House Report 108-244 - NASA FLEXIBILITY ACT OF 2003

[House Report 108-244]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

108th Congress Rept. 108-244
1st Session HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Part 1
======================================================================

NASA FLEXIBILITY ACT OF 2003

_______

August 4, 2003.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed

_______

Mr. Boehlert, from the Committee on Science, submitted the following

R E P O R T

together with

MINORITY VIEWS

[To accompany H.R. 1085]

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

The Committee on Science, to whom was referred the bill
(H.R. 1085) to make certain workforce authorities available to
the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and for
other purposes, having considered the same, report favorably
thereon with an amendment and recommend that the bill as
amended do pass.

CONTENTS

Page
I. Amendment......................................................2
II. Purpose of the Bill............................................12
III. Background and Need for the Legislation........................12
IV. Summary of Hearings............................................13
V. Committee Actions..............................................14
VI. Summary of Major Provisions of the Bill........................16
VII. Section-by-Section Analysis (by Title and Section).............18
VIII. Committee Views................................................25
IX. Cost Estimate..................................................28
X. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate......................28
XI. Compliance With Public Law 104-4 (Unfunded Mandates)...........30
XII. Committee Oversight Findings and Recommendations...............30
XIII. Statement on General Performance Goals and Objectives..........30
XIV. Constitutional Authority Statement.............................30
XV. Federal Advisory Committee Statement...........................30
XVI. Congressional Accountability Act...............................30
XVII. Statement on Preemption of State, Local, or Tribal Law.........31
XVIII.Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported..........31

XIX. Committee Recommendations......................................47
XX. Exchange of Committee Correspondence...........................49
XXI. Exchange of Correspondence from Outside Organizations..........51
XXII. Minority Views.................................................63
XXIII.Proceedings of the Subcommittee Markup.........................67

XXIV. Proceedings of the Full Committee Markup......................139

I. Amendment

The amendment is as follows:
Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the
following:

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ``NASA Flexibility Act of 2003''.

SEC. 2. COMPENSATION FOR CERTAIN EXCEPTED PERSONNEL.

(a) In General.--Subparagraph (A) of section 203(c)(2) of the
National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958 (42 U.S.C. 2473(c)(2)(A)) is
amended by striking ``the highest rate of grade 18 of the General
Schedule of the Classification Act of 1949, as amended,'' and inserting
``the rate of basic pay payable for level III of the Executive
Schedule,''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section shall take
effect on the first day of the first pay period beginning on or after
the date of enactment of this Act.

SEC. 3. WORKFORCE AUTHORITIES.

(a) In General.--Subpart I of part III of title 5, United States
Code, is amended by inserting after chapter 97, as added by section
841(a)(2) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (Public Law 107-296; 116
Stat. 2229), the following:

``CHAPTER 98--NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION

``Sec.
``9801. Definitions.
``9802. Planning, notification, and reporting requirements.
``9803. Restrictions.
``9804. Recruitment, redesignation, and relocation bonuses.
``9805. Retention bonuses.
``9806. Term appointments.
``9807. Pay authority for critical positions.
``9808. Assignments of intergovernmental personnel.
``9809. Enhanced demonstration project authority.
``9810. Science and technology scholarship program.
``9811. Distinguished scholar appointment authority.
``9812. Travel and transportation expenses of certain new appointees.
``9813. Annual leave enhancements.
``9814. Limited appointments to Senior Executive Service positions.
``9815. Qualifications pay.
``9816. Reporting requirement.

``Sec. 9801. Definitions

``For purposes of this chapter--
``(1) the term `Administration' means the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration;
``(2) the term `Administrator' means the Administrator of the
National Aeronautics and Space Administration;
``(3) the term `critical need' means a specific and important
requirement of the Administration's mission that the
Administration is unable to fulfill because the Administration
lacks the appropriate employees because--
``(A) of the inability to fill positions; or
``(B) employees do not possess the requisite skills;
``(4) the term `employee' means an individual employed in or
under the Administration;
``(5) the term `workforce plan' means the plan required under
section 9802(a);
``(6) the term `appropriate committees of Congress' means--
``(A) the Committees on Government Reform, Science,
and Appropriations of the House of Representatives; and
``(B) the Committees on Governmental Affairs,
Commerce, Science, and Transportation, and
Appropriations of the Senate;
``(7) the term `redesignation bonus' means a bonus under
section 9804 paid to an individual described in subsection
(a)(2) thereof;
``(8) the term `supervisor' has the meaning given such term
by section 7103(a)(10); and
``(9) the term `management official' has the meaning given
such term by section 7103(a)(11).

``Sec. 9802. Planning, notification, and reporting requirements

``(a) Not later than 90 days before exercising any of the workforce
authorities made available under this chapter, the Administrator shall
submit a written plan to the appropriate committees of Congress. Such
plan shall be developed in consultation with the Office of Personnel
Management.
``(b) A workforce plan shall include a description of--
``(1) each critical need of the Administration and the
criteria used in the identification of that need;
``(2)(A) the functions, approximate number, and classes or
other categories of positions or employees that--
``(i) address critical needs; and
``(ii) would be eligible for each authority proposed
to be exercised under this chapter; and
``(B) how the exercise of those authorities with respect to
the eligible positions or employees involved would address each
critical need identified under paragraph (1);
``(3)(A) any critical need identified under paragraph (1)
which would not be addressed by the authorities made available
under this chapter; and
``(B) the reasons why those needs would not be so addressed;
``(4) the specific criteria to be used in determining which
individuals may receive the benefits described under sections
9804 and 9805 (including the criteria for granting bonuses in
the absence of a critical need), and how the level of those
benefits will be determined;
``(5) the safeguards or other measures that will be applied
to ensure that this chapter is carried out in a manner
consistent with merit system principles;
``(6) the means by which employees will be afforded the
notification required under subsections (c) and (d)(1)(B);
``(7) the methods that will be used to determine if the
authorities exercised under this chapter have successfully
addressed each critical need identified under paragraph (1);
``(8)(A) the recruitment methods used by the Administration
before the enactment of this chapter to recruit highly
qualified individuals; and
``(B) the changes the Administration will implement after the
enactment of this chapter in order to improve its recruitment
of highly qualified individuals, including how it intends to
use--
``(i) nongovernmental recruitment or placement
agencies; and
``(ii) Internet technologies;
``(9) any reforms to the Administration's workforce
management practices recommended by the Columbia Accident
Investigation Board, the extent to which those recommendations
were accepted, and, if necessary, the reasons why any of those
recommendations were not accepted; and
``(10) the safeguards and other measures that will be applied
to ensure that this chapter is carried out in a manner that
does not compromise the safety or survival of any spacecraft or
crew thereof.
``(c) Not later than 60 days before first exercising any of the
workforce authorities made available under this chapter, the
Administrator shall provide to all employees the workforce plan and any
additional information which the Administrator considers appropriate.
``(d)(1)(A) The Administrator may from time to time modify the
workforce plan. Not later than 60 days before implementing any such
modifications, the Administrator shall submit a description of the
proposed modifications to the appropriate committees of Congress.
``(B) Not later than 60 days before implementing any such
modifications, the Administrator shall provide an appropriately
modified plan to all employees of the Administration and to the
appropriate committees of Congress.
``(2) Any reference in this chapter or any other provision of law to
the workforce plan shall be considered to include any modification made
in accordance with this subsection.
``(e) Before submitting any written plan under subsection (a) (or
modification under subsection (d)) to the appropriate committees of
Congress, the Administrator shall--
``(1) provide to each employee representative representing
any employees who might be affected by such plan (or
modification) a copy of the proposed plan (or modification);
``(2) give each representative 30 calendar days (unless
extraordinary circumstances require earlier action) to review
and make recommendations with respect to the proposed plan (or
modification); and
``(3) give any recommendations received from any such
representatives under paragraph (2) full and fair consideration
in deciding whether or how to proceed with respect to the
proposed plan (or modification).
``(f) None of the workforce authorities made available under this
chapter may be exercised in a manner inconsistent with the workforce
plan.
``(g) Whenever the Administration submits its performance plan under
section 1115 of title 31 to the Office of Management and Budget for any
year, the Administration shall at the same time submit a copy of such
plan to the appropriate committees of Congress.
``(h) Not later than 6 years after the date of enactment of this
chapter, the Administrator shall submit to the appropriate committees
of Congress an evaluation and analysis of the actions taken by the
Administration under this chapter, including--
``(1) an evaluation, using the methods described in
subsection (b)(7), of whether the authorities exercised under
this chapter successfully addressed each critical need
identified under subsection (b)(1);
``(2) to the extent that they did not, an explanation of the
reasons why any critical need (apart from the ones under
subsection (b)(3)) was not successfully addressed; and
``(3) recommendations for how the Administration could
address any remaining critical need and could prevent those
that have been addressed from recurring.
``(i) The budget request for the Administration for the first fiscal
year beginning after the date of enactment of this chapter and for each
fiscal year thereafter shall include a statement of the total amount of
appropriations requested for such fiscal year to carry out this
chapter.

``Sec. 9803. Restrictions

``(a) None of the workforce authorities made available under this
chapter may be exercised with respect to any officer who is appointed
by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate.
``(b) Unless specifically stated otherwise, all workforce authorities
made available under this chapter shall be subject to section 5307.
``(c)(1) None of the workforce authorities made available under
section 9804, 9805, 9806, 9807, 9810, 9813, 9814, 9815, or 9816 may be
exercised with respect to a political appointee.
``(2) For purposes of this subsection, the term `political appointee'
means an employee who holds--
``(A) a position which has been excepted from the competitive
service by reason of its confidential, policy-determining,
policy-making, or policy-advocating character; or
``(B) a position in the Senior Executive Service as a
noncareer appointee (as such term is defined in section
3132(a)).

``Sec. 9804. Recruitment, redesignation, and relocation bonuses

``(a) Notwithstanding section 5753, the Administrator may pay a bonus
to an individual, in accordance with the workforce plan and subject to
the limitations in this section, if--
``(1) the Administrator determines that the Administration
would be likely, in the absence of a bonus, to encounter
difficulty in filling a position; and
``(2) the individual--
``(A) is newly appointed as an employee of the
Federal Government;
``(B) is currently employed by the Federal Government
and is newly appointed to another position in the same
geographic area; or
``(C) is currently employed by the Federal Government
and is required to relocate to a different geographic
area to accept a position with the Administration.
``(b) If the position is described as addressing a critical need in
the workforce plan under section 9802(b)(2)(A), the amount of a bonus
may not exceed--
``(1) 50 percent of the employee's annual rate of basic pay
(including comparability payments under sections 5304 and
5304a) as of the beginning of the service period multiplied by
the service period specified under subsection (d)(1)(B)(i); or
``(2) 100 percent of the employee's annual rate of basic pay
(including comparability payments under sections 5304 and
5304a) as of the beginning of the service period.
``(c) If the position is not described as addressing a critical need
in the workforce plan under section 9802(b)(2)(A), the amount of a
bonus may not exceed--
``(1) 25 percent of the employee's annual rate of basic pay
(including comparability payments under sections 5304 and
5304a) as of the beginning of the service period multiplied by
the service period specified under subsection (d)(1)(B)(i); or
``(2) 100 percent of the employee's annual rate of basic pay
(including comparability payments under sections 5304 and
5304a) as of the beginning of the service period.
``(d)(1)(A) Payment of a bonus under this section shall be contingent
upon the individual entering into a service agreement with the
Administration.
``(B) At a minimum, the service agreement shall include--
``(i) the required service period;
``(ii) the method of payment, including a payment schedule,
which may include a lump-sum payment, installment payments, or
a combination thereof;
``(iii) the amount of the bonus and the basis for calculating
that amount; and
``(iv) the conditions under which the agreement may be
terminated before the agreed-upon service period has been
completed, and the effect of the termination.
``(2) For purposes of determinations under subsections (b)(1) and
(c)(1), the employee's service period shall be expressed as the number
equal to the full years and twelfth parts thereof, rounding the
fractional part of a month to the nearest twelfth part of a year. The
service period may not be less than 6 months and may not exceed 4
years.
``(3) A bonus under this section may not be considered to be part of
the basic pay of an employee.
``(e) Before paying a bonus under this section, the Administration
shall establish a plan for paying recruitment, redesignation, and
relocation bonuses, subject to approval by the Office of Personnel
Management.
``(f) No more than 25 percent of the total amount in bonuses awarded
under subsection (a) in any year may be awarded to supervisors or
management officials.

``Sec. 9805. Retention bonuses

``(a) Notwithstanding section 5754, the Administrator may pay a bonus
to an employee, in accordance with the workforce plan and subject to
the limitations in this section, if the Administrator determines that--
``(1) the unusually high or unique qualifications of the
employee or a special need of the Administration for the
employee's services makes it essential to retain the employee;
and
``(2) the employee would be likely to leave in the absence of
a retention bonus.
``(b) If the position is described as addressing a critical need in
the workforce plan under section 9802(b)(2)(A), the amount of a bonus
may not exceed 50 percent of the employee's annual rate of basic pay
(including comparability payments under sections 5304 and 5304a).
``(c) If the position is not described as addressing a critical need
in the workforce plan under section 9802(b)(2)(A), the amount of a
bonus may not exceed 25 percent of the employee's annual rate of basic
pay (including comparability payments under sections 5304 and 5304a).
``(d)(1)(A) Payment of a bonus under this section shall be contingent
upon the employee entering into a service agreement with the
Administration.
``(B) At a minimum, the service agreement shall include--
``(i) the required service period;
``(ii) the method of payment, including a payment schedule,
which may include a lump-sum payment, installment payments, or
a combination thereof;
``(iii) the amount of the bonus and the basis for calculating
the amount; and
``(iv) the conditions under which the agreement may be
terminated before the agreed-upon service period has been
completed, and the effect of the termination.
``(2) The employee's service period shall be expressed as the number
equal to the full years and twelfth parts thereof, rounding the
fractional part of a month to the nearest twelfth part of a year. The
service period may not be less than 6 months and may not exceed 4
years.
``(3) Notwithstanding paragraph (1), a service agreement is not
required if the Administration pays a bonus in biweekly installments
and sets the installment payment at the full bonus percentage rate
established for the employee, with no portion of the bonus deferred. In
this case, the Administration shall inform the employee in writing of
any decision to change the retention bonus payments. The employee shall
continue to accrue entitlement to the retention bonus through the end
of the pay period in which such written notice is provided.
``(e) A bonus under this section may not be considered to be part of
the basic pay of an employee.
``(f) An employee is not entitled to a retention bonus under this
section during a service period previously established for that
employee under section 5753 or under section 9804.
``(g) No more than 25 percent of the total amount in bonuses awarded
under subsection (a) in any year may be awarded to supervisors or
management officials.

``Sec. 9806. Term appointments

``(a) The Administrator may authorize term appointments within the
Administration under subchapter I of chapter 33, for a period of not
less than 1 year and not more than 6 years.
``(b) Notwithstanding chapter 33 or any other provision of law
relating to the examination, certification, and appointment of
individuals in the competitive service, the Administrator may convert
an employee serving under a term appointment to a permanent appointment
in the competitive service within the Administration without further
competition if--
``(1) such individual was appointed under open, competitive
examination under subchapter I of chapter 33 to the term
position;
``(2) the announcement for the term appointment from which
the conversion is made stated that there was potential for
subsequent conversion to a career-conditional or career
appointment;
``(3) the employee has completed at least 2 years of current
continuous service under a term appointment in the competitive
service;
``(4) the employee's performance under such term appointment
was at least fully successful or equivalent; and
``(5) the position to which such employee is being converted
under this section is in the same occupational series, is in
the same geographic location, and provides no greater promotion
potential than the term position for which the competitive
examination was conducted.
``(c) Notwithstanding chapter 33 or any other provision of law
relating to the examination, certification, and appointment of
individuals in the competitive service, the Administrator may convert
an employee serving under a term appointment to a permanent appointment
in the competitive service within the Administration through internal
competitive promotion procedures if the conditions under paragraphs (1)
through (4) of subsection (b) are met.
``(d) An employee converted under this section becomes a career-
conditional employee, unless the employee has otherwise completed the
service requirements for career tenure.
``(e) An employee converted to career or career-conditional
employment under this section acquires competitive status upon
conversion.

``Sec. 9807. Pay authority for critical positions

``(a) In this section, the term `position' means--
``(1) a position to which chapter 51 applies, including a
position in the Senior Executive Service;
``(2) a position under the Executive Schedule under sections
5312 through 5317;
``(3) a position established under section 3104; or
``(4) a senior-level position to which section 5376(a)(1)
applies.
``(b) Authority under this section--
``(1) may be exercised only with respect to a position that--
``(A) is described as addressing a critical need in
the workforce plan under section 9802(b)(2)(A); and
``(B) requires expertise of an extremely high level
in a scientific, technical, professional, or
administrative field;
``(2) may be exercised only to the extent necessary to
recruit or retain an individual exceptionally well qualified
for the position; and
``(3) may be exercised only in retaining employees of the
Administration or in appointing individuals who were not
employees of another Federal agency as defined under section
5102(a)(1).
``(c)(1) Notwithstanding section 5377, the Administrator may fix the
rate of basic pay for a position in the Administration in accordance
with this section. The Administrator may not delegate this authority.
``(2) The number of positions with pay fixed under this section may
not exceed 10 at any time.
``(d)(1) The rate of basic pay fixed under this section may not be
less than the rate of basic pay (including any comparability payments)
which would otherwise be payable for the position involved if this
section had never been enacted.
``(2) The annual rate of basic pay fixed under this section may not
exceed the per annum rate of salary payable under section 104 of title
3.
``(3) Notwithstanding any provision of section 5307, in the case of
an employee who, during any calendar year, is receiving pay at a rate
fixed under this section, no allowance, differential, bonus, award, or
similar cash payment may be paid to such employee if, or to the extent
that, when added to basic pay paid or payable to such employee (for
service performed in such calendar year as an employee in the executive
branch or as an employee outside the executive branch to whom chapter
51 applies), such payment would cause the total to exceed the per annum
rate of salary which, as of the end of such calendar year, is payable
under section 104 of title 3.

``Sec. 9808. Assignments of intergovernmental personnel

``For purposes of applying the third sentence of section 3372(a)
(relating to the authority of the head of a Federal agency to extend
the period of an employee's assignment to or from a State or local
government, institution of higher education, or other organization),
the Administrator may, with the concurrence of the employee and the
government or organization concerned, take any action which would be
allowable if such sentence had been amended by striking `two' and
inserting `four'.

``Sec. 9809. Enhanced demonstration project authority

``When conducting a demonstration project at the Administration,
section 4703(d)(1)(A) may be applied by substituting `8,000' for
`5,000'.

