Executive Summary one of its metabolites, tertiary-butyl alcohol (TBA), are for the most part negative, whereas the MTBE metabolite formaldehyde is genotoxic in a variety of experimental systems. Formaldehyde is viewed as a “probable” human carcinogen and TBA shows some evidence of carcinogenicity in male rats and female mice. There is sufficient evidence to indicate that MTBE is an animal carcinogen and to regàrd MTBE as having a human hazard potential. Estimates of cancer potency derived from MTBE animal studies as well as estimates of human exposure to MTBF have large uncertainties and caution is required in their use. The estimated upper-bound cancer unit risks for MTBE are similar to or slightly less than those for fully vaporized conventional gasoline; substantially less than that for benzene, a minor constituent of gasoline that is classified as a known human carcinogen; and more than 100 times less than that for 1,3-butadiene, a carcinogenic emission product of incomplete fuel combustion. The interpretation of any health risks associated with the addition of MTBE to gasoline requires a comparison to the health risks associated with the use of conventional gasoline. Meaningful predictions of human cancer risk from the wintertime use of oxygenated gasoline versus nonoxygenated gasoline require much more knowledge of the relative ambient air concentrations and personal exposures to the toxic compounds that are present in both the evaporative and exhaust emissions from both types of fuels. • It is not likely that the health effects associated with ingestion of moderate to large quantities of ethanol would occur from inhalation of ethanol at ambient levels to which most people may be exposed from use of ethanol as a fuel oxygenate. Potential health effects from exposure to other oxygenates are not known and require investigation if their use in fuels is to become widespread. vil NOAA Fleet Question #18. Please explain the rationale behind NOAA's planned fleet investments. Why isn't more use made of charter and lease services? Answer: The FY 1998 request for NOAA's Fleet Modernization Program represents the minimum investment needed to ensure uninterrupted ship support for NOAA's at-sea data collection programs. Most of the $11.8 million requested is for maintenance and repairs to existing ships to keep their reliability at high enough levels to prevent downtime. $2.1 million will be used for the development of requirements, contract solicitation activities, and trade-off and feasibility studies for a new class of acoustically quiet fisheries research vessel with the laboratory space, scientific equipment, and scientific berthing capability. $1.5 million is needed to acquire current technology-hydrographic survey systems - so NOAA can maintain its expertise to manage contractors collecting hydrographic data and maintain a high level of data quality control for producing the nations nautical charts so important to maritime commerce. In recent years NOAA has made considerable progress toward the use of private charters, university ships, and contracts for data. One third of the ship time that NOAA currently needs is being acquired through charters, and lease services. NOAA is finding, however, that a mix of platforms will be needed to meet future needs. Contracts are being used for collecting hydrographic survey data, university ships are being used to support NOAA research programs, the use of NOAA's new oceanographic ship will be coordinated with the academic community, and where feasible, commercial fisheries vessels are being chartered. Question #19. Please justify NOAA's plan to spend $4.5 million to extend the life of the MILLER FREEMAN. Has NOAA fully explored lease and charter alternatives? Answer: The MILLER FREEMAN is one of NOAA's most capable fisheries research vessels but it's major systems are in need of repair which may soon result in reduced reliability. The $4.5 million requested for the MILLER FREEMAN will be used to replace or overhaul the ship's propulsion systems, auxiliary machinery systems, and fishing gear to ensure the ship's continued reliability and extend its service life. The ship provides fisheries stock management data and has done so for many years. NOAA has fully explored lease and charter alternatives. At this time, there is no vessel available in the private or university sector that can perform the data collection functions of the MILLER FREEMAN. NOAA has requested $2.1 million in FY 1998 to design a class of new fisheries research vessels and the MILLER FREEMAN is one of the vessels that NOAA plans to eventually replace. Before the MILLER FREEMAN is replaced, NOAA will determine if suitable vessels are available in the academic or private sectors. Question 20. National Undersea Research Program (NURP) Please describe what program changes NOAA plans to fund a Answer: In order to address the concerns of both the Administration and the Congress, major changes are being made in the program. The new NURP will continue to be a national program implemented through a network of regional undersea research centers. Each center functions as an independent unit and is responsible for directing and managing its own research program which will be responsive to research needs as defined by the NOAA Strategic Plan and the advice of a National Advisory Council, which is new to