming, and that certainly is very important. I only wish we could do that with earthquakes in California.

The National Weather Service has advised us that they will propose legislation involving the closure of some 80 Weather offices across the country. I suspect we will hear about that from some of our colleagues.

Can you tell us specifically how much money this will save the taxpayer? How many FTEs are involved for those offices out there, full-time-equivalents, and how these savings fit into your budget

plan?

Mr. BAKER. Let me ask the Deputy Director of the Weather Service to address this very specific question.

Mr. BOEZI. Congressman, the details of

Chairman CALVERT. Please identify yourself for the record.

Mr. BOEZI. I am Louis J. Boezi, Deputy Director of the National Weather Service. The legislative package that we are assembling this year for the closure of additional offices in certain locations are reflected in the President's budget. The net decrease in FTEs as well as the adjustments in cost, the specific details we will have to provide you on an aggregated basis from all over the country. Chairman CALVERT. Is this the savings you are referring to that is the same as was indicated in a previous Congress as far as the cash flow?

Mr. BOEZI. Yes.

NOAA COMMISSIONED CORPS LEGISLATION

Chairman CALVERT. NOAA has promised Congress a legislative package to complete the future elimination of the NOAA Corps to a civilian agency by the end of 1996. Why do we still not have that? And when can we expect it?

Mr. BAKER. Mr. Chairman, this is a very important document for us. We are working on it very vigorously. We expect to have that up to you within weeks. At this point it has been delayed from the promised date of November 15th as we did not have agreement in the Administration about the total cost that would be involved with the changeover of this military, uniformed service into a civilian activity in providing the same capabilities.

It is important that we find a way to make the transition and treat each person who is in the Corps in a fair and equitable way, and to define a way to make that transition. So we have been trying to find a way to do that. We also have been working very carefully on finding a way to show exactly what the savings are. This is a complex issue because it involves the way in which retirements are calculated. Military retirement is calculated differently than civilian calculated costs.

When we go with civilians providing this capability, we will be going into a pay-as-you-go retirement system rather than one that

is unfunded. This is in our current NOAA Corps, so there would be substantial long-term savings for the government. But there will be some one-time costs in terms of making this transition.

We are very close, I think, at this point now in having an agreement on what we think those costs are, and we are prepared now to bring that report to Congress so that you can see if we have provided a sensible plan.

MILLER FREEMAN

Chairman CALVERT. Good. We are looking forward to seeing that report.

However, on the subject of the Corps, your have a request_for $4.5 million to extend the service life of the Miller Freeman in Fiscal Year 1998. What have you been doing to look at alternatives such as the chartering of ships?

Mr. BAKER. Mr. Chairman, this is that area I have really pushed very hard on. I think it is really important. When I came into NOAA in 1993, the plan was to build a completely governmentowned/government-operated fleet. I felt that way was not the way for us to maintain our seagoing capability.

I was joined in my view by the Inspector General and many Members of Congress. Together I think we have been moving in the direction of finding a way of providing a seagoing capability for NOAA that uses the best capabilities of the private sector, of the academic fleet, and of government-owned vessels. We have put together a plan which tries to use the best of all of those so we can provide the best possible seagoing capability. We are working with the private sector on extending hydrographic measurements using the technology that they have. We are looking, in the meantime, to extend the lifetime of some of our ships so that as we go through this transition we still have seagoing capability.

It is absolutely critical that we are able to go out and do stock assessments. It requires ships to do that. It is important that we do oceanographic research, and we have moved to major new contracting with the University National Oceanographic Laboratory system.

So we are moving towards a mix. I think a mix is the right answer. There will be a transition period, and so we will be doing some modernization of these 30-year-old ships. So as we move into the new mixed fleet, we will have capability in the meantime. Chairman CALVERT. Thank you. Mr. Roemer.

SEA GRANT AND H.R. 437

Mr. ROEMER. Thank you again, Dr. Baker.

My first question is just, hopefully, a "yes" or "no" response. As you know, the Sea Grant bill introduced by Mr. Saxton contains more money than you requested. It is hopefully my intention, and I understand Mr. Calvert's intention as well, that you spend that extra money on the zebra mussel research that is so critical for the Great Lakes' region.

Do you intend to spend that extra money on that important research for our Midwestern area?

Mr. BAKER. Congressman Roemer, let me see if I can answer that question.

Mr. ROEMER. I was hoping it would just be a "yes," but go ahead. [Laughter.]

Mr. BAKER. I have to answer the question in a way that satisfies the Administration and Congressional constituent views.

We believe that the zebra mussel problem is very serious. We have supported zebra mussel research and zebra mussel outreach for a long time, and we continue to do that.

It is probably the most dangerous example of a nonindigenous species that we have in the country. We believe that this is a program that has to be addressed with a combination of research and public outreach, plus engineering measures.

So we have supported zebra mussel research within the Sea Grant program, as the Congress has said.

Let me just say, in terms of the budget levels the Administration has requested $50 million for the Sea Grant Program, and we support legislation at that level.

Mr. ROEMER. Why didn't you ask for the funds, then? I was hopeful that we would not have to get into this conversation with you, but why didn't you request funds if you are supportive of the research?

Now this gets you into more difficulty, Dr. Baker. How do you please us and please the Administration?

[Laughter.]

Mr. BAKER. I have been asking for Sea Grant funds since I became Administrator of NOAA, because I think this is a very important program.

The Administration has supported the $50 million level. If we had more money for this program, we would spend more money. And we believe the Sea Grant Program is a very important program.

NWS STREAMLINING

Mr. ROEMER. Well I will then follow up with more conversation with you on this. I am a little bit worried with that response for something that is so crucial for us in the Midwest. And, given your answer about how you see the threat of this kind of indigenous species, too.

Let me try to follow up and try to ask you a question that will be helpful to both you and I in terms of funding and staff.

I have some concerns in that we did not pass the streamlining legislation that we hoped to last year that would help reduce some of the costs for certifying new weather offices. That, combined with some other things, have possibly caused you some staffing problems.

How significant are these problems? And is this going to have an impact on staff reductions and some of these, last week, severe weather warning areas in the National Hurricane Center in Miami?

Mr. BAKER. Congressman Roemer, the budget cuts that we have had to take because of the possibility of streamlining are very difficult for us.

We have taken some temporary measures in 1997 to try to meet that, because in fact streamlining was not approved. And we have