``Sec. 9810. Science and technology scholarship program

``(a)(1) The Administrator shall establish a National Aeronautics and
Space Administration Science and Technology Scholarship Program to
award scholarships to individuals that is designed to recruit and
prepare students for careers in the Administration.
``(2) Individuals shall be selected to receive scholarships under
this section through a competitive process primarily on the basis of
academic merit, with consideration given to financial need and the goal
of promoting the participation of individuals identified in section 33
or 34 of the Science and Engineering Equal Opportunities Act.
``(3) To carry out the Program the Administrator shall enter into
contractual agreements with individuals selected under paragraph (2)
under which the individuals agree to serve as full-time employees of
the Administration, for the period described in subsection (f)(1), in
positions needed by the Administration and for which the individuals
are qualified, in exchange for receiving a scholarship.
``(b) In order to be eligible to participate in the Program, an
individual must--
``(1) be enrolled or accepted for enrollment as a full-time
student at an institution of higher education, as a junior or
senior undergraduate or graduate student, in an academic field
or discipline described in the list made available under
subsection (d);
``(2) be a United States citizen or permanent resident; and
``(3) at the time of the initial scholarship award, not be an
employee (as defined in section 2105).
``(c) An individual seeking a scholarship under this section shall
submit an application to the Administrator at such time, in such
manner, and containing such information, agreements, or assurances as
the Administrator may require.
``(d) The Administrator shall make publicly available a list of
academic programs and fields of study for which scholarships under the
Program may be utilized and shall update the list as necessary.
``(e)(1) The Administrator may provide a scholarship under the
Program for an academic year if the individual applying for the
scholarship has submitted to the Administrator, as part of the
application required under subsection (c), a proposed academic program
leading to a degree in a program or field of study on the list made
available under subsection (d).
``(2) An individual may not receive a scholarship under this section
for more than 4 academic years, unless the Administrator grants a
waiver.
``(3) The dollar amount of a scholarship under this section for an
academic year shall be determined under regulations issued by the
Administrator, but shall in no case exceed the cost of attendance.
``(4) A scholarship provided under this section may be expended for
tuition, fees, and other authorized expenses as established by the
Administrator by regulation.
``(5) The Administrator may enter into a contractual agreement with
an institution of higher education under which the amounts provided for
a scholarship under this section for tuition, fees, and other
authorized expenses are paid directly to the institution with respect
to which the scholarship is provided.
``(f)(1) The period of service for which an individual shall be
obligated to serve as an employee of the Administration is, except as
provided in subsection (h)(2), 24 months for each academic year for
which a scholarship under this section is provided.
``(2)(A) Except as provided in subparagraph (B), obligated service
under paragraph (1) shall begin not later than 60 days after the
individual obtains the educational degree for which the scholarship was
provided.
``(B) The Administrator may defer the obligation of an individual to
provide a period of service under paragraph (1) if the Administrator
determines that such a deferral is appropriate. The Administrator shall
prescribe the terms and conditions under which a service obligation may
be deferred through regulation.
``(g)(1) Scholarship recipients who fail to maintain a high level of
academic standing, as defined by the Administrator by regulation, who
are dismissed from their educational institutions for disciplinary
reasons, or who voluntarily terminate academic training before
graduation from the educational program for which the scholarship was
awarded, shall be in breach of their contractual agreement and, in lieu
of any service obligation arising under such agreement, shall be liable
to the United States for repayment within 1 year after the date of
default of all scholarship funds paid to them and to the institution of
higher education on their behalf under the agreement, except as
provided in subsection (h)(2). The repayment period may be extended by
the Administrator when determined to be necessary, as established by
regulation.
``(2) Scholarship recipients who, for any reason, fail to begin or
complete their service obligation after completion of academic
training, or fail to comply with the terms and conditions of deferment
established by the Administrator pursuant to subsection (f)(2)(B),
shall be in breach of their contractual agreement. When recipients
breach their agreements for the reasons stated in the preceding
sentence, the recipient shall be liable to the United States for an
amount equal to--
``(A) the total amount of scholarships received by such
individual under this section; plus
``(B) the interest on the amounts of such awards which would
be payable if at the time the awards were received they were
loans bearing interest at the maximum legal prevailing rate, as
determined by the Treasurer of the United States,
multiplied by 3.
``(h)(1) Any obligation of an individual incurred under the Program
(or a contractual agreement thereunder) for service or payment shall be
canceled upon the death of the individual.
``(2) The Administrator shall by regulation provide for the partial
or total waiver or suspension of any obligation of service or payment
incurred by an individual under the Program (or a contractual agreement
thereunder) whenever compliance by the individual is impossible or
would involve extreme hardship to the individual, or if enforcement of
such obligation with respect to the individual would be contrary to the
best interests of the Government.
``(i) For purposes of this section--
``(1) the term `cost of attendance' has the meaning given
that term in section 472 of the Higher Education Act of 1965;
``(2) the term `institution of higher education' has the
meaning given that term in section 101(a) of the Higher
Education Act of 1965; and
``(3) the term `Program' means the National Aeronautics and
Space Administration Science and Technology Scholarship Program
established under this section.
``(j)(1) There is authorized to be appropriated to the Administration
for the Program $10,000,000 for each fiscal year.
``(2) Amounts appropriated under this section shall remain available
for 2 fiscal years.

``Sec. 9811. Distinguished scholar appointment authority

``(a) In this section--
``(1) the term `professional position' means a position that
is classified to an occupational series identified by the
Office of Personnel Management as a position that--
``(A) requires education and training in the
principles, concepts, and theories of the occupation
that typically can be gained only through completion of
a specified curriculum at a recognized college or
university; and
``(B) is covered by the Group Coverage Qualification
Standard for Professional and Scientific Positions; and
``(2) the term `research position' means a position in a
professional series that primarily involves scientific inquiry
or investigation, or research-type exploratory development of a
creative or scientific nature, where the knowledge required to
perform the work successfully is acquired typically and
primarily through graduate study.
``(b) The Administration may appoint, without regard to the
provisions of section 3304(b) and sections 3309 through 3318, but
subject to subsection (c), candidates directly to General Schedule
professional, competitive service positions in the Administration for
which public notice has been given (in accordance with regulations of
the Office of Personnel Management), if--
``(1) with respect to a position at the GS-7 level, the
individual--
``(A) received, within 2 years before the effective
date of the appointment, from an accredited institution
authorized to grant baccalaureate degrees, a
baccalaureate degree in a field of study for which
possession of that degree in conjunction with academic
achievements meets the qualification standards as
prescribed by the Office of Personnel Management for
the position to which the individual is being
appointed; and
``(B) achieved a cumulative grade point average of
3.0 or higher on a 4.0 scale and a grade point average
of 3.5 or higher for courses in the field of study
required to qualify for the position;
``(2) with respect to a position at the GS-9 level, the
individual--
``(A) received, within 2 years before the effective
date of the appointment, from an accredited institution
authorized to grant graduate degrees, a graduate degree
in a field of study for which possession of that degree
meets the qualification standards at this grade level
as prescribed by the Office of Personnel Management for
the position to which the individual is being
appointed; and
``(B) achieved a cumulative grade point average of
3.5 or higher on a 4.0 scale in graduate coursework in
the field of study required for the position;
``(3) with respect to a position at the GS-11 level, the
individual--
``(A) received, within 2 years before the effective
date of the appointment, from an accredited institution
authorized to grant graduate degrees, a graduate degree
in a field of study for which possession of that degree
meets the qualification standards at this grade level
as prescribed by the Office of Personnel Management for
the position to which the individual is being
appointed; and
``(B) achieved a cumulative grade point average of
3.5 or higher on a 4.0 scale in graduate coursework in
the field of study required for the position; or
``(4) with respect to a research position at the GS-12 level,
the individual--
``(A) received, within 2 years before the effective
date of the appointment, from an accredited institution
authorized to grant graduate degrees, a graduate degree
in a field of study for which possession of that degree
meets the qualification standards at this grade level
as prescribed by the Office of Personnel Management for
the position to which the individual is being
appointed; and
``(B) achieved a cumulative grade point average of
3.5 or higher on a 4.0 scale in graduate coursework in
the field of study required for the position.
``(c) In making any selections under this section, preference
eligibles who meet the criteria for distinguished scholar appointments
shall be considered ahead of nonpreference eligibles.
``(d) An appointment made under this authority shall be a career-
conditional appointment in the competitive civil service.

``Sec. 9812. Travel and transportation expenses of certain new
appointees

``(a) In this section, the term `new appointee' means--
``(1) a person newly appointed or reinstated to Federal
service to the Administration to--
``(A) a career or career-conditional appointment;
``(B) a term appointment;
``(C) an excepted service appointment that provides
for noncompetitive conversion to a career or career-
conditional appointment;
``(D) a career or limited term Senior Executive
Service appointment;
``(E) an appointment made under section 203(c)(2)(A)
of the National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958 (42
U.S.C. 2473(c)(2)(A));
``(F) an appointment to a position established under
section 3104; or
``(G) an appointment to a position established under
section 5108; or
``(2) a student trainee who, upon completion of academic
work, is converted to an appointment in the Administration that
is identified in paragraph (1) in accordance with an
appropriate authority.
``(b) The Administrator may pay the travel, transportation, and
relocation expenses of a new appointee to the same extent, in the same
manner, and subject to the same conditions as the payment of such
expenses under sections 5724, 5724a, 5724b, and 5724c to an employee
transferred in the interests of the United States Government.

``Sec. 9813. Annual leave enhancements

``(a) In this section--
``(1) the term `newly appointed employee' means an individual
who is first appointed--
``(A) as an employee of the Federal Government; or
``(B) as an employee of the Federal Government
following a break in service of at least 90 days after
that individual's last period of Federal employment,
other than--
``(i) employment under the Student
Educational Employment Program administered by
the Office of Personnel Management;
``(ii) employment as a law clerk trainee;
``(iii) employment under a short-term
temporary appointing authority while a student
during periods of vacation from the educational
institution at which the student is enrolled;
``(iv) employment under a provisional
appointment if the new appointment is permanent
and immediately follows the provisional
appointment; or
``(v) employment under a temporary
appointment that is neither full-time nor the
principal employment of the individual;
``(2) the term `period of qualified non-Federal service'
means any period of service performed by an individual that--
``(A) was performed in a position the duties of which
were directly related to the duties of the position in
the Administration which that individual will fill as a
newly appointed employee; and
``(B) except for this section, would not otherwise be
service performed by an employee for purposes of
section 6303; and
``(3) the term `directly related to the duties of the
position' means duties and responsibilities in the same line of
work which require similar qualifications.
``(b)(1) For purposes of section 6303, the Administrator may deem a
period of qualified non-Federal service performed by a newly appointed
employee to be a period of service of equal length performed as an
employee.
``(2) A decision under paragraph (1) to treat a period of qualified
non-Federal service as if it were service performed as an employee
shall continue to apply so long as that individual serves in or under
the Administration.
``(c)(1) Notwithstanding section 6303(a), the annual leave accrual
rate for an employee of the Administration in a position paid under
section 5376 or 5383, or for an employee in an equivalent category
whose rate of basic pay is greater than the rate payable at GS-15, step
10, shall be 1 day for each full biweekly pay period.
``(2) The accrual rate established under this subsection shall
continue to apply to the employee so long as such employee serves in or
under the Administration.

``Sec. 9814. Limited appointments to Senior Executive Service positions

``(a) In this section, the terms `career reserved position', `Senior
Executive Service position', `senior executive' and `career appointee'
have the meanings set forth in section 3132(a).
``(b) Subject to succeeding provisions of this section, the
Administrator may, notwithstanding any other provision of this title,
fill a career reserved position on a temporary basis, but only if--
``(1) such position is vacant as a result of--
``(A) the separation of the incumbent; or
``(B) the temporary absence of the incumbent due to
illness, training, or reassignment; or
``(2) such position is or would be difficult to fill in any
other manner due to the fact that such position is likely to be
eliminated within the next 2 years.
``(c) Notwithstanding sections 3132 and 3394(b), an appointment made
by the Administrator under subsection (b) shall not exceed 2 years.
``(d) The Administrator may extend an appointment under subsection
(b) for as long as necessary to meet a contingency described in
subsection (b)(1), but for not to exceed 1 year and not if the
circumstance described in subsection (b)(2) pertains.
``(e) The number of career reserved positions filled under subsection
(b) may not at any time exceed 10 percent of the total number of Senior
Executive Service positions then authorized for the Administration
under section 3133.
``(f) An individual appointed to a career reserved position on a
temporary basis under subsection (b) shall, if such individual was so
appointed from a civil service position held under a career or career-
conditional appointment, be entitled, upon completion of that temporary
appointment, to be reemployed in the position from which such
individual was so appointed (or an equivalent position), in accordance
with such regulations as the Office of Personnel Management may
prescribe.
``(g) An appointment to a career reserved position on a temporary
basis under subsection (b) may not be made without the prior approval
of the Office of Personnel Management if the individual--
``(1) is to be appointed--
``(A) from outside the Federal Government; or
``(B) from a civil service position held under an
appointment other than a career or career-conditional
appointment; or
``(2) is a senior executive, but not a career appointee.
``(h) An individual appointed to a career reserved position on a
temporary basis under subsection (b) who is not a career appointee
shall, for purposes of performance awards under section 5384, be
treated as a career appointee.

``Sec. 9815. Qualifications pay

``(a) Notwithstanding section 5334, the Administrator may set the pay
of an employee paid under the General Schedule at any step within the
pay range for the grade of the position, if such employee--
``(1) possesses unusually high or unique qualifications; and
``(2) is assigned--
``(A) new duties, without a change of position; or
``(B) to a new position.
``(b) If an exercise of the authority under this section relates to a
current employee selected for another position within the
Administration, a determination shall be made that the employee's
contribution in the new position will exceed that in the former
position, before setting pay under this section.
``(c) Pay as set under this section is basic pay for such purposes as
pay set under section 5334.
``(d) If the employee serves for at least 1 year in the position for
which the pay determination under this section was made, or a successor
position, the pay earned under such position may be used in succeeding
actions to set pay under chapter 53.
``(e) Before setting any employee's pay under this section, the
Administrator shall submit a plan to the Office of Personnel Management
and the appropriate committees of Congress, that includes--
``(1) criteria for approval of actions to set pay under this
section;
``(2) the level of approval required to set pay under this
section;
``(3) all types of actions and positions to be covered;
``(4) the relationship between the exercise of authority
under this section and the use of other pay incentives; and
``(5) a process to evaluate the effectiveness of this
section.

``Sec. 9816. Reporting requirement

``The Administrator shall submit to the appropriate committees of
Congress, not later than February 28 of each of the next 6 years
beginning after the date of enactment of this chapter, a report that
provides the following:
``(1) A summary of all bonuses paid under subsections (b)-(c)
of section 9804 during the preceding fiscal year. Such summary
shall include the total amount of bonuses paid, the total
number of bonuses paid, the percentage of bonuses awarded to
supervisors and management officials, and the average
percentage used to calculate the total average bonus amount,
under each of those subsections.
``(2) A summary of all bonuses paid under subsections (b)-(c)
of section 9805 during the preceding fiscal year. Such summary
shall include the total amount of bonuses paid, the total
number of bonuses paid, the percentage of bonuses awarded to
supervisors and management officials, and the average
percentage used to calculate the total average bonus amount,
under each of those subsections.
``(3) The total number of term appointments converted during
the preceding fiscal year under section 9806 and, of that total
number, the number of conversions that were made to address a
critical need described in the workforce plan pursuant to
section 9802(b)(2).
``(4) The number of positions for which the rate of basic pay
was fixed under section 9807 during the preceding fiscal year,
the number of positions for which the rate of basic pay under
such section was terminated during the preceding fiscal year,
and the number of times the rate of basic pay was fixed under
such section to address a critical need described in the
workforce plan pursuant to section 9802(b)(2).
``(5) The number of scholarships awarded under section 9810
during the preceding fiscal year and the number of scholarship
recipients appointed by the Administration during the preceding
fiscal year.
``(6) The total number of distinguished scholar appointments
made under section 9811 during the preceding fiscal year and,
of that total number, the number of appointments that were made
to address a critical need described in the workforce plan
pursuant to section 9802(b)(2).
``(7) The average amount paid per appointee, and the largest
amount paid to any appointee, under section 9812 during the
preceding fiscal year for travel and transportation expenses.
``(8) The total number of employees who were awarded enhanced
annual leave under section 9813 during the preceding fiscal
year; of that total number, the number of employees who were
serving in a position addressing a critical need described in
the workforce plan pursuant to section 9802(b)(2); and, for
employees in each of those respective groups, the average
amount of additional annual leave such employees earned in the
preceding fiscal year (over and above what they would have
earned absent section 9813).
``(9) The total number of appointments made under section
9814 during the preceding fiscal year and, of that total
number, the number of appointments that were made to address a
critical need described in the workforce plan pursuant to
section 9802(b)(2).
``(10) The number of employees for whom the Administrator set
the pay under section 9815 during the preceding fiscal year and
the number of times pay was set under such section to address a
critical need described in the workforce plan pursuant to
section 9802(b)(2).''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of chapters for part III of title
5, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

``98. National Aeronautics and Space Administration......... 9801''.

SEC. 4. WORKFORCE DIVERSITY.

It is the sense of the Congress that the National Aeronautics and
Space Administration should, in accordance with section 7201 of title
5, United States Code, conduct a continuing program for the recruitment
of members of minority groups for positions in the Administration to
carry out the policy set forth in subsection (b) of such section in a
manner designed to eliminate underrepresentation of minorities in the
various categories of civil service employment within the Federal
service, with special efforts directed at recruiting in minority
communities, in educational institutions, and from other sources from
which minorities can be recruited.

II. Purpose of the Bill

The purpose of H.R. 1085 is to provide specified workforce
authorities to NASA, to require certain notification, planning,
and reporting to Congress, NASA employees, and NASA employee
representatives about the use of these workforce authorities,
to establish a science and technology scholarship program and
authorize funding for this program, and for other purposes.

III. Background and Need for the Legislation

In May 2002, NASA proposed to the Committee a list of
changes to civil service law designed to improve NASA's ability
to recruit and retain highly skilled scientists, engineers, and
program managers. The agency proposed additional changes in
February 2003. NASA found it needed additional recruitment and
retention tools because of the declines in university
enrollment for U.S. students in technical fields, increased
hiring competition from industry and academia for technical
skills, and a lack of minority and gender diversity in the
scientists and engineers (S&E) talent pool. NASA also
identified several workforce trends within the agency that
posed a significant threat to its ability to support its
technical programs and address the agency's management
challenges. From fiscal year 1993 to 2000, NASA reduced its
civil service workforce by 26 percent. Within NASA's S&E
workforce, the over-60 population outnumbers its under-30
population by nearly 3 to 1. At some NASA centers, the ratio is
more than 5 to 1. By contrast, in 1993, the under-30 S&E
workforce outnumbered the over-60 group by almost 2 to 1.
Approximately 15 percent of NASA's S&E employees are currently
eligible to retire, and within five years, almost 25 percent of
NASA's S&E workforce will be retirement eligible.
Several reports have independently identified problems in
the U.S. science and engineering workforce pipeline and the
NASA workforce. Since 2001, the General Accounting Office (GAO)
has ranked ``strengthening human capital'' as one of NASA's top
management challenges. The GAO reported in January 2003: ``NASA
is facing shortages in its workforce, which could likely worsen
as the workforce continues to age and the pipeline of talent
shrinks. This dilemma is more pronounced among areas crucial to
NASA's ability to perform its mission, such as engineering,
science, and information technology.'' Similarly, NASA's
independent Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel reported in 2000
and 2001: ``The critical skills challenge faced by NASA * * *
in Space Shuttle and International Space Station programs
continues. Recent downsizing * * * produced a workforce with *
* * a potential future shortage of experienced leadership.'' In
November 2002, the Commission on the Future of the United
States Aerospace Industry (Aerospace Commission) recommended
that government, industry, labor, and academia work together to
develop an aerospace workforce for the 21st century.

IV. Summary of Hearings

The Space and Aeronautics Subcommittee held a hearing on
July 18, 2002 on NASA's Workforce and Management Challenges.
The purpose of the hearing was to examine NASA's legislative
proposals to the Committee to provide new and expanded
authorities for recruitment, retention, and restructuring of
its workforce.
The Honorable David Walker, Comptroller General of the
United States, testified on the General Accounting Office's
perspective on NASA's top management challenges, focusing on
its human capital challenges. He observed that modern,
effective, credible, and equitable human capital strategies are
key to any successful transformation effort. Mr. Walker
testified that such a transformation would take five to seven
years, and that while the vast majority of the transformation
efforts could be done within the context of current law, he
recommended that Congress grant NASA some reasonable
flexibility with appropriate safeguards to prevent abuse of
these authorities.
The Honorable Sean O'Keefe, NASA Administrator, testified
that the President's Management Agenda identified human capital
as one of the top five issues that need to be addressed. Mr.
O'Keefe testified that NASA's human capital plan is fourfold:
(1) to use existing authorities under Title V and the Space Act
of 1958, as amended; (2) to develop an agency-wide human
capital strategic plan to begin targeted hiring objectives,
professional development strategies, and workforce shaping
techniques that draw the best benchmarking from across federal
agencies; (3) to refine NASA's mission and vision to include
the inspiration of the next generation of explorers through
education initiatives; and (4) to seek additional legislative
authorities in managing NASA's civil service workforce.
Mr. Mark Roth, General Counsel for the American Federation
of Government Employees (AFGE), testified that the human
capital crisis is government-wide and that it is unwise to make
necessary civil service changes on an agency-by-agency basis as
NASA requested. Mr. Roth testified that the AFGE opposed most
of NASA's human resource proposals, but the AFGE did support
the proposed Science and Technology Scholarship Program. Mr.
Roth criticized NASA for downsizing and outsourcing efforts
over the past decade. He said that NASA's human capital
proposals were contradictory because they provided buyouts to
certain employees while offering recruitment and retention
bonuses that far exceed current law to others. Mr. Roth
testified that the AFGE opposed an extension of the Interagency
Personnel Act and NASA's request for direct hire authority.
While the AFGE generally supports bonuses, Mr. Roth testified
that studies showed that fewer than 1 percent of eligible
federal employees received recruitment and retention bonuses
due to lack of funds. Mr. Roth testified that the AFGE did not
oppose demonstration projects in general, but NASA's proposal
for a demonstration project and alternative personnel system
would give the Office of Personnel Management authority that
rests solely with Congress.
The full Science Committee held a hearing on NASA's
workforce issues on March 12, 2003 to receive expert testimony
on H.R. 1085 (as introduced).
Mr. Max Stier, President and CEO of the Partnership for
Public Service, testified on the fierce competition in hiring
technical talent and how NASA and other federal government
employers are ill-equipped to compete with the flexible hiring
practices of private industry and academia for the same talent
pool. Mr. Stier cited a convoluted government hiring system
along with a relatively inflexible federal pay system as
reasons for NASA's difficulty in attracting talent to the
agency.
Mr. Bobby Harnage, National President of the American
Federation of Government Employees (AFL-CIO), testified that
the AFGE opposed most of the proposals contained in H.R. 1085
(as introduced) but that the AFGE agreed to work with Chairman
Boehlert, the Science Committee, and NASA in drafting
legislation to address NASA's workforce needs.
Mr. George Nesterczuk, a private consultant, expressed
general support for H.R. 1085 (as introduced) as ``an immediate
remedy for retaining and attracting talented individuals'' and
provided specific conclusions and recommendations for each
provision in the bill. Mr. Nesterczuk testified that he thought
the demonstration project authority was ``the most important
authority extended to NASA'' in the bill. Mr. Nesterczuk urged
the Committee to delete the voluntary separation incentive
provision from the bill because it ``sends a mixed message * *
* in an organization arguing for relief because it is losing
talent.''