the program. Centers will participate directly in the NOAA strategic planning process to assist in determining national needs, and to propose underwater research solutions where applicable. Centers are responsible for managing an annual peer review process and developing proposals that will be competitively reviewed by a National Review Panel. Periodic administrative and management review will assure accountability and program integrity. The framework and structure for the reinvented NURP have been developed in consultation with the Administration and the university community involved. The President's budget request for FY 1998 contains $5.4 million for the new program. This is the first time in many years that the Administration has recognized the program in its budget. While a $5.4 million program will be different from the current $12 million program, reinvention will proceed and we believe this modest investment will enable us to demonstrate that the process embodied in the reinvented program will lead to increased competition and will focus research on NOAA's most pressing problems. NOAA Operations and Research Center at Goddard Question 21. Please justify NOAA's request for $97 million for a research facility on the campus of the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland. Were alternatives, such as leasing existing space or refurbishing existing facilities considered, and if so, why were these options rejected? Answer: A comprehensive description of the NOAA Operations and Research Center at Goddard was submitted in response to question 64 from the House Science Committee. The following response specifically elaborates on the alternatives issues raised in the follow-up questions. NOAA tasked Booz-Allen Hamilton, Inc. (BAH), to perform a construction cost estimate and an economic analysis for the proposed NOAA Operations and Research Center (NORC) at Goddard. The economic analysis provides detailed information about all alternatives sought by NOAA. These alternatives included construction at Goddard using third party financing and leasing buildings in Prince George's County and Silver Spring, Maryland. In addition, BAH reviewed the possibility of existing space at the NOAA complex in Silver Spring, but this approach was found not feasible for the following reasons. First, there is not sufficient space currently available at the NOAA complex in Silver Spring to accommodate those NOAA components identified to move to the NORC. Second, what space is available was not designed for, and cannot support, major computer facilities, such as those that are scheduled to move to the NORC at Goddard. Third, the BAH analysis shows that a new NOAA facility at Goddard is the least expensive alternative available. Both the life cycle cost and net present value methods of analysis support this conclusion. Question #22. Capital Acquisitions Account Please describe the new Capital Assets Acquisition account. How will it make NOAA more accountable? Answer: The creation of the Capital Assets Acquisition Account (CAA) responds to the requirements of the Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act of 1994 and the Information Technology Management Reform Act of 1996 and includes capital projects contained formerly in the Operations Research and Facilities (ORF) account and the Construction account within the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Although no funding is currently identified, this account would also contain any requests for Fleet Replacement previously requested in the Fleet Modernization, Shipbuilding and Conversion account. The Placing these projects in this account is consistent with the Administration's fixed asset policy by seeking advanced appropriations for multi-year projects. The Administration supports advanced appropriations as part of an ongoing attempt to improve cost and performance of agency procurement. Administration's goal is to ensure that capital assets support core/priority missions of the agency; the assets have demonstrated a projected return on investment that is clearly articulated, cost-benefits of acquisition have been evaluated, and to help ensure accountability. The projects included in this account support NOAA's operational mission across all line offices. In particular, projects related to the National Weather Service modernization and on-going operations are included. Increased funds are proposed for deployment of Advanced Weather Interactive Processing System (AWIPS), as well as current and follow-on geostationary satellites. Funds are also requested for new construction of a Fisheries laboratory in Santa Cruz, California, and a new facility at the Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland. With the creation of the Capital Assets Acquisition Account to provide funding for multi-year projects, the need for a separate Construction and Fleet Shipbuilding and Conversion accounts is eliminated, because like the CAA, these accounts were established to facilitate the funding of multi-year projects without impacting the overall ORF outlay rate and to avoid jeopardizing operational, base programs. Funds for projects that have outlay rates more in line with the overall ORF outlay rates, such as facility and ship maintenance, are requested beginning in FY 1998 within the ORF account under two new activities, Facilities and |