V. Committee Actions

On March 5, 2003, Science Committee Chairman Sherwood
Boehlert introduced H.R. 1085, NASA Flexibility Act of 2003, a
bill to provide specified workforce authorities to NASA.
The Space and Aeronautics Subcommittee met on Thursday,
June 26, 2003 to consider the bill.
An amendment in the nature of a substitute was
offered by Chairman Boehlert, which made technical changes and
added or modified several provisions. The amendment was adopted
by voice vote.
Mr. Boehlert moved that the Subcommittee favorably report
the bill, H.R. 1085, as amended, to the Full Committee and that
the staff be instructed to make all necessary technical and
conforming changes to the bill as amended in accordance with
the recommendations of the Subcommittee. With a quorum present,
the motion was agreed to by a voice vote.
On July 22, 2003, the Committee on Science considered H.R.
1085, as amended by the Subcommittee.
An en bloc amendment was offered by Chairman
Boehlert that included technical and conforming changes and
provisions to (1) strike the section on Voluntary Separation
Incentive payments; (2) require NASA to report on any workforce
management practices recommended by the Columbia Accident
Investigation Board; (3) require that any NASA modifications to
the Workforce Plan be sent to Congress 60 days before being
implemented; (4) restrict the total period of obligated service
for the Science and Technology Scholarship Program to four
years; and (5) only require six years of annual reports from
NASA. The amendment was adopted by a rollcall vote (Y-22; N-
16).
An amendment was offered by Ms. Jackson-Lee to
require NASA to report in the Workforce Plan the safeguards and
other measures that will be applied to ensure that workforce
programs are carried out in a manner that does not compromise
the safety or survival of any spacecraft or crew thereof. The
amendment was adopted by voice vote.
An amendment was offered by Mr. Miller to restrict
certain workforce authorities from being exercised with respect
to political appointees. A perfecting second degree amendment
was offered by Chairman Boehlert to the amendment by Mr. Miller
to modify the definition of a political appointee and was
adopted by voice vote. The Miller amendment was adopted, as
amended, by voice vote.
An amendment was offered by Mr. Miller to strike
the section of the bill providing NASA the authority to conduct
Enhanced Demonstration Projects. The amendment was defeated by
a rollcall vote (Y-20; N-20).
An amendment was offered by Mr. Rohrabacher to
limit the eligibility of science and technology scholarship
recipients to junior or senior undergraduates and graduate
students and to expand the eligibility to permanent residents
of the United States. The amendment was adopted by voice vote.
An amendment was offered by Mr. Hall to (1)
require certain personnel ceilings and authorize appropriations
for the NASA Office of Safety and Mission Assurance; (2)
require NASA to study Space Shuttle crew survivability
concepts; (3) issue a moratorium on all voluntary separation
incentive payments until a Congressional certification on
skills related to safety is made; and (4) issue a moratorium on
any privatization, outsourcing, or contracting out of human
space flight activities until certain conditions are met. The
Chair ruled the amendment was not germane to the bill. The
motion to table the appeal of the ruling of the Chair was
adopted by a rollcall vote (Y-22; N-19).
An amendment was offered by Ms. Johnson of Texas
to add a new section to the bill that expressed a sense of
Congress that NASA should conduct a continuing program, in
accordance with current law, for the recruitment of members of
minority groups for positions in NASA. The amendment was
adopted by voice vote.
An amendment was offered by Mr. Gordon to require
NASA to conduct a strategic resources review of NASA's human
space flight program with the objective of determining (1)
goals over the next 20 years; (2) required civil service
workforce levels and shortfalls; and (3) infrastructure needed.
A unanimous consent request to withdraw the amendment was
adopted by voice vote.
An amendment was offered by Mr. Lampson to require
NASA to establish a planned series of exploration goals for
human space flight for the next 20 years. The amendment was
defeated by a rollcall vote (Y-12; N-18).
An amendment was offered by Mr. Miller to require
NASA to contract with the National Academy of Public
Administration for an independent review of whether NASA is
making full use of workforce flexibilities available to it
under existing law and to prohibit the use of workforce
authorities provided in the bill until this review is submitted
to Congress. The amendment was defeated by a rollcall vote (Y-
9; N-13).
An amendment was offered by Ms. Jackson-Lee to add
a new section to the bill to reinstate the employees,
resources, and functions in the Minority University Research
and EducationProgram into the Equal Opportunity division. The
amendment was defeated by a roll call vote (Y-12; N-18).
An amendment was offered by Chairman Boehlert to
repeal the four-year maximum total period of obligated service
for the Science and Technology Scholarship Program (which had
been added by his earlier en bloc amendment). The amendment was
adopted by voice vote.
An amendment was offered by Mr. Hall to require
NASA to study Space Shuttle crew survivability concepts. The
Chair ruled the amendment was not germane to the bill.
The motion to adopt the bill, as amended, was agreed to by
voice vote. Mr. Rohrabacher moved that the Committee favorably
report the bill, H.R. 1085, as amended, to the House with the
recommendation that the bill as amended do pass and that staff
be instructed to make technical and conforming changes to the
bill as amended and prepare the legislative report and that the
Chairman take all necessary steps to bring the bill before the
House for consideration. The motion was agreed to by a rollcall
vote (Y-21; N-14).

VI. Summary of Major Provisions of the Bill

Greater Flexibility in Civil Service Law to
Address NASA's Critical Needs: Authorizes NASA greater
flexibility to recruit, retain, and restructure its workforce
to address the agency's critical needs. Prohibits politically
appointed employees in NASA from benefiting from the
authorities provided in the bill.
Compensation for Certain Excepted Personnel:
Amends the National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958 to tie
the pay scale for NASA Excepted (NEX) employees to level III of
the Executive Schedule rather than the obsolete pay scale of
grade 18 of the General Schedule.
Vigorous Congressional Oversight: Before
exercising any of the authorities provided under the Act, the
NASA Administrator must submit to Congress and all NASA
employees a detailed Workforce Plan developed in consultation
with the Office of Personnel Management. Directs NASA to submit
annual performance plans and specific information on the use of
these workforce authorities to Congress for the next six years.
After six years, NASA is to submit to Congress an evaluation of
how the authorities exercised under the Act addressed NASA's
critical needs.
Higher Bonuses: Under current law, recruitment and
relocation bonuses are authorized up to 25 percent of an
employee's annual salary. This Act authorizes NASA to award
recruitment, redesignation, and relocation bonuses up to 50
percent of an employee's annual salary multiplied by an agreed-
upon service period (up to 4 years) if the position addresses a
critical need.
Higher Retention Bonuses: Under current law,
retention bonuses are authorized up to 25 percent of an
employee's annual salary without locality adjustments. This Act
authorizes NASA to pay retention bonuses up to 50 percent of an
employee's annual salary if the employee's position addresses a
critical need.
Term Appointments: Authorizes NASA to make term
appointments for up to six years. Current law limits term
appointments to a four-year term. Allows term appointments to
be converted to career-conditional civil service appointments
under strict conditions.
Pay Authority for Critical Positions: Authorizes
the NASA Administrator to fix the rate of pay up to the level
of the Vice-President's pay ($198,600 per year) for up to ten
employees. Such employees must have expertise of an extremely
high level in scientific, technical, professional, or
administrative fields.
Assignments under the Intergovernmental Personnel
Act (IPA): Authorizes NASA to grant extensions of four years to
personnel serving in IPA assignments. Currently, only two-year
extensions are allowed after an initial two-year assignment.
Thus, an IPA assignment may last a total of six years under the
new authority versus only four years under current law.
Enhanced Demonstration Project: Authorizes NASA to
conduct a personnel demonstration project for up to 8,000
employees rather than for up to 5,000 employees as in current
law. NASA employs approximately 18,000 civil servants.
Science & Technology Scholarships: Authorizes NASA
to set-up a ``scholarship for service'' program under which
NASA would pay for junior-senior undergraduate and graduate
school education. In exchange, the student would be obligated
to work for NASA after graduation. Authorizes $10 million per
year.
Distinguished Scholars: Authorizes NASA to
directly hire recent graduates from undergraduate or graduate
school with high grade point averages. Veteran's preferences
still apply.
Travel and Transportation Expenses for New
Appointees: Authorizes NASA to compensate newly hired employees
for certain travel and transportation expenses that current
employees are already eligible to receive.
Annual leave enhancements: Authorizes new
appointees to NASA who have no prior Federal service to accrue
leave at the rate normally allowed for a Federal employee of
similar experience.
Limited Senior Executive Service (SES)
Appointments: Authorizes NASA to temporarily fill career
reserved SES positions due to death, illness, training, or
special-tasking of the employee previously holding that
position.
Qualifications Pay: Authorizes NASA to adjust the
pay to any step within an employee's grade in the General
Schedule (GS) for employees with superior qualifications and
additional duties.

VII. Section-by-Section Analysis (by Title and Section)

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE

``The NASA Flexibility Act of 2003.''

SECTION 2. COMPENSATION FOR CERTAIN EXCEPTED PERSONNEL

Amends section 203(c) of the National Aeronautics and Space
Act of 1958 to tie the pay scale for NASA Excepted (NEX)
Employees to level III of the Executive Schedule rather than
the obsolete pay scale of grade 18 of the General Schedule.
Directs that this amendment takes effect on the first day of
the first pay period beginning on or after the date of
enactment of this Act.

SECTION 3. WORKFORCE AUTHORITIES

Amends title 5, United States Code, on Government
Organizations and Employees by inserting a new chapter 98 for
the National Aeronautics and Space Administration with the
following sections:
Sec. 9801. Definitions.
Sec. 9802. Planning, notification, and reporting
requirements.
Sec. 9803. Restrictions.
Sec. 9804. Recruitment, redesignation, and relocation
bonuses.
Sec. 9805. Retention bonuses.
Sec. 9806. Term appointments.
Sec. 9807. Pay authority for critical positions.
Sec. 9808. Assignments of intergovernmental personnel.
Sec. 9809. Enhanced demonstration project authority.
Sec. 9810. Science and technology scholarship program.
Sec. 9811. Distinguished scholar appointment authority.
Sec. 9812. Travel and transportation expenses of certain
new appointees.
Sec. 9813. Annual leave enhancements.
Sec. 9814. Limited appointments to Senior Executive Service
positions.
Sec. 9815. Qualifications pay.
Sec. 9816. Reporting requirement.

SECTION 9801. DEFINITIONS

Defines terms used throughout the bill. Defines the term
``critical need'' as a specific and important requirement of
NASA's mission that the agency is unable to fulfill because
NASA lacks the appropriate employees either because of the
inability to fill positions or because employees lack the
requisite skills. Defines the term ``redesignation bonus'' as a
bonus which could be paid to an employee moving from one
government job to another, including within NASA, without
relocating to a different geographic region.

SECTION 9802. PLANNING, NOTIFICATION, AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

Requires the NASA Administrator to submit a Workforce Plan
to Congress not later than 90 days before exercising any of the
authorities under this chapter. The Workforce Plan shall be
developed in consultation with the Office of Personnel
Management. Requires that this Workforce Plan describe: (1)
each of NASA's critical needs and the criteria used in its
identification; (2) the functions, approximate number, and
classes or other categories of positions or employees that
address critical needs and that would be eligible for each
workforce authority provided in this chapter and proposed to be
exercised, and how the exercise of those authorities with
respect to the eligible positions or employees involved would
address each critical need identified; (3) any critical need
which would not be addressed by the workforce authorities
provided in this chapter and the reasons why those needs would
not be so addressed; (4) the specific criteria to be used in
determining which individuals may receive the benefits
described in sections 9804, 9805 (including the criteria for
granting bonuses in the absence of a critical need), and 9810,
and how the level of those benefits will be determined; (5) the
safeguards or other measures that will be applied to ensure
that this chapter is carried out in a manner consistent with
merit system principles; (6) the means by which NASA employees
will be afforded the notification required for the Workforce
Plan or any modifications thereof; (7) the methods that will be
used to determine if the workforce authorities provided in this
chapter have successfully addressed each critical need
identified; (8) NASA's recruitment methods and plans to improve
recruitment of highly qualified individuals; (9) any reforms to
NASA's workforce management practices recommended by the
Columbia Accident Investigation Board, the extent to which
those recommendations were accepted, and, if necessary, the
reasons why any of those recommendations were not accepted; and
(10) the safeguards and other measures that will be applied to
ensure that this chapter is carried out in a manner that does
not compromise the safety or survival of any spacecraft or crew
thereof. Requires that NASA provide the Workforce Plan to all
employees 60 days before exercising any of the workforce
authorities provided in this chapter. Authorizes the NASA
Administrator to modify the Workforce Plan, provided that not
later than 60 days before implementing any such modifications
the Administrator submit a description of proposed
modifications to Congress and submit such description not later
than 60 days beforehand to all employees. Requires the NASA
Administrator to provide each employee representative
representing any employee who might be affected with a copy of
the proposed plan (or modification), to give each
representative 30 calendar days to review and make
recommendations to the proposed plan (or modification) to NASA,
and for NASA to give such recommendations full and fair
consideration in deciding how to proceed with the proposed
plan. Requires that none of the workforce authorities provided
in this chapter be exercised in a manner inconsistent with the
Workforce Plan. Directs NASA to submit the annual performance
plan that it submits to OMB under current law to the Congress.
Requires the NASA Administrator to submit to Congress an
evaluation and analysis of the actions taken under this chapter
not later than six years after its enactment. Requires that
this evaluation and analysis include: (1) an evaluation of
whether the authorities exercised under this chapter
successfully addressed each critical need identified; (2) to
the extent that they did not, an explanation of the reasons why
any critical need was not successfully addressed; and (3)
recommendations for how the Administration could address any
remaining critical need and could prevent those that have been
addressed from recurring. Requires that NASA's annual budget
request include a statement of the total amount of
appropriations requested for the fiscal year to carry out this
chapter.

SECTION 9803. RESTRICTIONS

Prohibits Senate-confirmed Presidential and political
appointees at NASA from being eligible to benefit from the
authorities under this chapter. Requires that the total amount
for all salaries, bonuses, and other benefits that an employee
might receive under the workforce authorities provided in this
chapter be limited according to current law.

SECTION 9804. RECRUITMENT, REDESIGNATION, AND RELOCATION BONUSES

Authorizes the NASA Administrator to pay recruitment,
redesignation, and relocation bonuses to an individual in
accordance with the authority provided in this section and
consistent with the Workforce Plan if the individual is: (1)
newly appointed as an employee of the Federal Government; (2)
currently employed by the Federal Government and is newly
appointed to another position in the same geographic area; or
(3) currently employed by the Federal Government and must
relocate to a different geographic area to accept a position
with the Administration.
Authorizes recruitment, redesignation, and relocation
bonuses under the following formula: (1) If the position
addresses a critical need, the amount of a bonus may not exceed
50 percent of an employee's annual salary (including
comparability payments) multiplied by an agreed-upon service
period; (2) If the position does not address a critical need,
the amount of a bonus may not exceed 25 percent of an
employee's annual salary (including comparability payments)
multiplied by an agreed-upon service period; and (3) In either
case, the total bonus may not exceed the employee's annual
salary (including comparability payments) at the beginning of
the employee's period of service.
Requires that payment of a bonus be contingent on the
employee entering into a service agreement with NASA. Requires
that the service agreement, at a minimum, establish: (1) the
required service period; (2) the payment schedule and method of
payment which may include a lump-sum payment, installment
payments, or a combination thereof; (3) the amount of the bonus
and the basis for calculating such amount; and (4) the
conditions under which the agreement may be terminated before
the agreed-upon service period has been completed, and the
effect of the termination. Requires that an employee's service
period not be less than six months and not exceed four years.
Requires NASA to establish a plan for paying such bonuses,
subject to OPM approval, before paying a bonus under this
section. Restricts supervisors and management officials from
receiving more than 25 percent of the total amount in bonuses
awarded in any year.

SECTION 9805. RETENTION BONUSES

Authorizes the NASA Administrator to pay higher retention
bonuses than is provided under current law and in accordance
with the authority provided in this section and consistent with
the Workforce Plan if the Administrator determines that the
unusually high or unique qualifications of an employee or a
special need of NASA makes it essential to retain the employee
and the employee would be likely to leave in the absence of a
retention bonus. Authorizes retention bonuses under the
following formula: (1) If the position addresses a critical
need, the amount of a bonus may not exceed 50 percent of an
employee's annual salary (including comparability payments); or
(2) If the position does not address a critical need, the
amount of a bonus may not exceed 25 percent of an employee's
annual salary (including comparability payments). Requires that
payment of a bonus be contingent on the employee entering into
a service agreement with NASA unless NASA pays a retention
bonus in biweekly installments to the employee. Requires that
the service agreement, at a minimum, establish: (1) the
required service period; (2) the payment schedule and method of
payment which may include a lump-sum payment, installment
payments, or a combination thereof; (3) the amount of the bonus
and the basis for calculating such amount; and (4) the
conditions under which the agreement may be terminated before
the agreed-upon service period has been completed, and the
effect of the termination. Requires that the service period may
not be less than six months and may not exceed four years.
Prohibits an employee from receiving a retention bonus under
this section during a service period for which other bonuses
were previously provided to the employee. Requires NASA to
establish a plan for paying retention bonuses, subject to OPM
approval, before paying a retention bonus under this section.
Restricts supervisors and management officials from receiving
more than 25 percent of the total amount in bonuses awarded in
any year.

SECTION 9806. TERM APPOINTMENTS

Authorizes the NASA Administrator to make term appointments
within NASA for not less than one year and not more than six
years. Authorizes the NASA Administrator to convert a term
appointment to a permanent appointment in the competitive
service within NASA without further competition if: (1) the
individual was hired under the open, competitive examining
procedures under current law; (2) the original announcement
stated the appointment may be converted from term to career-
conditional or career appointment; (3) the individual has
completed at least two years of the term appointment; (4) the
employee's performance was at least fully successful or
equivalent; and (5) the position is in the same occupational
series and geographic location and provides no greater
promotion potential than the term appointment. Authorizes the
NASA Administrator to convert a term appointment to a permanent
appointment in the competitive service within NASA through
internal competitive procedures if conditions (1) through (4)
above are met. Directs that an employee converted under this
section becomes a career-conditional employee unless the
employee has otherwise completed the service requirements for
career tenure. Directs that an employee converted to career or
career-conditional employment under this section acquires
competitive status upon conversion.

SECTION 9807. PAY AUTHORITY FOR CRITICAL POSITIONS

Authorizes the NASA Administrator to fix the salary for up
to 10 administrative, technical and professional positions
described in the section to the salary level of the Vice-
President if the position addresses a critical need identified
in the Workforce Plan and the position requires expertise of an
extremely high level in scientific, technical, professional, or
administrative fields. Directs that the NASA Administrator may
not delegate this authority. Requires that an employee
receiving pay at a rate fixed under this section not be paid an
allowance, differential, bonus, award, or similar cash payment
during any calendar year that would cause the employee's salary
total to exceed the annual rate of salary prescribed for the
Vice-President.

SECTION 9808. ASSIGNMENTS UNDER THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL PERSONNEL ACT

Authorizes the NASA Administrator to extend the period of
an employee's Intergovernmental Personnel Act (IPA) assignment
up to four years, rather than two years provided under current
law.

SECTION 9809. ENHANCED DEMONSTRATION PROJECT

Authorizes NASA when conducting a demonstration project to
apply that project to up to 8,000 individuals rather than 5,000
individuals as specified under current law.

SECTION 9810. SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM

Authorizes the NASA Administrator to establish a NASA
Science and Technology Scholarship Program to award
scholarships to individuals who agree to serve as full-time
NASA employees in exchange for receiving this scholarship.
Requires that individuals be selected for this scholarship
through a competitive application process primarily on the
basis of academic merit, with consideration given to financial
need and the goal of promoting the participation of individuals
under the Science and Engineering Equal Opportunities Act.
Requires that individuals eligible for this scholarship must be
full-time junior or senior undergraduate or graduate students,
U.S. citizens or permanent residents, and not be federal
employees. Directs NASA to advertise and update periodically a
list of academic programs and fields of study for which
scholarships may be used. Prohibits an individual from
receiving this scholarship for more than four academic years,
unless the NASA Administrator grants a waiver. Requires that
the scholarship pay for tuition, fees, and other authorized
expenses established by the NASA Administrator by regulation.
Directs that scholarships not exceed the cost of attendance.
Authorizes the NASA Administrator to enter into contractual
agreement with an institution of higher education to provide
payment for this scholarship. Requires two years of service for
each year of scholarship. Requires that obligated service begin
not later than 60 days after the individual receives the
educational degree for which the scholarship was provided
unless the NASA Administrator allows the individual to defer
the obligated service under prescribed terms and conditions.
Requires that students who fail to maintain a high level of
academic standing as defined in NASA regulation, who are
dismissed from their college or university for disciplinary
reasons, or who do not complete their program of study be
required to repay NASA for funds received under the scholarship
program. Directs that in the event a scholarship recipient
fails to complete the service obligation to NASA, the
individual be responsible to repay three times the amount of
scholarship received plus interest on that amount at a
determined, prevailing loan-rate. Authorizes the NASA
Administrator to waive a service obligation for an individual
who received a scholarship when completion of service would be
impossible or would involve extreme hardship to the individual
or if enforcement would be contrary to the best interests of
the government. Authorizes appropriation of $10,000,000 for
each fiscal year for the NASA Science and Technology
Scholarship Program established under this section.

SECTION 9811. DISTINGUISHED SCHOLAR APPOINTMENT AUTHORITY

Authorizes NASA to appoint candidates directly to General
Schedule professional, competitive service positions in grades
GS-7 through GS-12 who meet specified education and grade point
average requirements and for which public notice for the
position has been given in accordance with OPM regulations.
Requires that the candidates receive their degree within two
years before the effective date of the appointment. Requires
that in selecting these individuals for this appointment, NASA
shall consider preference eligibles who meet the criteria for
distinguished scholar appointment ahead of non-preference
eligibles. Directs that an appointment made under this
authority shall be a career-conditional appointment in the
competitive civil service.

SECTION 9812. TRAVEL AND TRANSPORTATION EXPENSES OF CERTAIN NEW
APPOINTEES

Authorizes the NASA Administrator to pay the travel,
transportation, and relocation expenses for a new appointee to
NASA to the same extent, in the same manner, and subject to the
same conditions as payment of such expenses to an employee
transferred in the interests of the United States Government.

SECTION 9813. ANNUAL LEAVE ENHANCEMENTS

Authorizes the NASA Administrator to deem a period of
qualified non-Federal service performed by a newly appointed
employee to be a period of service of equal length performed as
a NASA employee for the purposes of establishing leave the
accrual rate for the employee. Requires that this authority
continues to apply only as long as the individual works for
NASA. Authorizes the annual leave accrual rate for NASA
employees serving in senior level or senior executive pay
positions or in an equivalent category whose rate of basic pay
is greater than GS-15, step 10 to be 1 day for each full
biweekly period as long as the employee works for NASA.

SECTION 9814. LIMITED APPOINTMENTS TO SENIOR EXECUTIVE SERVICE
POSITIONS

Authorizes the NASA Administrator to fill career reserved
SES positions on a temporary basis when a vacancy in such a
position occurs as a result of separation of the incumbent,
temporary absence of the incumbent due to illness, training, or
reassignment, or if such a position would be difficult to fill
in any other manner because the position is likely to be
eliminated within the next two years. Restricts such
appointments from exceeding two years, but allows the
Administrator to extend such an appointment up to an additional
year provided the reason for the original appointment was not
that the position was likely to be eliminated within two years.
Restricts the number of such appointments from exceeding 10
percent of the total number of SES positions within NASA at any
time. Authorizes an individual appointed to such a career
reserved position on a temporary basis to be reemployed to the
position (or an equivalent position) from which the individual
was so appointed in accordance with OPM regulations. Requires
OPM approval if the individual appointed to such a career
reserved position under this section is to be appointed (1)
from outside the Federal Government; or (2) from a civil
service position that is not a career or career-conditional
appointment; or (3) or is a senior executive, but not a career
appointee. Authorizes an individual appointed under this
authority to be treated as a career appointee for purposes of
performance awards.

SECTION 9815. QUALIFICATIONS PAY

Authorizes the NASA Administrator to set the pay for a
General Schedule (GS) employee at any step within the pay range
under the General Schedule if the employee possesses unusually
highor unique qualifications and the employee is assigned new
duties or to a new position. Authorizes that if an employee serves at
least one year in the position under the GS step determined by the
authority under this section, then succeeding actions to set pay under
current law for the employee may take the pay determination under this
section into account. Requires the NASA Administrator to submit a plan
to OPM and the Congress that describes the implementation and process
for evaluating the effectiveness of this authority before exercising
this authority.

SECTION 9816. REPORTING REQUIREMENT

Requires the NASA Administrator to submit an annual report
to the Congress not later than February 28 for each of the next
six years after enactment of this chapter to provide specific
information listed in this section about the use of the
workforce authorities provided in this chapter for the
preceding fiscal year.

SECTION 3. CLERICAL AMENDMENT

Amends the table of chapters in title 5, United States Code
by adding chapter 98 for NASA.

SECTION 4. WORKFORCE DIVERSITY

Expresses the sense of Congress that NASA should conduct a
continuing program, in accordance with current law, for the
recruitment of members of minority groups for positions in NASA
that carries out the policy set forth in current law in a
manner designed to eliminate under-representation of minorities
in the various categories of civil service employment.

VIII. Committee Views

Committee changes to NASA's initial legislative proposals

In May 2002 and February 2003, NASA made several
legislative proposals to the Committee for changes to civil
service law designed to improve NASA's ability to recruit and
retain highly skilled scientists, engineers, and program
managers. The Committee made several changes to NASA's initial
proposals before including them in the bill and rejected some
altogether.
Certain legislative proposals from NASA were included as
Government-wide authorities in Title XIII of the Homeland
Security Act of 2002 (P.L. 107-296) that was signed into law in
November 2002. Similar authorities for Streamlined Hiring,
Voluntary Separation Incentives, and Voluntary Early Retirement
were included in the Homeland Security Act, and NASA told the
Committee that the Homeland Security Act satisfied its request
for Congress to act on these legislative proposals.
The Committee did not include NASA's proposed industry
exchange program because the Committee believes the program
would create significant, potential conflicts of interest. The
Committee was particularly wary of the proposal because the
Columbia Accident Investigation Board has raised concerns that
NASA employees and contractors have become too
indistinguishable.
Also, the Committee did not include NASA's legislative
proposal for a streamlined demonstration project and
alternative personnel system authorities for the entire agency
because NASA's initial proposals did not allow for sufficient
outside review of the project or Congressional oversight before
the demonstration became permanent. The Committee's provision
for an enhanced demonstration project simply increases the
number of employees who may be included in the demonstration
project from 5,000 to 8,000 individuals.
To ensure consistency of terms with specified conditions in
current law, the bill defines the conditions for a
redesignation bonus as a new term. NASA's original legislative
proposal would have changed the conditions for recruitment
bonuses from what is defined in current law for all Federal
agencies.
The service obligation in the bill's Science and Technology
Scholarship Program differs from NASA's original legislative
proposal by making the obligation two years for every academic
year that a scholarship is awarded. NASA's original legislative
proposal would have only obligated the scholarship recipient to
one year of service for every academic year that a scholarship
is awarded. The Committee believes that these scholarships
could be generous for scholarship recipients, and NASA can
recoup its investment with a longer service obligation that
would also aid NASA in retaining these scholarship recipients
as employees.
The Distinguished Scholar Appointment Authority in the bill
differs from NASA's original legislative proposal by requiring
that the students appointed directly to certain positions in
NASA receive the specified degree within two years of the
effective date of the appointment. NASA's original legislative
proposal did not specify a timeframe for the receipt of a
degree, though NASA's intent was to use this authority to
directly appoint recent college graduates. The bill also makes
clear that such positions must be advertised in accordance with
standard procedures.
The Limited Appointments to Senior Executive Service
Positions authority in the bill differs from NASA's original
legislative proposal by limiting the term of the appointment up
to three years maximum and specifying the conditions for such
appointments. NASA's original legislative proposal would have
allowed such appointments up to seven years and made only
general conditions for such appointments.
In addition, wording changes were made to virtually every
provision to focus its purpose and clarify its relation to
current law. Also, significant reporting requirements were
added.

NASA reports to Congress

The Committee believes that for NASA to fulfill the
specific and important requirements of its mission that it must
be able to fill positions and have employees who possess the
requisite skills. The Committee expects NASA to describe in
detail in the Workforce Plan each critical need of the agency
as well as the approximate number of positions and employees
that address those critical needs.
The bill directs NASA management to fully consult with its
employees, employee representatives, and the Committee when
formulating its Workforce Plan and plans for an enhanced
demonstration project. NASA has not yet explained its plans for
the enhanced demonstration project, so it is especially
critical that NASA consult with employees, employee
representatives, and the Congress well in advance of any
planned implementation. The Committee expects NASA to provide
the widest dissemination to employees and employee
representatives of the draft Workforce Plan and plans for an
enhanced demonstration project and means for them to provide
feedback. At a minimum, the Committee expects NASA to provide
both plans via a readily-accessible Internet website along with
the means to provide written feedback to the draft plans, to
advertise to employees the means to provide feedback on the
draft plans, and to conduct seminars at NASA centers with
employees and employee representatives and receive verbal
feedback on both plans. The Committee expects NASA to give such
recommendations full and fair consideration before submitting
its Workforce Plan and demonstration project plan to Congress.
The Committee expects that the report due not later than
six years after the date of enactment of this bill will be a
comprehensive evaluation and analysis of whether the workforce
authorities provided in the bill have been effective in the
recruitment, retention, and restructuring of NASA's workforce.
The Committee expects NASA to establish specific goals in the
Workforce Plan so that the agency can later evaluate its
performance in achieving those goals in this report. The six
year timeframe for this evaluation is based on testimony from
the Honorable David Walker and the Honorable Sean O'Keefe
during the July 18, 2002 Space and Aeronautics hearing on NASA
Workforce and Management Challenges where both witnesses agreed
that after five to six years the agency should have enough
information to judge the effects of additional workforce
flexibilities.
The Committee is concerned that NASA may not budget for the
bonuses, salaries, and other expenses provided in the workforce
authorities of the bill. The Committee believes that payment of
additional salaries, bonuses, incentives, and other expenses
provided by the authorities in this bill should not detract
from the budgets for other Personnel and Related Costs
accounts. The bill requires NASA to include a statement of the
total amount of appropriations requested for each fiscal year
to carry out the workforce authorities.
The Committee directs NASA to conduct a strategic resources
review of its human space flight programs. The objective of the
review is to determine the workforce and infrastructure
requirements to support NASA's human space flight goals over
the next twenty years. In carrying out the review, NASA should
state the specific human space flight goals that the agency
will pursue over the next 20 years. Given those goals, NASA's
review should determine the civil service workforce levels, on
an annual basis and by Center, necessary to support those
goals. Any workforce shortfalls should be identified. In
addition, the review should identify, by Center, the
infrastructure needed to support the twenty-year human space
flight goals enumerated by the agency. The infrastructure
review should also identify any existing infrastructure that
will need to be upgraded or modified. NASA should provide a
report containing the results of the strategic resources review
to the House Science Committee and the Senate Commerce, Science
and Transportation Committee within one year of the enactment
of this Act.

Bonuses and incentives

The bill provides several additional authorities for NASA
to offer bonuses and incentives to NASA employees to better
recruit, retain, and restructure its workforce.
The Committee used the same conditions for paying
recruitment, relocation, and retention bonuses in the bill as
in current law. The bill defines a redesignation bonus as a new
situation for awarding a bonus. A redesignation bonus may be
awarded to an individual if the Administrator determines that
NASA would be likely, in the absence of a bonus, to encounter
difficulty in filling a position and if the individual is
currently employed by the Federal Government and is newly
appointed to another position in the same geographic area. The
Committee intends for the NASA Administrator to set strict
criteria in determining whether a position is difficult to fill
so that this redesignation bonus authority is not used to
simply pay bonuses to employees who change positions.
The Committee believes that the bonus authorities provided
in sections 9804 and 9805 should primarily benefit NASA's
science and engineering workforce and not supervisors and
management officials. For this reason, the bill limits the
total amount in bonuses that may be awarded in any year to
supervisors or management officials to no more than 25 percent.
The Committee plans to monitor these bonus amounts closely in
NASA's annual reports.

NASA appointment authorities

The bill provides several additional authorities for NASA
to make appointments to positions within NASA in order to
better recruit workers to NASA positions.
The Committee regards the authority for Compensation for
Certain Excepted Personnel provided in section 2 separately
from the other workforce authorities in the bill, because this
authority simply amends the National Aeronautics and Space Act
of 1958 to update an obsolete grade 18 of the General Schedule
with level III of the Executive Schedule.

IX. Cost Estimate

A cost estimate and comparison prepared by the Director of
the Congressional Budget Office under section 402 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974 has been timely submitted to
the Committee on Science prior to the filing of this report and
is included in Section X of this report pursuant to House Rule
XIII, clause 3(c)(3).
H.R. 1085 does not contain new budget authority, credit
authority, or changes in revenues or tax expenditures. Assuming
that the sums authorized under the bill are appropriated, H.R.
1085 does authorize additional discretionary spending, as
described in the Congressional Budget Office report on the
bill, which is contained in Section X of this report.

X. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate

U.S. Congress,
Congressional Budget Office,
Washington, DC, July 24, 2003.
Hon. Sherwood L. Boehlert,
Chairman, Committee on Science,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 1085, the NASA
Flexibility Act of 2003.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Kathleen
Gramp.
Sincerely,
Douglas Holtz-Eakin,
Director.
Enclosure.

H.R. 1085--NASA Flexibility Act of 2003

Summary: H.R. 1085 would allow the National Aeronautics and
Space Administration (NASA) to modify its personnel and
workforce practices. Under the bill, NASA would be allowed to
pay higher bonuses to attract and retain individuals with
special expertise, as well as to increase compensation or
benefits for certain positions. In addition, the bill would
authorize the appropriation of $10 million a year for a new
science and technology scholarship program.
Assuming appropriation of the necessary amounts, CBO
estimates that implementing H.R. 1085 would cost $70 million
over the 2004-2008 period. (In 2003, about $2 billion was
appropriated for NASA's personnel costs.) Enacting H.R. 1085
would not affect direct spending or revenues.
H.R. 1085 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
and would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal
governments.
Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated
budgetary impact of H.R. 1085 is shown in the following table.
The costs of this legislation fall within budget functions 250
(general science, space, and technology) and 400
(transportation).

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--
------------------------------------------------------
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHANGES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION
Estimated Authorization Level............................ 14 15 17 19 19
Estimated Outlays........................................ 5 11 16 19 19
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Basis of estimate: For this estimate, CBO assumes that H.R.
1085 will be enacted by the end of fiscal year 2003. We assume
that the necessary amounts will be appropriated for each year
and that outlays will occur at historical rates for NASA's
personnel costs.
This bill would authorize the appropriation of $10 million
a year for a science and technology scholarship program.
Recipients would be required to work for NASA for a minimum of
two--but no more than four--years.
Based on information from NASA, CBO estimates that
expenditures for the new personnel benefits authorized by the
bill would cost $4 million to $7 million a year (in 2003
dollars) in most or all of the next five years, depending on
how extensively the agency used some of the new authorities.
CBO estimates that spending for higher bonuses would account
for most of the additional cost. According to NASA, over 5,000
of its roughly 18,000 employees will be eligible to retire by
2008, half of whom are in scientific and engineering fields.
Under H.R. 1085, new employees could receive bonuses
equivalent to 100 percent of their salary under certain
conditions (compared to 25 percent under current law), while
current employees with critical skills could be given a one-
time bonus equivalent to 50 percent of their salary (compared
to 25 percent under current law). Based on information from
NASA on how it expects to use the new authority, CBO estimates
such bonuses would cost a total of about $25 million over the
next five years, assuming that such payments would likely
increase over time in response to recruitment needs and payment
schedules. The estimated cost is equivalent to giving the
maximum bonus to an average of 90 individuals a year over the
2004-2008 period, or smaller bonuses to a larger number of
people.
Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: H.R. 1085
contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as
defined in UMRA and would impose no costs on state, local, or
tribal governments.
Previous CBO estimates: CBO previously prepared cost
estimates for two bills that were similar to H.R. 1085. All
three bills contain similar provisions, but the estimated cost
of H.R. 1085 is lower than for the other two because it would
not authorize a personnel exchange program with industrial
firms. The two other cost estimates were for H.R. 1836, the
Civil Service and National Security Personnel Improvement Act,
as ordered reported by the House Committee on Government Reform
on May 8, 2003 (the cost estimate was transmitted on May 15,
2003); and for S. 610, a bill to amend the provisions of title
5, United States Code, to provide for workforce flexibilities
and certain federal personnel provisions relating to the
National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and for other
purposes, as ordered reported by the Senate Committee on
Governmental Affairs on June 17, 2003 (the cost estimate was
transmitted on June 25, 2003).
Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Kathleen Gramp; Impact
on State, Local, and Tribal Governments: Leo Lex; and Impact on
the Private Sector: Paige Piper/Bach.
Estimate approved by: Robert A. Sunshine, Assistant
Director for Budget Analysis.

XI. Compliance With Public Law 104-4 (Unfunded Mandates)

H.R. 1085 contains no unfunded mandates.

XII. Committee Oversight Findings and Recommendations

The Committee on Science's oversight findings and
recommendations are reflected in the body of this report.

XIII. Statement on General Performance Goals and Objectives

Pursuant to clause (3)(c) of House rule XIII, the goals of
H.R. 1085 are to authorize specified workforce authorities to
NASA for improved recruitment and retention; to require that
NASA provide certain notification, planning, and reporting to
Congress, NASA employees, and NASA employee representatives
about the use of these workforce authorities; and to establish
a science and technology scholarship program.

XIV. Constitutional Authority Statement

Article I, section 8 of the Constitution of the United
States grants Congress the authority to enact H.R. 1085.

XV. Federal Advisory Committee Statement

H.R. 1085 does not establish nor authorize the
establishment of any advisory committee.

XVI. Congressional Accountability Act

The Committee finds that H.R. 1085 does not relate to the
terms and conditions of employment or access to public services
or accommodations within the meaning of section 102(b)(3) of
the Congressional Accountability Act (Public Law 104-1).

XVII. Statement on Preemption of State, Local, or Tribal Law

This bill is not intended to preempt any state, local, or
tribal law.

XVIII. Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported

In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, 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
matter is printed in italic, existing law in which no change is
proposed is shown in roman):

SECTION 203 OF THE NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ACT OF 1958

FUNCTIONS OF THE ADMINISTRATION

Sec. 203. (a) * * *

* * * * * * *

(c) In the performance of its functions the Administration is
authorized--
(1) * * *
(2) to appoint and fix the compensation of such
officers and employees as may be necessary to carry out
such functions. Such officers and employees shall be
appointed in accordance with the civil-service laws and
their compensation fixed in accordance with the
Classification Act of 1949, except that (A) to the
extent the Administrator deems such action necessary to
the discharge of his responsibilities, he may appoint
not more than four hundred and twenty-five of the
scientific, engineering, and administrative personnel
of the Administration without regard to such laws, and
may fix the compensation of such personnel not in
excess of [the highest rate of grade 18 of the General
Schedule of the Classification Act of 1949, as
amended,] the rate of basic pay payable for level III
of the Executive Schedule, and (B) to the extent the
Administrator deems such action necessary to recruit
specially qualified scientific and engineering talent,
he may establish the entrance grade for scientific and
engineering personnel without previous service in the
Federal Government at a level up to two grades higher
than the grade provided for such personnel under the
General Schedule established by the Classification Act
of 1949, and fix their compensation accordingly;

* * * * * * *

----------

TITLE 5, UNITED STATES CODE

* * * * * * *

PART III--EMPLOYEES

* * * * * * *

Subpart I--Miscellaneous

Personnel flexibilities relating to the Internal Revenue Serv9501
* * * * * * *
9801 National Aeronautics and Space Administration....................

* * * * * * *

CHAPTER 98--NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION

Sec.
9801. Definitions.
9802. Planning, notification, and reporting requirements.
9803. Restrictions.
9804. Recruitment, redesignation, and relocation bonuses.
9805. Retention bonuses.
9806. Term appointments.
9807. Pay authority for critical positions.
9808. Assignments of intergovernmental personnel.
9809. Enhanced demonstration project authority.
9810. Science and technology scholarship program.
9811. Distinguished scholar appointment authority.
9812. Travel and transportation expenses of certain new appointees.
9813. Annual leave enhancements.
9814. Limited appointments to Senior Executive Service positions.
9815. Qualifications pay.
9816. Reporting requirement.

Sec. 9801. Definitions

For purposes of this chapter--
(1) the term ``Administration'' means the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration;
(2) the term ``Administrator'' means the
Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration;
(3) the term ``critical need'' means a specific and
important requirement of the Administration's mission
that the Administration is unable to fulfill because
the Administration lacks the appropriate employees
because--
(A) of the inability to fill positions; or
(B) employees do not possess the requisite
skills;
(4) the term ``employee'' means an individual
employed in or under the Administration;
(5) the term ``workforce plan'' means the plan
required under section 9802(a);
(6) the term ``appropriate committees of Congress''
means--
(A) the Committees on Government Reform,
Science, and Appropriations of the House of
Representatives; and
(B) the Committees on Governmental Affairs,
Commerce, Science, and Transportation, and
Appropriations of the Senate;
(7) the term ``redesignation bonus'' means a bonus
under section 9804 paid to an individual described in
subsection (a)(2) thereof;
(8) the term ``supervisor'' has the meaning given
such term by section 7103(a)(10); and
(9) the term ``management official'' has the meaning
given such term by section 7103(a)(11).

Sec. 9802. Planning, notification, and reporting requirements

(a) Not later than 90 days before exercising any of the
workforce authorities made available under this chapter, the
Administrator shall submit a written plan to the appropriate
committees of Congress. Such plan shall be developed in
consultation with the Office of Personnel Management.
(b) A workforce plan shall include a description of--
(1) each critical need of the Administration and the
criteria used in the identification of that need;
(2)(A) the functions, approximate number, and classes
or other categories of positions or employees that--
(i) address critical needs; and
(ii) would be eligible for each authority
proposed to be exercised under this chapter;
and
(B) how the exercise of those authorities with
respect to the eligible positions or employees involved
would address each critical need identified under
paragraph (1);
(3)(A) any critical need identified under paragraph
(1) which would not be addressed by the authorities
made available under this chapter; and
(B) the reasons why those needs would not be so
addressed;
(4) the specific criteria to be used in determining
which individuals may receive the benefits described
under sections 9804 and 9805 (including the criteria
for granting bonuses in the absence of a critical
need), and how the level of those benefits will be
determined;
(5) the safeguards or other measures that will be
applied to ensure that this chapter is carried out in a
manner consistent with merit system principles;
(6) the means by which employees will be afforded the
notification required under subsections (c) and
(d)(1)(B);
(7) the methods that will be used to determine if the
authorities exercised under this chapter have
successfully addressed each critical need identified
under paragraph (1);
(8)(A) the recruitment methods used by the
Administration before the enactment of this chapter to
recruit highly qualified individuals; and
(B) the changes the Administration will implement
after the enactment of this chapter in order to improve
its recruitment of highly qualified individuals,
including how it intends to use--
(i) nongovernmental recruitment or placement
agencies; and
(ii) Internet technologies;
(9) any reforms to the Administration's workforce
management practices recommended by the Columbia
Accident Investigation Board, the extent to which those
recommendations were accepted, and, if necessary, the
reasons why any of those recommendations were not
accepted; and
(10) the safeguards and other measures that will be
applied to ensure that this chapter is carried out in a
manner that does not compromise the safety or survival
of any spacecraft or crew thereof.
(c) Not later than 60 days before first exercising any of the
workforce authorities made available under this chapter, the
Administrator shall provide to all employees the workforce plan
and any additional information which the Administrator
considers appropriate.
(d)(1)(A) The Administrator may from time to time modify the
workforce plan. Not later than 60 days before implementing any
such modifications, the Administrator shall submit a
description of the proposed modifications to the appropriate
committees of Congress.
(B) Not later than 60 days before implementing any such
modifications, the Administrator shall provide an appropriately
modified plan to all employees of the Administration and to the
appropriate committees of Congress.
(2) Any reference in this chapter or any other provision of
law to the workforce plan shall be considered to include any
modification made in accordance with this subsection.
(e) Before submitting any written plan under subsection (a)
(or modification under subsection (d)) to the appropriate
committees of Congress, the Administrator shall--
(1) provide to each employee representative
representing any employees who might be affected by
such plan (or modification) a copy of the proposed plan
(or modification);
(2) give each representative 30 calendar days (unless
extraordinary circumstances require earlier action) to
review and make recommendations with respect to the
proposed plan (or modification); and
(3) give any recommendations received from any such
representatives under paragraph (2) full and fair
consideration in deciding whether or how to proceed
with respect to the proposed plan (or modification).
(f) None of the workforce authorities made available under
this chapter may be exercised in a manner inconsistent with the
workforce plan.
(g) Whenever the Administration submits its performance plan
under section 1115 of title 31 to the Office of Management and
Budget for any year, the Administration shall at the same time
submit a copy of such plan to the appropriate committees of
Congress.
(h) Not later than 6 years after the date of enactment of
this chapter, the Administrator shall submit to the appropriate
committees of Congress an evaluation and analysis of the
actions taken by the Administration under this chapter,
including--
(1) an evaluation, using the methods described in
subsection (b)(7), of whether the authorities exercised
under this chapter successfully addressed each critical
need identified under subsection (b)(1);
(2) to the extent that they did not, an explanation
of the reasons why any critical need (apart from the
ones under subsection (b)(3)) was not successfully
addressed; and
(3) recommendations for how the Administration could
address any remaining critical need and could prevent
those that have been addressed from recurring.
(i) The budget request for the Administration for the first
fiscal year beginning after the date of enactment of this
chapter and for each fiscal year thereafter shall include a
statement of the total amount of appropriations requested for
such fiscal year to carry out this chapter.

Sec. 9803. Restrictions

(a) None of the workforce authorities made available under
this chapter may be exercised with respect to any officer who
is appointed by the President, by and with the advice and
consent of the Senate.
(b) Unless specifically stated otherwise, all workforce
authorities made available under this chapter shall be subject
to section 5307.
(c)(1) None of the workforce authorities made available under
section 9804, 9805, 9806, 9807, 9810, 9813, 9814, 9815, or 9816
may be exercised with respect to a political appointee.
(2) For purposes of this subsection, the term ``political
appointee'' means an employee who holds--
(A) a position which has been excepted from the
competitive service by reason of its confidential,
policy-determining, policy-making, or policy-advocating
character; or
(B) a position in the Senior Executive Service as a
noncareer appointee (as such term is defined in section
3132(a)).

Sec. 9804. Recruitment, redesignation, and relocation bonuses

(a) Notwithstanding section 5753, the Administrator may pay a
bonus to an individual, in accordance with the workforce plan
and subject to the limitations in this section, if--
(1) the Administrator determines that the
Administration would be likely, in the absence of a
bonus, to encounter difficulty in filling a position;
and
(2) the individual--
(A) is newly appointed as an employee of the
Federal Government;
(B) is currently employed by the Federal
Government and is newly appointed to another
position in the same geographic area; or
(C) is currently employed by the Federal
Government and is required to relocate to a
different geographic area to accept a position
with the Administration.
(b) If the position is described as addressing a critical
need in the workforce plan under section 9802(b)(2)(A), the
amount of a bonus may not exceed--
(1) 50 percent of the employee's annual rate of basic
pay (including comparability payments under sections
5304 and 5304a) as of the beginning of the service
period multiplied by the service period specified under
subsection (d)(1)(B)(i); or
(2) 100 percent of the employee's annual rate of
basic pay (including comparability payments under
sections 5304 and 5304a) as of the beginning of the
service period.
(c) If the position is not described as addressing a critical
need in the workforce plan under section 9802(b)(2)(A), the
amount of a bonus may not exceed--
(1) 25 percent of the employee's annual rate of basic
pay (including comparability payments under sections
5304 and 5304a) as of the beginning of the service
period multiplied by the service period specified under
subsection (d)(1)(B)(i); or
(2) 100 percent of the employee's annual rate of
basic pay (including comparability payments under
sections 5304 and 5304a) as of the beginning of the
service period.
(d)(1)(A) Payment of a bonus under this section shall be
contingent upon the individual entering into a service
agreement with the Administration.
(B) At a minimum, the service agreement shall include--
(i) the required service period;
(ii) the method of payment, including a payment
schedule, which may include a lump-sum payment,
installment payments, or a combination thereof;
(iii) the amount of the bonus and the basis for
calculating that amount; and
(iv) the conditions under which the agreement may be
terminated before the agreed-upon service period has
been completed, and the effect of the termination.
(2) For purposes of determinations under subsections (b)(1)
and (c)(1), the employee's service period shall be expressed as
the number equal to the full years and twelfth parts thereof,
rounding the fractional part of a month to the nearest twelfth
part of a year. The service period may not be less than 6
months and may not exceed 4 years.
(3) A bonus under this section may not be considered to be
part of the basic pay of an employee.
(e) Before paying a bonus under this section, the
Administration shall establish a plan for paying recruitment,
redesignation, and relocation bonuses, subject to approval by
the Office of Personnel Management.
(f) No more than 25 percent of the total amount in bonuses
awarded under subsection (a) in any year may be awarded to
supervisors or management officials.

Sec. 9805. Retention bonuses

(a) Notwithstanding section 5754, the Administrator may pay a
bonus to an employee, in accordance with the workforce plan and
subject to the limitations in this section, if the
Administrator determines that--
(1) the unusually high or unique qualifications of
the employee or a special need of the Administration
for the employee's services makes it essential to
retain the employee; and
(2) the employee would be likely to leave in the
absence of a retention bonus.
(b) If the position is described as addressing a critical
need in the workforce plan under section 9802(b)(2)(A), the
amount of a bonus may not exceed 50 percent of the employee's
annual rate of basic pay (including comparability payments
under sections 5304 and 5304a).
(c) If the position is not described as addressing a critical
need in the workforce plan under section 9802(b)(2)(A), the
amount of a bonus may not exceed 25 percent of the employee's
annual rate of basic pay (including comparability payments
under sections 5304 and 5304a).
(d)(1)(A) Payment of a bonus under this section shall be
contingent upon the employee entering into a service agreement
with the Administration.
(B) At a minimum, the service agreement shall include--
(i) the required service period;
(ii) the method of payment, including a payment
schedule, which may include a lump-sum payment,
installment payments, or a combination thereof;
(iii) the amount of the bonus and the basis for
calculating the amount; and
(iv) the conditions under which the agreement may be
terminated before the agreed-upon service period has
been completed, and the effect of the termination.
(2) The employee's service period shall be expressed as the
number equal to the full years and twelfth parts thereof,
rounding the fractional part of a month to the nearest twelfth
part of a year. The service period may not be less than 6
months and may not exceed 4 years.
(3) Notwithstanding paragraph (1), a service agreement is not
required if the Administration pays a bonus in biweekly
installments and sets the installment payment at the full bonus
percentage rate established for the employee, with no portion
of the bonus deferred. In this case, the Administration shall
inform the employee in writing of any decision to change the
retention bonus payments. The employee shall continue to accrue
entitlement to the retention bonus through the end of the pay
period in which such written notice is provided.
(e) A bonus under this section may not be considered to be
part of the basic pay of an employee.
(f) An employee is not entitled to a retention bonus under
this section during a service period previously established for
that employee under section 5753 or under section 9804.
(g) No more than 25 percent of the total amount in bonuses
awarded under subsection (a) in any year may be awarded to
supervisors or management officials.

Sec. 9806. Term appointments

(a) The Administrator may authorize term appointments within
the Administration under subchapter I of chapter 33, for a
period of not less than 1 year and not more than 6 years.
(b) Notwithstanding chapter 33 or any other provision of law
relating to the examination, certification, and appointment of
individuals in the competitive service, the Administrator may
convert an employee serving under a term appointment to a
permanent appointment in the competitive service within the
Administration without further competition if--
(1) such individual was appointed under open,
competitive examination under subchapter I of chapter
33 to the term position;
(2) the announcement for the term appointment from
which the conversion is made stated that there was
potential for subsequent conversion to a career-
conditional or career appointment;
(3) the employee has completed at least 2 years of
current continuous service under a term appointment in
the competitive service;
(4) the employee's performance under such term
appointment was at least fully successful or
equivalent; and
(5) the position to which such employee is being
converted under this section is in the same
occupational series, is in the same geographic
location, and provides no greater promotion potential
than the term position for which the competitive
examination was conducted.
(c) Notwithstanding chapter 33 or any other provision of law
relating to the examination, certification, and appointment of
individuals in the competitive service, the Administrator may
convert an employee serving under a term appointment to a
permanent appointment in the competitive service within the
Administration through internal competitive promotion
procedures if the conditions under paragraphs (1) through (4)
of subsection (b) are met.
(d) An employee converted under this section becomes a
career-conditional employee, unless the employee has otherwise
completed the service requirements for career tenure.
(e) An employee converted to career or career-conditional
employment under this section acquires competitive status upon
conversion.

Sec. 9807. Pay authority for critical positions

(a) In this section, the term ``position'' means--
(1) a position to which chapter 51 applies, including
a position in the Senior Executive Service;
(2) a position under the Executive Schedule under
sections 5312 through 5317;
(3) a position established under section 3104; or
(4) a senior-level position to which section
5376(a)(1) applies.
(b) Authority under this section--
(1) may be exercised only with respect to a position
that--
(A) is described as addressing a critical
need in the workforce plan under section
9802(b)(2)(A); and
(B) requires expertise of an extremely high
level in a scientific, technical, professional,
or administrative field;
(2) may be exercised only to the extent necessary to
recruit or retain an individual exceptionally well
qualified for the position; and
(3) may be exercised only in retaining employees of
the Administration or in appointing individuals who
were not employees of another Federal agency as defined
under section 5102(a)(1).
(c)(1) Notwithstanding section 5377, the Administrator may
fix the rate of basic pay for a position in the Administration
in accordance with this section. The Administrator may not
delegate this authority.
(2) The number of positions with pay fixed under this section
may not exceed 10 at any time.
(d)(1) The rate of basic pay fixed under this section may not
be less than the rate of basic pay (including any comparability
payments) which would otherwise be payable for the position
involved if this section had never been enacted.
(2) The annual rate of basic pay fixed under this section may
not exceed the per annum rate of salary payable under section
104 of title 3.
(3) Notwithstanding any provision of section 5307, in the
case of an employee who, during any calendar year, is receiving
pay at a rate fixed under this section, no allowance,
differential, bonus, award, or similar cash payment may be paid
to such employee if, or to the extent that, when added to basic
pay paid or payable to such employee (for service performed in
such calendar year as an employee in the executive branch or as
an employee outside the executive branch to whom chapter 51
applies), such payment would cause the total to exceed the per
annum rate of salary which, as of the end of such calendar
year, is payable under section 104 of title 3.

Sec. 9808. Assignments of intergovernmental personnel

For purposes of applying the third sentence of section
3372(a) (relating to the authority of the head of a Federal
agency to extend the period of an employee's assignment to or
from a State or local government, institution of higher
education, or other organization), the Administrator may, with
the concurrence of the employee and the government or
organization concerned, take any action which would be
allowable if such sentence had been amended by striking ``two''
and inserting ``four''.

Sec. 9809. Enhanced demonstration project authority

When conducting a demonstration project at the
Administration, section 4703(d)(1)(A) may be applied by
substituting ``8,000'' for ``5,000''.

Sec. 9810. Science and technology scholarship program

(a)(1) The Administrator shall establish a National
Aeronautics and Space Administration Science and Technology
Scholarship Program to award scholarships to individuals that
is designed to recruit and prepare students for careers in the
Administration.
(2) Individuals shall be selected to receive scholarships
under this section through a competitive process primarily on
the basis of academic merit, with consideration given to
financial need and the goal of promoting the participation of
individuals identified in section 33 or 34 of the Science and
Engineering Equal Opportunities Act.
(3) To carry out the Program the Administrator shall enter
into contractual agreements with individuals selected under
paragraph (2) under which the individuals agree to serve as
full-time employees of the Administration, for the period
described in subsection (f)(1), in positions needed by the
Administration and for which the individuals are qualified, in
exchange for receiving a scholarship.
(b) In order to be eligible to participate in the Program, an
individual must--
(1) be enrolled or accepted for enrollment as a full-
time student at an institution of higher education, as
a junior or senior undergraduate or graduate student,
in an academic field or discipline described in the
list made available under subsection (d);
(2) be a United States citizen or permanent resident;
and
(3) at the time of the initial scholarship award, not
be an employee (as defined in section 2105).
(c) An individual seeking a scholarship under this section
shall submit an application to the Administrator at such time,
in such manner, and containing such information, agreements, or
assurances as the Administrator may require.
(d) The Administrator shall make publicly available a list of
academic programs and fields of study for which scholarships
under the Program may be utilized and shall update the list as
necessary.
(e)(1) The Administrator may provide a scholarship under the
Program for an academic year if the individual applying for the
scholarship has submitted to the Administrator, as part of the
application required under subsection (c), a proposed academic
program leading to a degree in a program or field of study on
the list made available under subsection (d).
(2) An individual may not receive a scholarship under this
section for more than 4 academic years, unless the
Administrator grants a waiver.
(3) The dollar amount of a scholarship under this section for
an academic year shall be determined under regulations issued
by the Administrator, but shall in no case exceed the cost of
attendance.
(4) A scholarship provided under this section may be expended
for tuition, fees, and other authorized expenses as established
by the Administrator by regulation.
(5) The Administrator may enter into a contractual agreement
with an institution of higher education under which the amounts
provided for a scholarship under this section for tuition,
fees, and other authorized expenses are paid directly to the
institution with respect to which the scholarship is provided.
(f)(1) The period of service for which an individual shall be
obligated to serve as an employee of the Administration is,
except as provided in subsection (h)(2), 24 months for each
academic year for which a scholarship under this section is
provided.
(2)(A) Except as provided in subparagraph (B), obligated
service under paragraph (1) shall begin not later than 60 days
after the individual obtains the educational degree for which
the scholarship was provided.
(B) The Administrator may defer the obligation of an
individual to provide a period of service under paragraph (1)
if the Administrator determines that such a deferral is
appropriate. The Administrator shall prescribe the terms and
conditions under which a service obligation may be deferred
through regulation.
(g)(1) Scholarship recipients who fail to maintain a high
level of academic standing, as defined by the Administrator by
regulation, who are dismissed from their educational
institutions for disciplinary reasons, or who voluntarily
terminate academic training before graduation from the
educational program for which the scholarship was awarded,
shall be in breach of their contractual agreement and, in lieu
of any service obligation arising under such agreement, shall
be liable to the United States for repayment within 1 year
after the date of default of all scholarship funds paid to them
and to the institution of higher education on their behalf
under the agreement, except as provided in subsection (h)(2).
The repayment period may be extended by the Administrator when
determined to be necessary, as established by regulation.
(2) Scholarship recipients who, for any reason, fail to begin
or complete their service obligation after completion of
academic training, or fail to comply with the terms and
conditions of deferment established by the Administrator
pursuant to subsection (f)(2)(B), shall be in breach of their
contractual agreement. When recipients breach their agreements
for the reasons stated in the preceding sentence, the recipient
shall be liable to the United States for an amount equal to--
(A) the total amount of scholarships received by such
individual under this section; plus
(B) the interest on the amounts of such awards which
would be payable if at the time the awards were
received they were loans bearing interest at the
maximum legal prevailing rate, as determined by the
Treasurer of the United States,
multiplied by 3.
(h)(1) Any obligation of an individual incurred under the
Program (or a contractual agreement thereunder) for service or
payment shall be canceled upon the death of the individual.
(2) The Administrator shall by regulation provide for the
partial or total waiver or suspension of any obligation of
service or payment incurred by an individual under the Program
(or a contractual agreement thereunder) whenever compliance by
the individual is impossible or would involve extreme hardship
to the individual, or if enforcement of such obligation with
respect to the individual would be contrary to the best
interests of the Government.
(i) For purposes of this section--
(1) the term ``cost of attendance'' has the meaning
given that term in section 472 of the Higher Education
Act of 1965;
(2) the term ``institution of higher education'' has
the meaning given that term in section 101(a) of the
Higher Education Act of 1965; and
(3) the term ``Program'' means the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration Science and
Technology Scholarship Program established under this
section.
(j)(1) There is authorized to be appropriated to the
Administration for the Program $10,000,000 for each fiscal
year.
(2) Amounts appropriated under this section shall remain
available for 2 fiscal years.

Sec. 9811. Distinguished scholar appointment authority

(a) In this section--
(1) the term ``professional position'' means a
position that is classified to an occupational series
identified by the Office of Personnel Management as a
position that--
(A) requires education and training in the
principles, concepts, and theories of the
occupation that typically can be gained only
through completion of a specified curriculum at
a recognized college or university; and
(B) is covered by the Group Coverage
Qualification Standard for Professional and
Scientific Positions; and
(2) the term ``research position'' means a position
in a professional series that primarily involves
scientific inquiry or investigation, or research-type
exploratory development of a creative or scientific
nature, where the knowledge required to perform the
work successfully is acquired typically and primarily
through graduate study.
(b) The Administration may appoint, without regard to the
provisions of section 3304(b) and sections 3309 through 3318,
but subject to subsection (c), candidates directly to General
Schedule professional, competitive service positions in the
Administration for which public notice has been given (in
accordance with regulations of the Office of Personnel
Management), if--
(1) with respect to a position at the GS-7 level, the
individual--
(A) received, within 2 years before the
effective date of the appointment, from an
accredited institution authorized to grant
baccalaureate degrees, a baccalaureate degree
in a field of study for which possession of
that degree in conjunction with academic
achievements meets the qualification standards
as prescribed by the Office of Personnel
Management for the position to which the
individual is being appointed; and
(B) achieved a cumulative grade point average
of 3.0 or higher on a 4.0 scale and a grade
point average of 3.5 or higher for courses in
the field of study required to qualify for the
position;
(2) with respect to a position at the GS-9 level, the
individual--
(A) received, within 2 years before the
effective date of the appointment, from an
accredited institution authorized to grant
graduate degrees, a graduate degree in a field
of study for which possession of that degree
meets the qualification standards at this grade
level as prescribed by the Office of Personnel
Management for the position to which the
individual is being appointed; and
(B) achieved a cumulative grade point average
of 3.5 or higher on a 4.0 scale in graduate
coursework in the field of study required for
the position;
(3) with respect to a position at the GS-11 level,
the individual--
(A) received, within 2 years before the
effective date of the appointment, from an
accredited institution authorized to grant
graduate degrees, a graduate degree in a field
of study for which possession of that degree
meets the qualification standards at this grade
level as prescribed by the Office of Personnel
Management for the position to which the
individual is being appointed; and
(B) achieved a cumulative grade point average
of 3.5 or higher on a 4.0 scale in graduate
coursework in the field of study required for
the position; or
(4) with respect to a research position at the GS-12
level, the individual--
(A) received, within 2 years before the
effective date of the appointment, from an
accredited institution authorized to grant
graduate degrees, a graduate degree in a field
of study for which possession of that degree
meets the qualification standards at this grade
level as prescribed by the Office of Personnel
Management for the position to which the
individual is being appointed; and
(B) achieved a cumulative grade point average
of 3.5 or higher on a 4.0 scale in graduate
coursework in the field of study required for
the position.
(c) In making any selections under this section, preference
eligibles who meet the criteria for distinguished scholar
appointments shall be considered ahead of nonpreference
eligibles.
(d) An appointment made under this authority shall be a
career-conditional appointment in the competitive civil
service.

Sec. 9812. Travel and transportation expenses of certain new appointees

(a) In this section, the term ``new appointee'' means--
(1) a person newly appointed or reinstated to Federal
service to the Administration to--
(A) a career or career-conditional
appointment;
(B) a term appointment;
(C) an excepted service appointment that
provides for noncompetitive conversion to a
career or career-conditional appointment;
(D) a career or limited term Senior Executive
Service appointment;
(E) an appointment made under section
203(c)(2)(A) of the National Aeronautics and
Space Act of 1958 (42 U.S.C. 2473(c)(2)(A));
(F) an appointment to a position established
under section 3104; or
(G) an appointment to a position established
under section 5108; or
(2) a student trainee who, upon completion of
academic work, is converted to an appointment in the
Administration that is identified in paragraph (1) in
accordance with an appropriate authority.
(b) The Administrator may pay the travel, transportation, and
relocation expenses of a new appointee to the same extent, in
the same manner, and subject to the same conditions as the
payment of such expenses under sections 5724, 5724a, 5724b, and
5724c to an employee transferred in the interests of the United
States Government.

Sec. 9813. Annual leave enhancements

(a)(1) In this section--
(A) the term ``newly appointed employee'' means an
individual who is first appointed--
(i) as an employee of the Federal Government;
or
(ii) as an employee of the Federal Government
following a break in service of at least 90
days after that individual's last period of
Federal employment, other than--
(I) employment under the Student
Educational Employment Program
administered by the Office of Personnel
Management;
(II) employment as a law clerk
trainee;
(III) employment under a short-term
temporary appointing authority while a
student during periods of vacation from
the educational institution at which
the student is enrolled;
(IV) employment under a provisional
appointment if the new appointment is
permanent and immediately follows the
provisional appointment; or
(V) employment under a temporary
appointment that is neither full-time
nor the principal employment of the
individual;
(B) the term ``period of qualified non-Federal
service'' means any period of service performed by an
individual that--
(i) was performed in a position the duties of
which were directly related to the duties of
the position in the Administration which that
individual will fill as a newly appointed
employee; and
(ii) except for this section, would not
otherwise be service performed by an employee
for purposes of section 6303; and
(C) the term ``directly related to the duties of the
position'' means duties and responsibilities in the
same line of work which require similar qualifications.
(2)(A) For purposes of section 6303, the Administrator may
deem a period of qualified non-Federal service performed by a
newly appointed employee to be a period of service of equal
length performed as an employee.
(B) A decision under paragraph (A) to treat a period of
qualified non-Federal service as if it were service performed
as an employee shall continue to apply so long as that
individual serves in or under the Administration.
(3)(A) Notwithstanding section 6303(a), the annual leave
accrual rate for an employee of the Administration in a
position paid under section 5376 or 5383, or for an employee in
an equivalent category whose rate of basic pay is greater than
the rate payable at GS-15, step 10, shall be 1 day for each
full biweekly pay period.
(B) The accrual rate established under this subsection shall
continue to apply to the employee so long as such employee
serves in or under the Administration.

Sec. 9814. Limited appointments to Senior Executive Service positions

(a) In this section, the terms ``career reserved position'',
``Senior Executive Service position'', ``senior executive'' and
``career appointee'' have the meanings set forth in section
3132(a).
(b) Subject to succeeding provisions of this section, the
Administrator may, notwithstanding any other provision of this
title, fill a career reserved position on a temporary basis,
but only if--
(1) such position is vacant as a result of--
(A) the separation of the incumbent; or
(B) the temporary absence of the incumbent
due to illness, training, or reassignment; or
(2) such position is or would be difficult to fill in
any other manner due to the fact that such position is
likely to be eliminated within the next 2 years.
(c) Notwithstanding sections 3132 and 3394(b), an appointment
made by the Administrator under subsection (b) shall not exceed
2 years.
(d) The Administrator may extend an appointment under
subsection (b) for as long as necessary to meet a contingency
described in subsection (b)(1), but for not to exceed 1 year
and not if the circumstance described in subsection (b)(2)
pertains.
(e) The number of career reserved positions filled under
subsection (b) may not at any time exceed 10 percent of the
total number of Senior Executive Service positions then
authorized for the Administration under section 3133.
(f) An individual appointed to a career reserved position on
a temporary basis under subsection (b) shall, if such
individual was so appointed from a civil service position held
under a career or career-conditional appointment, be entitled,
upon completion of that temporary appointment, to be reemployed
in the position from which such individual was so appointed (or
an equivalent position), in accordance with such regulations as
the Office of Personnel Management may prescribe.
(g) An appointment to a career reserved position on a
temporary basis under subsection (b) may not be made without
the prior approval of the Office of Personnel Management if the
individual--
(1) is to be appointed--
(A) from outside the Federal Government; or
(B) from a civil service position held under
an appointment other than a career or career-
conditional appointment; or
(2) is a senior executive, but not a career
appointee.
(h) An individual appointed to a career reserved position on
a temporary basis under subsection (b) who is not a career
appointee shall, for purposes of performance awards under
section 5384, be treated as a career appointee.

Sec. 9815. Qualifications pay

(a) Notwithstanding section 5334, the Administrator may set
the pay of an employee paid under the General Schedule at any
step within the pay range for the grade of the position, if
such employee--
(1) possesses unusually high or unique
qualifications; and
(2) is assigned--
(A) new duties, without a change of position;
or
(B) to a new position.
(b) If an exercise of the authority under this section
relates to a current employee selected for another position
within the Administration, a determination shall be made that
the employee's contribution in the new position will exceed
that in the former position, before setting pay under this
section.
(c) Pay as set under this section is basic pay for such
purposes as pay set under section 5334.
(d) If the employee serves for at least 1 year in the
position for which the pay determination under this section was
made, or a successor position, the pay earned under such
position may be used in succeeding actions to set pay under
chapter 53.
(e) Before setting any employee's pay under this section, the
Administrator shall submit a plan to the Office of Personnel
Management and the appropriate committees of Congress, that
includes--
(1) criteria for approval of actions to set pay under
this section;
(2) the level of approval required to set pay under
this section;
(3) all types of actions and positions to be covered;
(4) the relationship between the exercise of
authority under this section and the use of other pay
incentives; and
(5) a process to evaluate the effectiveness of this
section.

Sec. 9816. Reporting requirement

The Administrator shall submit to the appropriate committees
of Congress, not later than February 28 of each of the next 6
years beginning after the date of enactment of this chapter, a
report that provides the following:
(1) A summary of all bonuses paid under subsections
(b)-(c) of section 9804 during the preceding fiscal
year. Such summary shall include the total amount of
bonuses paid, the total number of bonuses paid, the
percentage of bonuses awarded to supervisors and
management officials, and the average percentage used
to calculate the total average bonus amount, under each
of those subsections.
(2) A summary of all bonuses paid under subsections
(b)-(c) of section 9805 during the preceding fiscal
year. Such summary shall include the total amount of
bonuses paid, the total number of bonuses paid, the
percentage of bonuses awarded to supervisors and
management officials, and the average percentage used
to calculate the total average bonus amount, under each
of those subsections.
(3) The total number of term appointments converted
during the preceding fiscal year under section 9806
and, of that total number, the number of conversions
that were made to address a critical need described in
the workforce plan pursuant to section 9802(b)(2).
(4) The number of positions for which the rate of
basic pay was fixed under section 9807 during the
preceding fiscal year, the number of positions for
which the rate of basic pay under such section was
terminated during the preceding fiscal year, and the
number of times the rate of basic pay was fixed under
such section to address a critical need described in
the workforce plan pursuant to section 9802(b)(2).
(5) The number of scholarships awarded under section
9810 during the preceding fiscal year and the number of
scholarship recipients appointed by the Administration
during the preceding fiscal year.
(6) The total number of distinguished scholar
appointments made under section 9811 during the
preceding fiscal year and, of that total number, the
number of appointments that were made to address a
critical need described in the workforce plan pursuant
to section 9802(b)(2).
(7) The average amount paid per appointee, and the
largest amount paid to any appointee, under section
9812 during the preceding fiscal year for travel and
transportation expenses.
(8) The total number of employees who were awarded
enhanced annual leave under section 9813 during the
preceding fiscal year; of that total number, the number
of employees who were serving in a position addressing
a critical need described in the workforce plan
pursuant to section 9802(b)(2); and, for employees in
each of those respective groups, the average amount of
additional annual leave such employees earned in the
preceding fiscal year (over and above what they would
have earned absent section 9813).
(9) The total number of appointments made under
section 9814 during the preceding fiscal year and, of
that total number, the number of appointments that were
made to address a critical need described in the
workforce plan pursuant to section 9802(b)(2).
(10) The number of employees for whom the
Administrator set the pay under section 9815 during the
preceding fiscal year and the number of times pay was
set under such section to address a critical need
described in the workforce plan pursuant to section
9802(b)(2).

XIX. Committee Recommendations

On July 22, 2003, a quorum being present, the Committee on
Science favorably reported H.R. 1085, NASA Flexibility Act of
2003, by a rollcall vote of Yeas--21; Nays--14, and recommended
its enactment.

XXII. Minority Views

We submit these Minority Views with a sense of profound
disappointment over a missed opportunity. Despite the stated
objectives for this legislation, H.R. 1085 is more notable for
what it does not do than for what it accomplishes.
H.R. 1085 has been described as a ``targeted'' approach
intended to stem a ``brain drain'' at NASA. To that end, the
bill provides enhanced recruitment, relocation, and retention
bonus authorities requested by NASA. At the same time, however,
NASA's FY 2004 budget request proposes a ``decreasing civil
service workforce'' through FY 2008--not a proposal consistent
with a stated effort by NASA to stem an alleged outflux of
skilled employees from the agency. H.R. 1085 does nothing to
reverse that situation. In addition, NASA's FY 2004 request
budgets almost 20 percent less for bonuses for the NASA Centers
than was actually paid out to prospective and existing Center
employees in FY 2000--hardly an indication that the agency is
seeking to make aggressive use of its existing bonus
authority--let alone the more generous authority that it would
receive under this legislation. H.R. 1085 does nothing to
reverse this situation either.
H.R. 1085 proposes to enhance NASA's workforce
demonstration project authority. Following NASA's direction,
the original version of H.R. 1085 would have eliminated
entirely the ceiling on the number of NASA employees that could
be made subject to a demonstration project--effectively
allowing NASA management to change the entire agency's
personnel system without prior Congressional approval. At the
subcommittee markup of H.R. 1085, the Chairman--with NASA's
concurrence--changed the proposed demonstration project ceiling
to 8,000, which is the number of non-union employees at the
agency. No rationale was given for the change to a level NASA
had previously said would not meet its needs. More importantly,
not only has NASA never made use of the generous 5,000 employee
demonstration project authority it has under existing law, but
NASA management has steadfastly refused to tell this Committee
what it would do with the enhanced authority it is seeking in
this bill. With the Space Shuttle accident investigation
uncovering troubling information about management and workforce
practices in the agency, this is not the time to be loosening
Congressional oversight of NASA's workforce rules. An attempt
to eliminate the enhanced demonstration project authority was
defeated by the narrowest of margin (a 20-20 tie) on a party-
line vote.
The above-mentioned items represent some of the
shortcomings of H.R. 1085 in addressing its own ``targeted''
objectives. However, our concerns with this legislation run far
deeper. Fundamentally, we believe it is a mistake to make a
virtue of the narrowness of vision represented by this bill's
focus on a limited set of personnel practices when the evidence
is mounting that the NASA workforce is confronting challenges
of almost crisis proportion. Those larger workforce challenges
deserve our attention if we are to best serve the interests of
NASA's employees.
Most glaring is H.R. 1085's failure to address in any
substantive manner the workforce issues being raised by the
investigation of the Space Shuttle Columbia accident. Ranking
Member Ralph Hall offered an amendment at the full committee
markup containing provisions designed to enhance NASA's
independent safety office, start NASA down the road to
developing a viable crew escape system for the Space Shuttle,
require NASA to certify that its use of ``buyouts'' would not
result in the loss of any critical Space Station or Space
Shuttle skills, and bar any further contracting out of NASA
functions to the private sector until NASA responds to and
implements the Columbia Accident Investigation Board (CAIB).
Rep. Hall was prevented from obtaining a vote on these
provisions at the full committee markup when the Chairman ruled
them to be ``non-germane'', even though they directly address
the health, safety, and administration of the NASA workforce.
Paradoxically, the Minority was also told that
consideration of any amendments that might relate to the Space
Shuttle investigation should be deferred until after the CAIB's
report is released some five weeks from now. Yet when all of
the Democratic Members of the Science Committee sent a letter
in May to the Chairman urging that the markup of NASA workforce
legislation be delayed until after the Accident Board's report
was released so that we might take its findings into account
during our deliberations, our recommendation was rejected.
Representative Nick Lampson offered an amendment at the
full committee markup that would have compelled NASA to
establish clear goals for the human space flight program. He
argued that the best and brightest employees aren't attracted
to NASA by money--rather, it is the promise of challenging and
exciting work. At present NASA's human space flight program
remains adrift with no goals or destinations--a situation that
predated the Columbia accident and which cannot be blamed on
that tragedy. His amendment was voted down on a party-line
vote.
An amendment by Representative Brad Miller would have
required NASA to get an independent assessment of the extent to
which it was making use of its existing workforce flexibility
authorities before any of the proposed new authorities could
take effect. Such a requirement would seem to be a good-
government provision that recognizes the need for Congress to
know how well existing statutory authorities are being used
before we grant additional ones. Unfortunately, Republican
Miller's amendment was also defeated on a party-line vote.
Representative Sheila Jackson Lee offered an amendment to
reinstate the Minority University Research and Education
activities as a Division after they were demoted to program
status by NASA. The intent of the amendment was to ensure that
the important work being done on minority university research
and education would not be allowed to suffer through
inattention or competition with other programs under NASA's new
organizational structure. Her amendment too was defeated on a
party-line vote.
The news at the full committee markup was not all bad. We
were pleased that the Majority accepted Representative Miller's
amendment to prohibit political appointees from making use of
the bonuses and other incentives in H.R. 1085. We likewise
applaud their willingness to accept Representative Eddie
Bernice Johnson's amendment to encourage NASA to continue to
seek a diverse workforce and Representative Jackson Lee's
amendment to direct NASA to report back to the Committee on how
it will implement its workforce flexibility authorities without
compromising safety.
At the end of the day, however, these improvements to H.R.
1085 do not outweigh the failure of the bill to address the
major issues confronting the NASA workforce. It was a missed
opportunity. We can and should do better.

Ralph M. Hall.
Jerry F. Costello.
Anthony Weiner.
Lincoln Davis.
Brad Miller.
John B. Larson.
Bart Gordon.
Nick Lampson.
Jim Matheson.
Dennis Moore.
Eddie Bernice Johnson.
Michael Honda.
Dennis Cardoza.
Sheila Jackson Lee.
Mark Udall.
Lynn Woolsey.
David Wu.
Chris Bell.
Brad Sherman.
Brian Baird.

XXIII. PROCEEDINGS OF THE MARKUP BY THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON SPACE AND
AERONAUTICS ON H.R. 1085, NASA FLEXIBILITY ACT OF 2003

----------

THURSDAY, JUNE 26, 2003

House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics,
Committee on Science,
Washington, DC.

The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:05 a.m., in
Room 2318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Dana
Rohrabacher [Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding.
Chairman Rohrabacher. I now call the Subcommittee on Space
and Aeronautics to order. Good morning. And pursuant to notice
to the Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics is that we are
meeting today to consider the following measures: H.R. 1085,
the NASA Flexibility Act of 2003, and then the Committee Print
for the Federal Aviation Administration Research and
Development Reauthorization Act.
And I welcome everyone to this markup this morning. And
this is the first markup of this subcommittee for the 108th
Congress. Let me also be the first to thank Chairman Boehlert
for his leadership. Is he here with us yet? He will be.
Chairman Boehlert is on his way, and we appreciate his
leadership for tackling a difficult, yet crucial, issue and
that is NASA's workforce needs.
Today's markup concerns H.R. 1085, the NASA Flexibility Act
of 2003. NASA is facing a crisis regarding its workforce. A
significant portion of the workforce will be eligible to retire
soon, so action needs to be taken. H.R. 1085 is intended to
provide NASA the flexibility necessary to attract the best of
the brightest talent in the fields of engineering and science
by helping NASA address the problems of recruiting and
retaining highly skilled technical personnel. H.R. 1085
provides NASA with the authority needed to ensure that our
skilled workforce continues to be our greatest asset for
pushing the boundaries of this great new frontier of space.
We will also markup the Federal Aviation Administration
Research and Development Reauthorization Act. This bill
authorizes funding for civil aviation research and development.
It also calls for a joint FAA and NASA initiative aimed at
resolving the problems facing our national air traffic
management system.
This morning, I look forward to working with my colleagues
on both sides of the aisle, and I am confident that our efforts
will help maintain America's leadership role in aerospace.
I also would like to thank Bart Gordon, the Ranking Member
of the Subcommittee, for his hard work on this and his openness
and willingness to work in a very bipartisan manner on this
bill. And I know there were some rough edges we had to work
out, and I appreciate that he did this with goodwill and went
forward in trying to make sure that we could get this job done.
And I certainly now would recognize you for any opening remarks
that you would like to make.
[The prepared statement of Chairman Rohrabacher follows:]
Prepared Statement of Chairman Dana Rohrabacher
I want to welcome everyone here this morning for the Space
Subcommittee's first markup of the 108th Congress. Let me also be the
first to thank Chairman Boehlert for his leadership in tackling a
difficult, and yet, crucial issue--NASA's workforce needs.
Today's markup concerns H.R. 1085, the NASA Flexibility Act of
2003. NASA is facing a crisis regarding its workforce. A significant
portion of the workforce will be eligible to retire soon. So action
needs to be taken. H.R. 1085 is intended to provide NASA the
flexibility necessary to attract the best and brightest talent in the
fields of engineering and science.
By helping NASA address the problem of recruiting and retaining
highly skilled technical personnel, H.R. 1085 provides NASA with the
authority needed to ensure that a skilled workforce continues to be our
greatest asset for pushing the boundaries of new frontiers.
We will also markup the Federal Aviation Administration
Reauthorization Act. This bill authorizes funding for civil aviation
research and development. It also calls for a joint FAA and NASA
initiative aimed at solving the problems facing our national air
traffic management system.
This morning I look forward to working with my colleagues on both
sides of the aisle. I am confident that our efforts today will help to
maintain our leadership role in aerospace.

Mr. Gordon. Mr. Chairman, you are going to make me feel bad
here with all of those nice words. This is a very important
issue, and I think that there was sincere effort to get this
workforce issue off to the right direction, but somewhere
between here and the barn, I am afraid it got turned around a
little bit. And so I will not be able to support the proposal
today. And I would like to spend just a few minutes explaining
why.
On May the 13th of this year, all of the Members of the
Democratic caucus of the Science Committee sent a joint letter
to Chairman Boehlert. And I would like to ask unanimous consent
that that letter be inserted into the record of this markup.
Chairman Rohrabacher. Without objection.
[The information follows:]

Mr. Gordon. In that letter, we asked him to delay the
markup of any NASA workforce legislation until the Columbia
Accident Investigation Board has reported and the Committee has
had a chance to review its findings and recommendations.
Admiral Gehman has said on several occasions that the Accident
Investigation Board is examining issues related to the NASA
personnel, contractors, and culture as it attempts to assert
the root causes of the accident. In fact, Admiral Gehman was
quoted yesterday in the Washington Post as saying a ``goodly
portion of the report, perhaps half,'' will deal with the
issues of management at NASA. Now in all fairness, not all of
that will be dealing with the issue at hand, but certainly, I
think, that a good portion will be. We should wait to hear what
the Board concludes before we adopt the legislative provisions
that might prove either counterproductive or insufficient to
address the underlying problems identified by the Board.
No case for urgency appears to exist that would outweigh
the benefits of waiting until we have the Board's report. The
July the 25th deadline given to the Science Committee for its
consideration of H.R. 1836 is not relevant. We are not marking
up H.R. 1836 today. The bill that is before us, on the other
hand, is not scheduled for a Full Committee markup until just
before the August recess and will not be ready for Floor
consideration until the fall, under the best of circumstances.
I have an additional concern about today's markup. The
proposed amendment in the nature of a substitute that we
received just 72 hours ago contained numerous provisions that
were not in H.R. 1085. It also retains provisions that are
questionable. Last night, we were informed that we are now
proposing another version of the bill. The new bill appears to
make some movement in a positive direction, and I hope that
this signals the potential for a meaningful discussion on a
consensus approach prior to Full Committee consideration of
this bill.
At the same time, I think we have to consider the concerns
of all of NASA's 18,000 employees, not just a portion. For
example, the ``enhanced demonstration project authority''
contained in the bill before us today still represents a change
to the existing civil service statute. Despite our questions,
NASA has still not said why they need this new authority or
what they will use it for. In fact, they currently have
authority for a demonstration project of 5,000 employees. What
this bill does is add--increase that to an additional 8,000,
which means all of the non-collective employees. And I think
that it is instructive to note that the Senate Governmental
Affairs Committee chose not to include that provision in the
bill that it reported out on June the 17th by a 10 to 1
bipartisan vote.
Now I will concede that you probably will prevail on a
party-line vote on the bill before us today, as was the case in
the House Government Reform. However, I continue to believe
that the party-line votes are not a signal that more work
needs--or is a signal that more work needs to be done on
legislation that should not be controversial. Concern for the
wellbeing of the NASA workforce is not unique to one party. We
all want to ensure that NASA has the skilled workforce it needs
to carry out its mission in the years ahead. And we are
prepared to consider whatever legislative measures are needed
to strengthen that workforce.
We also need to ensure that the rights of NASA workers are
protected. Moreover, NASA already has one of the highest
percentages of workforce contracted out in the Federal
Government. For better or worse, that level of contracting has
a significant impact on the roles and responsibilities of the
NASA civil servants. We need to understand the implications of
that reality, also, and the Gehman Board may be able to assist
us in that task.
Mr. Chairman, I would propose that this subcommittee defer
this markup on this legislation until after we have a chance to
review what the Gehman Board has to say. Let us also take a
look at what the Senate has done on a 10 to 1 bipartisan basis.
And let us sit down and try to come up with legislation that
reflects a consensus of this subcommittee and the Full Science
Committee. It is likely that we are going to have the chance to
do only one NASA workforce bill this year, so let us take the
time and do it right.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Gordon follows:]
Prepared Statement of Representative Bart Gordon
Mr. Chairman, I cannot support the proposal before us today, and I
would like to spend a few minutes explaining why. On May 13th of this
year, all of the Members of the Democratic caucus of the Science
Committee sent a joint letter to Chairman Boehlert. I would like to ask
unanimous consent that the letter be inserted into the record of this
markup. In that letter, we asked him to delay the markup of any NASA
workforce legislation until the Columbia Accident Investigation Board
has reported and the Committee has had a chance to review its findings
and recommendations. Admiral Gehman has said on several occasions that
the Accident Investigation Board is examining issues related to NASA's
personnel, contractors, and culture as it attempts to ascertain the
root causes of the accident. Indeed, Admiral Gehman was quoted in
yesterday's Washington Post as saying a ``goodly portion of the report,
perhaps half,'' will deal with issues of management at NASA. We should
wait to hear what the Board concludes before we adopt legislative
provisions that might prove either counterproductive or insufficient to
address the underlying problems identified by the board.
No case for urgency appears to exist that would outweigh the
benefits of waiting until after the Board reports. The July 25th
deadline given to the Science Committee for its consideration of H.R.
1836 is not relevant: we are not marking up H.R. 1836 today. The bill
that is before us, on the other hand, is not scheduled for a Full
Committee markup until just before the August recess and will not be
ready for Floor consideration until the fall under the best of
circumstances.
I have an additional concern about today's markup. The proposed
amendment in the nature of substitute that we received just 72 hours
ago contains numerous provisions that were not in H.R. 1085. It also
retains provisions that are controversial to say the least. For
example, the so-called ``enhanced demonstration project authority''
contained in the bill before us today was opposed by all of the
Democratic Members of the House Government Reform committee at the
recent markup of H.R. 1836. As they noted in their Minority View,
``This provision would allow NASA to exempt the entire agency from most
federal civil service laws.'' It is instructive to note that the Senate
Governmental Affairs committee chose not to include that provision in
the bill that it reported out on June 17th.
I will concede that you might prevail on a party line vote today,
as was the case in the House Government Reform markup. Yet it is also
highly likely that such a provision ultimately will not survive a
House-Senate conference. More to the point, I believe that party-line
votes are a signal that more work needs to be done on legislation that
should be non-controversial. Concern for the well being of the NASA
workforce is not unique to one party. We all want to ensure that NASA
has the skilled workforce that it needs to carry out its mission in the
years ahead. And we are prepared to consider whatever legislative
measures are needed to strengthen that workforce.
We also need to ensure that the rights of NASA's workers are
protected. Moreover, NASA has one of the highest percentages of work
contracted out in the Federal Government. For better or worse, that
level of contracting has a significant impact on the roles and
responsibilities of the NASA civil servants. We need to understand the
implications of that reality too, and the Gehman Board may be able to
assist us in that task.
Mr. Chairman, I would propose that this subcommittee defer its
markup of this legislation until after we have had a chance to review
what the Gehman Board has to say. Let's also take a look at what the
Senate has done. And then let's sit down and try to come up with
legislation that reflects a consensus of the subcommittee and the Full
Science Committee. We are probably going to have only one chance this
year to pass a NASA workforce bill. Let's take the time to do it right.
Thank you, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Chairman Rohrabacher. Thank you very much, Mr. Gordon. And
no, that was a very good opening statement. And Sherwood
Boehlert has instructed me, as Subcommittee Chairman, to make
sure we get this job done and move forward as soon as possible.
And although I think your requests were very reasonable, and I,
of course, follow the direction of my Full Committee Chairman
and respect his judgments as well. So we will be moving
forward, but I appreciate your concerns.
I would ask unanimous consent to--for the authority to
recess this subcommittee at any point. Without objection, so
ordered. So--and let me say, I think that this may be the time
we are going to have to recess until Chairman Boehlert blesses
us with his presence. And he has an amendment to offer, and
that is the most important issue of the day to get through. So
I think that I will declare--yes. Do you want to do that? That
is a good idea.
Okay. We have to--this parliamentary procedure has to be
exactly right. That is right. Wait a minute, we don't have a
first reading of the bill yet, right? All right. We are going
to have a short recess. So we are now in recess for five
minutes.
[Recess.]
Chairman Rohrabacher. And we are called back into order, of
course. And let us see. We will now consider bill H.R. 1085.
And I recognize Mr. Boehlert, the bill's sponsor, and the
Chairman, of course, of the Full Committee on Science for any
opening remarks that he may have. Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and
thank you for the courtesy of delaying, somewhat, the opening.
I apologize to my colleagues, but when you get in the middle of
a conversation that is important on the telephone, you just
can't say, ``Sorry, Dana is summoning me.'' But I cut it short,
because I said you were summoning me.
I am pleased to be able to take this bill up today, Mr.
Chairman. We need to act as soon as possible to assist NASA at
this critical time. I think it is simple and obvious that NASA
needs to improve its ability to attract and retain the best and
the brightest. Within five years, a quarter of the NASA
workforce will be eligible to retire. That point has been made
in numerous reports by the Government Accounting Office,
including the latest report issued in January, not long before
the loss, the tragic loss, of the Space Shuttle Columbia. So I
don't think we can afford to wait any longer in dealing with
this issue.
I know that my Democratic colleagues suggested that we wait
until Admiral Gehman reports before taking up this bill. I
heartily disagree. Admiral Gehman's report is not likely to say
anything specific about workforce reforms. That is hardly the
Gehman Board's focus. If anything, Admiral Gehman will simply
reiteratewhat we already know, that NASA needs to do more to
attract and retain the best possible workforce. We can begin to help
NASA do that today by approving 1085. This bill is a carefully tailored
approach to NASA's problems. I will discuss some of the details of the
bill when I offer my amendment.
I just want to make two points right now. First, we just
didn't take what NASA gave us. Quite frankly, we don't just
take what any agency gives us. We have great respect for the
agencies. We value their input, but we exercise some judgment
on this committee. We rejected some ideas immediately, such as
creating an industry exchange program and allowing
demonstration projects to become permanent automatically. We
altered the language of NASA's proposals to make sure they
accomplish their stated purpose and no more. And we added
significant reporting requirements without saddling the agency
with anything onerous or pointless.
Second, the authorities that we provide NASA in this bill
are not radical departures from current law. They are
extensions of existing authorities. For example, the bill
allows NASA to pay higher bonuses than it can now, but it can
already pay bonuses. In short, H.R. 1085 is a moderate,
targeted, careful approach to enable NASA to overcome one of
its fundamental pressing problems. In the next few months, this
committee is going to spend a lot of time figuring out how to
address a range of issues at NASA. Here is something we know
how to do and we know how to do it now. It is time to act.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Rohrabacher. All right. It is the Chairman's
intention that we try to get this job done in the next 15
minutes so we can just----
Chairman Boehlert. You tell me if you think it is doable or
not, but I would ask unanimous consent to put in the record my
letter to Mr. Gordon about his request for delay. And I want to
stress this. This committee has not suddenly changed its modus
operandi. We have continually, throughout my chairmanship,
worked across the center aisle on a bipartisan basis. We
continue to keep the Minority Staff advised of what we are
doing as we proceed. We don't just one day walk in and say,
``Now, here is what we are going to do, we have decided,
because we are in the Majority.'' That is not the way this
committee operates. And it is not going to operate any
differently in the future.
Chairman Rohrabacher. And you keep the Chairman of the
Subcommittee informed as well.
Chairman Boehlert. Well, because the Chairman is a very
important part of the leadership structure on this committee,
as are the Ranking Members, I might add.
Chairman Rohrabacher. Okay.
Chairman Boehlert. This is not a solo act.
Chairman Rohrabacher. Okay. Without your--without
objection, your letter will be placed in the record.
[The information follows:]

Chairman Rohrabacher. And all Members with opening remarks
may place them into the record at this point and--or at any
point in the future.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Feeney follows:]
Prepared Statement of Representative Tom Feeney
I commend Chairman Boehlert and Chairman Rohrabacher for resolutely
focusing on this issue and crafting a workable and needed solution.
NASA possesses an aging skilled workforce and a threatened loss of
significant skills and knowledge. Four challenges must be faced: (1)
retaining key personnel, (2) shaping a workforce responding to
spaceflight's demanding and unique needs, (3) preserving and
transferring institutional memory, and (4) recruiting new and energetic
talent.
After careful study and patient negotiation, Chairman Boehlert and
Committee staff have constructed a package of personnel management
tools that can and should be used to assemble this required human
capital. The time to act is now, not later. Delay and endless analysis
are unacceptable options. Let's move forward.

[The prepared statement of Ms. Johnson follows:]
Prepared Statement of Representative Eddie Bernice Johnson
First, I would like to thank the Chair and Ranking Member for
calling us together today to mark up this very important legislation.
The space exploration research program has been one of the most
successful research programs in the history of this country. The Space
Shuttle Program has yielded many lifesaving medical tests,
accessibility advances for the physically challenged, and products that
make our lives more safe and enjoyable.
Unfortunately the world has new evidence of the dangers associated
with space exploration. Human space exploration is inherently risky.
Distance, speed and an environment that cannot support human life
combine to make human space flights particularly precarious.
I pledge to do what I can to help our space program recover from
this terrible setback so these important endeavors can flourish in the
future. As a Senior Member of the Science Committee and the Ranking
Member of the Science Subcommittee on Basic Research, I will work
closely with my House colleagues to assist NASA and Harold Gehman, Jr.,
who will lead the special investigative commission.
I am a firm believer that the United States will continue our space
program that has accomplished so much in the areas of research and
science. With two Americans and a Russian still stationed at the
International Space Station, it is imperative that this program not
come to a halt.

Chairman Rohrabacher. And the bill is open for discussion.
Mr. Gordon.
Mr. Gordon. I don't mean to belabor this, but since Mr.
Boehlert just came in, let me just quickly say that I think
there was a good faith effort to try to move this bill. I am
concerned that it has taken a different direction along the
way. Although we had been given notification, we didn't get
this bill until last night, so it is a little hard to be a
partner when we don't get it until last night. And the previous
one, we didn't get it until 72 hours before. And----
Chairman Boehlert. Would you yield just for one second?
Mr. Gordon. Yes, sir. Certainly.
Chairman Boehlert. I would like to point out that every
step of the way you have had information exchanges. The final
language, which is--should come as no surprise to anyone, was
just put together yesterday, so you got it as I did, too. But I
want to stress, Mr. Gordon, and I hope you will appreciate
this, that we have worked Staff to Staff every step of the way.
And we have high regard for your Professional Staff, and I know
that regard, I think,is mutual. And this is a committee where
we work across the center aisle.
Mr. Gordon. Well, thank you, sir. And I also--let me
compliment you on not including the industry exchange program.
I think that was a wise decision. But I--and I did receive your
letter concerning Admiral Gehman. It is one of the situations
where I guess we heard things differently, and I will have my
response to that as part of the record with unanimous consent.
And I also remind you that yesterday Admiral Gehman was
quoted in the New York Post [sic, Washington Post] as saying
that a ``goodly portion of the report, perhaps half,'' will
deal with issues of management of NASA. Now in all fairness,
clearly all of that wasn't going to deal with this issue at
point, but it would certainly seem that there would be
something to be learned from this. Particularly this is a
management-oriented board, so I don't think that there would be
any type of bad surprises for NASA. And as I had pointed out
earlier, just--we are only going to have a chance to do this
once, so we ought to do it right, and it just doesn't seem
reasonable not to wait 24--or one month until we get this
information from Admiral Gehman.
And I would also point out that in the Senate, there was a
bipartisan bill that passed 10 to 1 that worked out some of
these other problems, as I had mentioned in my earlier
statement, which I won't reiterate right now.
But thank you, and in an effort to move forward, I will
leave it at that.
Chairman Rohrabacher. All right. So I ask for unanimous
consent that the bill is considered--let me just say, as far as
I am concerned, this is a good bill. It is needed. There is an
honest disagreement on timing here. Sherry wants to get on with
the job and get it done. And Mr. Gordon has made some points
that I think are very reasonable points on the other side that
we should wait until after the Gehman Report. But as I say, I
respect the Chairman's leadership and his decision to make sure
that we move forward and try to get the job done. So with that,
I ask unanimous consent that this bill is considered as read
and open to amendment at any point and that amendments proceed
in order of the roster. And without objection, so ordered.
[Note: H.R. 1085 is located in the Appendix.]
Chairman Rohrabacher. The first amendment on the roster is
an amendment in the nature of a substitute offered by Mr.
Boehlert. I ask unanimous consent that the amendment in the
nature of a substitute be treated as original text. Without
objection, so ordered.
Mr. Boehlert, you--are you ready to proceed with your
amendment?
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I will make
this brief, and I will submit the full statement for the
record, in its entirety, but just a couple of opening comments.
This amendment reflects extensive negotiations with NASA
and, as Mr. Gordon so rightly observed, they wanted some things
that we didn't agree to, and we rejected them, and extensive
negotiations with the Government Reform Committee, and with the
unions that represent NASA employees. They must be considered.
They have a point of view. And we listened, and I am glad we
did. These have been productive negotiations. This version of
the bill is endorsed enthusiastically by the International
Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers, the largest
union at NASA. Labor and management have to work together to
have success, and we are.
NASA, too, supports passage today, and we know of no
concerns on the part of Chairman Davis from the Government
Reform Committee. This version of the bill is also closer to
the bill reported out of the Senate Government Affairs
Committee on a bipartisan basis, so I am hopeful we will be
able to get this bill to the President's desk early this fall.
And let me point out that if we report this out, as I
anticipate we will, in the Subcommittee, we will know more from
Admiral Gehman and his people before the Full Committee acts.
But I don't think this is a time for delay. I think we must
move forward.
[Note: The amendment is located in the Appendix.]
Chairman Rohrabacher. Thank you very much.
Is there any further discussion? If no, then thus all in
favor, I would say, all in favor, say aye. All those opposed,
say no. The ayes seem to have it. And the amendment is agreed
to.
Let us see. The next amendment to the roster was supposed
to be my amendment. And I have reached agreement with Chairman
Boehlert to defer my--offering my amendment until the bill goes
to Full Committee for consideration. And I have been assured
that my amendment will be acceptable to, at least to offer at
that time, and perhaps we can work out some of our minor
differences that we have with the concept.
Chairman Boehlert. Mr. Chairman, if I may.
Chairman Rohrabacher. Certainly.
Chairman Boehlert. And I would point out that the amendment
you are referring to is scholarship for service, and that is an
enlightened approach to a problem that has to be addressed. And
I very much look forward to working with you to make sure we
target it specifically, as is needed, to accomplish what we
hope to accomplish. So there is no disagreement in principle.
We are both enamored with the concept of scholarship for
service to help these youngsters pay for their college
education in return for a commitment to serve in the agency,
and so I am confident we can work this out.
Chairman Rohrabacher. Right. And there is a commitment on
both sides of the aisle and from both Chairmen to make sure
that gets done.
Are there any--and so I am withdrawing my amendment.
Are there any further amendments? Hearing none, the
question is on the bill, H.R. 1085, the NASA Flexibility Act of
2003, as amended. All those in favor, say aye. All those
opposed, say no. In the opinion of the Chair, the ayes have it.
I will now recognize Mr. Boehlert to offer a motion.
Chairman Boehlert. Mr. Chairman, I move that the
Subcommittee favorably report H.R. 1085, as amended, to the
Full Committee. Furthermore, I ask unanimous consent that the
Staff be instructed to make all necessary technical and
conforming changes to the bill, as--well, to the bill, in
accordance with the recommendations of the Subcommittee.
Chairman Rohrabacher. The Chair notes the presence of a
quorum. The question is on the motion to report the bill
favorably to Full Committee. Those in favor for the motion,
signify by saying aye. Those opposed. The ayes appear to have
it. The bill is favorably reported. Without objection, the
motion to reconsider is laid upon the table.
Thank you very much.
And this concludes our Committee markup. And without any
objection, we will declare this committee adjourned. So I do
declare this committee meeting adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:25 a.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
Appendix

----------

Roster, Amendment, H.R. 1085, Section-By-Section Analysis, and Summary
of H.R. 1085

108th CONGRESS
1st Session

H. R. 1085

To make certain workforce authorities available to the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration, and for other purposes.
__________
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
March 5, 2003
Mr. Boehlert introduced the following bill; which was referred to the
Committee on Science, and in addition to the Committee on
Government Reform, for a period to be subsequently determined by
the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as
fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
__________

A BILL

To make certain workforce authorities available to the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ``NASA Flexibility Act of 2003''.

SEC. 2. COMPENSATION FOR CERTAIN EXCEPTED PERSONNEL.

SEC. 3. WORKFORCE AUTHORITIES.

The National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958 (42 U.S.C. 2451 and
following) is amended by adding at the end the following:

``TITLE V--WORKFORCE AUTHORITIES

``definitions
``Sec. 501. For purposes of this title----
``(1) the term `employee' means an individual employed in
or under the Administration;
``(2) the term `appropriate committees of Congress' means--
--
``(A) the Committee on Science and the Committee on
Appropriations of the House of Representatives; and
``(B) the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation and the Committee on Appropriations of
the Senate;
``(3) the term `critical need' means a specific and
important requirement of the Administration's mission that the
Administration is unable to fulfill because the Administration
lacks the appropriate employees either because of the inability
to fill positions or because employees do not possess the
requisite skills;
``(4) the term `Workforce Plan' means the plan required
under section 502(a); and
``(5) the term `redesignation bonus' means a bonus under
section 504 paid to an individual described in subsection
(a)(2) thereof.
``planning, notification, and reporting requirements
``Sec. 502. (a) Not later than 90 days before first exercising any
of the workforce authorities made available by this title, the
Administrator shall submit to the appropriate committees of Congress a
written plan, which shall include a description of----
``(1) each critical need of the Administration and the
criteria used in its identification;
``(2) the functions, approximate number, and classes or
other categories of positions or employees that address
critical needs and that would be eligible for each authority
proposed to be exercised under section 503, and how the
exercise of those authorities with respect to the eligible
positions or employees involved would address each critical
need identified under paragraph (1);
``(3) any critical need identified under paragraph (1)
which would not be addressed by the authorities made available
by section 503, and the reasons why those needs would not be so
addressed;
``(4) the specific criteria to be used in determining which
individuals may receive the benefits described in sections 504,
505, and 506 (including, in the case of sections 504 and 505,
the criteria for granting bonuses in the absence of a critical
need), and how the level of those benefits will be determined;
``(5) the safeguards or other measures that will be applied
to ensure that this title is carried out in a manner consistent
with merit system principles;
``(6) the means by which employees will be afforded the
notification required under subsection (b) and the third
sentence of subsection (c)(1), respectively; and
``(7) the methods that will be used to determine if the
authorities exercised under section 503 have successfully
addressed each critical need identified under paragraph (1).
``(b) Not later than 60 days before first exercising any of the
workforce authorities made available by this title, the Administrator
shall provide to all employees the Workforce Plan, along with any
additional information which the Administrator considers appropriate.
``(c)(1) The Administrator may from time to time modify the
Workforce Plan. Not later than 90 days before implementing any such
modifications, the Administrator shall submit a description of the
proposed modifications to the appropriate committees of Congress. Not
later than 60 days before implementing any such modifications, the
Administrator shall provide an appropriately modified plan to all
employees of the Administration.
``(2) Any reference in this title or any other provision of law to
the Workforce Plan shall be considered to include any modification made
in accordance with this subsection.
``(d) None of the workforce authorities made available by section
503 may be exercised in a manner inconsistent with the Workforce Plan.
``(e) Not later than 6 years after the date of enactment of this
title, the Administrator shall submit to the appropriate committees of
Congress an evaluation and analysis of the actions taken by the
Administration under this title, including----
``(1) an evaluation, using the methods described in
subsection (a)(7), of whether the authorities exercised under
section 503 successfully addressed each critical need
identified under subsection (a)(1);
``(2) to the extent that they did not, an explanation of
the reasons why any critical need (apart from the ones under
subsection (a)(3)) was not successfully addressed; and
``(3) recommendations for how the Administration could
address any remaining critical need and could prevent those
that have been addressed from recurring.
``(f) Whenever the Administration submits its performance plan
under section 1115 of title 31, United States Code, to the Office of
Management and Budget for any year, the Administration shall at the
same time submit a copy of such plan to the appropriate committees of
Congress.
``workforce authorities
``Sec. 503. (a) The workforce authorities made available by this
title are as follows:
``(1) The authority to pay recruitment, redesignation, and
relocation bonuses, as provided by section 504.
``(2) The authority to pay retention bonuses, as provided
by section 505.
``(3) The authority to apply subchapter II of chapter 35 of
title 5, United States Code (relating to voluntary separation
incentive payments), as added by section 1313(a)(1)(A) of the
Homeland Security Act of 2002 (Public Law 107-296), in
accordance with section 506.
``(4) The authority to make term appointments and to take
related personnel actions, as provided by section 507.
``(5) The authority to fix rates of basic pay for critical
positions, as provided by section 508.
``(6) The authority to extend intergovernmental personnel
act assignments, as provided by section 509.
``(b) No authority under this title may be exercised with respect
to any officer who is appointed by the President, by and with the
advice and consent of the Senate.
``(c) Unless specifically stated otherwise, all authorities
provided under this title are subject to section 5307 of title 5,
United States Code. For purposes of applying such section 5307, cash
payments made under authority of this title shall be treated in the
same way as if they had instead been made under the corresponding
provisions of such title 5 (if any).
``recruitment, redesignation, and relocation bonuses
``Sec. 504. (a) Notwithstanding section 5753 of title 5, United
States Code, the Administrator may pay a bonus to an individual, in
accordance with the Workforce Plan and subject to the limitations in
this section, if the Administrator determines that the Administration
would be likely, in the absence of a bonus, to encounter difficulty in
filling a position, and if the individual----
``(1) is newly appointed as an employee of the Federal
Government;
``(2) is currently employed by the Federal Government and
is newly appointed to another position in the same geographic
area; or
``(3) is currently employed by the Federal Government and
must relocate to a different geographic area to accept a
position with the Administration.
``(b) If the position is described as addressing a critical need in
the Workforce Plan pursuant to section 502(a)(2), the amount of a bonus
may not exceed----
``(1) 50 percent of the employee's annual rate of basic pay
(including comparability payments under sections 5304-5304a of
title 5, United States Code) as of the beginning of the service
period multiplied by the service period specified pursuant to
subsection (d)(1)(A); or
``(2) 100 percent of the employee's annual rate of basic
pay (including comparability payments under sections 5304-5304a
of title 5, United States Code) as of the beginning of the
service period.
``(c) If the position is not described as addressing a critical
need in the Workforce Plan pursuant to section 502(a)(2), the amount of
a bonus may not exceed----
``(1) 25 percent of the employee's annual rate of basic pay
(including comparability payments under sections 5304-5304a of
title 5, United States Code) as of the beginning of the service
period multiplied by the service period specified pursuant to
subsection (d)(1)(A); or
``(2) 100 percent of the employee's annual rate of basic
pay (including comparability payments under sections 5304-5304a
of title 5, United States Code) as of the beginning of the
service period.
``(d)(1) Payment of a bonus under this section shall be contingent
upon the individual entering into a service agreement with the
Administration. The service agreement shall, at a minimum, set forth--
--
``(A) the required service period;
``(B) the method of payment, including a payment schedule;
the method of payment may include a lump-sum payment,
installment payments, or a combination thereof;
``(C) the amount of the bonus and the basis for calculating
such amount; and
``(D) the conditions under which the agreement may be
terminated before the agreed-upon service period has been
completed, and the effect of the termination.
``(2) For purposes of determinations under subsections (b)(1) and
(c)(1), the employee's service period shall be expressed as the number
equal to the full years and twelfth parts thereof, rounding the
fractional part of a month to the nearest twelfth part of a year. The
service period may not be less than 6 months and may not exceed 4
years.
``(3) A bonus under this section may not be considered to be part
of the basic pay of an employee.
``(e) Before paying a bonus under this section, the Administration
shall establish a plan for paying recruitment, redesignation, and
relocation bonuses, subject to approval by the Office of Personnel
Management.
``(f) The Administrator shall submit to the appropriate committees
of Congress, not later than February 28 of each year, a summary of all
bonuses paid under subsections (b) and (c) during the previous calendar
year. Such summary shall include the number of bonuses paid, the total
amount of bonuses paid, and the average percentage used in calculating
the total average bonus amount, under each such subsection.
``retention bonuses
``Sec. 505. (a) Notwithstanding section 5754 of title 5, United
States Code, the Administrator may pay a bonus to an employee, in
accordance with the Workforce Plan and subject to the limitations in
this section, if the Administrator determines that----
``(1) the unusually high or unique qualifications of the
employee or a special need of the Administration for the
employee's services makes it essential to retain the employee;
and
``(2) the employee would be likely to leave in the absence
of a retention bonus.
``(b) If the position is described as addressing a critical need in
the Workforce Plan pursuant to section 502(a)(2), the amount of a bonus
may not exceed 50 percent of the employee's annual rate of basic pay
(including comparability payments under sections 5304-5304a of title 5,
United States Code).
``(c) If the position is not described as addressing a critical
need in the Workforce Plan pursuant to section 502(a)(2), the amount of
a bonus may not exceed 25 percent of the employee's annual rate of
basic pay (including comparability payments under sections 5304-5304a
of title 5, United States Code).
``(d)(1) Payment of a bonus under this section shall be contingent
upon the employee entering into a service agreement with the
Administration. The service agreement shall, at a minimum, set forth--
--
``(A) the required service period;
``(B) the method of payment, including a payment schedule;
the method of payment may include a lump-sum payment,
installment payments, or a combination thereof;
``(C) the amount of the bonus and the basis for calculating
such amount; and
``(D) the conditions under which the agreement may be
terminated before the agreed-upon service period has been
completed, and the effect of the termination.
``(2) The employee's service period shall be expressed as the
number equal to the full years and twelfth parts thereof, rounding the
fractional part of a month to the nearest twelfth part of a year. The
service period may not be less than 6 months and may not exceed 4
years.
``(3) Notwithstanding paragraph (1), a service agreement is not
required if the Administration pays a bonus in biweekly installments
and sets the installment payment at the full bonus percentage rate
established for the employee with no portion of the bonus deferred. In
this case, the Administration shall inform the employee in writing of
any decision to change the retention bonus payments. The employee shall
continue to accrue entitlement to the retention bonus through the end
of the pay period in which such written notice is provided.
``(e) A bonus under this section may not be considered to be part
of the basic pay of an employee.
``(f) An employee is not entitled to a retention bonus under this
section during a service period previously established for that
employee under section 5753 of title 5, United States Code, or under
section 504.
``(g) Before paying a bonus under this section, the Administration
shall establish a plan for paying retention bonuses, subject to
approval by the Office of Personnel Management.
``(h) The Administrator shall submit to the appropriate committees
of Congress, not later than February 28 of each year, a summary of all
bonuses paid under subsections (b) and (c) during the previous calendar
year. Such summary shall include the number of bonuses paid, the total
amount of bonuses paid, and the average percentage used in calculating
the total average bonus amount, under each such subsection.
``voluntary separation incentive payments
``Sec. 506. (a) In applying subchapter II of chapter 35 of title 5,
United States Code, the Administrator may provide for voluntary
separation incentive payments in excess of the dollar-amount limitation
that would otherwise apply under section 3523(b)(3)(B) of such title,
subject to subsection (b).
``(b) Voluntary separation incentive payments described in
subsection (a)----
``(1) may not exceed 50 percent of the annual rate of basic
pay of the employee receiving such payments (computed
disregarding any comparability payments under sections 5304-
5304a of title 5, United States Code);
``(2) may not, in any calendar year, be made to more than--
--
``(A) 10 employees; or
``(B) such greater number of employees as the
Administrator may, with the approval of the Office of
Management and Budget, establish in lieu of the number
specified in subparagraph (A) following notification to
the appropriate committees of Congress;
``(3) may not be made to an employee if the employee has
within the last 12 months received, or if the employee is then
receiving, a bonus or allowance under section 5753 or 5754 of
title 5, United States Code, or under section 504 or 505; and
``(4) may be made only if the position in which the
employee is serving addresses a critical need identified in the
Workforce Plan pursuant to section 502(a)(2).
``(c)(1) The proposed use of workforce authorities in this section
shall be included in the plan required by section 3522 of title 5,
United States Code.
``(2) Whenever the Office of Personnel Management approves the
Administration's plan required in such section 3522, the Administration
shall submit a copy of theapproved plan to the appropriate committees
of Congress within 15 days after the date on which it is so approved.
``term appointments
``Sec. 507. (a) The Administrator may authorize term appointments
within the Administration made under authority of subchapter I of
chapter 33 of title 5, United States Code, for a period of not less
than 1 year and not more than 6 years.
``(b) Notwithstanding chapter 33 of title 5, United States Code, or
any other provision of law relating to the examination, certification,
and appointment of individuals in the competitive service, the
Administrator may convert an employee serving under a term appointment
to a permanent appointment in the competitive service within the
Administration without further competition if----
``(1) such individual was appointed under open, competitive
examination pursuant to provisions of subchapter I of chapter
33 of title 5, United States Code, to the term position;
``(2) the announcement for the term appointment from which
the conversion is made stated that there was potential for
subsequent conversion to a career-conditional or career
appointment;
``(3) the employee has completed at least 2 years of
current continuous service under a term appointment in the
competitive service;
``(4) the employee's performance under such term
appointment was at least fully successful or equivalent; and
``(5) the position to which such employee is being
converted under this section is in the same occupational
series, is in the same geographic location, and provides no
greater promotion potential than the term position for which
the competitive examination was conducted.
``(c) Notwithstanding chapter 33 of title 5, United States Code, or
any other provision of law relating to the examination, certification,
and appointment of individuals in the competitive service, the
Administrator may convert an employee serving under a term appointment
to a permanent appointment in the competitive service within the
Administration through internal competitive promotion procedures if the
conditions under paragraphs (1) through (4) of subsection (b) are met.
``(d) An employee converted under this section becomes a career-
conditional employee, unless the employee has otherwise completed the
service requirements for career tenure.
``(e) An employee converted to career or career-conditional
employment under this section acquires competitive status upon
conversion.
``(f) Not later than February 28 of each year, the Administrator
shall submit to the appropriate committees of Congress----
``(1) the total number of term appointments converted
during the previous calendar year; and
``(2) of that total number, the number of conversions that
were made to address a critical need described in the Workforce
Plan pursuant to section 502(a)(2).
``pay authority for critical positions
``Sec. 508. (a) For the purpose of this section, the term
`position' means----
``(1) a position to which chapter 51 of title 5, United
States Code, applies, including a position in the Senior
Executive Service;
``(2) a position under the Executive Schedule under
sections 5312-5317 of title 5, United States Code;
``(3) a position established under section 3104 of title 5,
United States Code; or
``(4) a senior-level position to which section 5376(a)(1)
of title 5, United States Code, applies.
``(b) Authority under this section----
``(1) may be exercised only with respect to a position
which is described as addressing a critical need in the
Workforce Plan pursuant to section 502(a)(2), and which
requires expertise of an extremely high level in a scientific,
technical, professional, or administrative field;
``(2) may be exercised only to the extent necessary to
recruit or retain an individual exceptionally well qualified
for the position; and
``(3) may be exercised only in retaining employees of the
Administration or in appointing individuals who were not
employees of another Federal agency as defined by section
5102(a)(1) of title 5, United States Code.
``(c)(1) Notwithstanding section 5377 of title 5, United States
Code, the Administrator may fix the rate of basic pay for a position in
the Administration in accordance with this section. The Administrator
may not delegate this authority.
``(2) The number of positions with pay fixed under this section may
not exceed 10 at any time.
``(d)(1) The rate of basic pay fixed under this section may not be
less than the rate of basic pay (including any comparability payments)
which would otherwise be payable for the position involved if this
section had never been enacted.
``(2) The annual rate of basic pay fixed under this section may not
exceed the per annum rate of salary payable under section 104 of title
3, United States Code.
``(3) Notwithstanding any provision of section 5307 of title 5,
United States Code, in the case of an employee who, during any calendar
year, is receiving pay at a rate fixed under this section, no
allowance, differential, bonus, award, or similar cash payment may be
paid to such employee if, or to the extent that, when added to basic
pay paid or payable to such employee (for service performed in such
calendar year as an employee in the executive branch or as an employee
outside the executive branch to whom chapter 51 of such title 5
applies), such payment would cause the total to exceed the per annum
rate of salary which, as of the end of such calendar year, is payable
under section 104 of title 3, United States Code.
``(e) The Administrator shall submit to the appropriate committees
of Congress, not later than February 28 of each year, the number of
critical pay positions that were established and the number of critical
pay positions that were disestablished during the previous calendar
year.
``assignments under the intergovernmental personnel act mobility
program
``Sec. 509. For purposes of applying the third sentence of section
3372(a) of title 5, United States Code (relating to the authority of
the head of a Federal agency to extend the period of an employee's
assignment to or from a State or local government, institution of
higher education, or other organization), the Administrator may, with
the concurrence of the employee and the government or organization
concerned, take any action which would be allowable if such sentence
had been amended by striking `two' and inserting `four'.
``enhanced demonstration project authority
``Sec. 510. When conducting a demonstration project at the
Administration, section 4703(d)(1)(A) of title 5, United States Code,
may be applied by substituting `such numbers of individuals as
determined by the Administrator' for `not more than 5,000 individuals'.
``termination
``Sec. 511. The workforce authorities under section 503 shall
terminate as of October 1, 2009, except that nothing in this section
shall----
``(1) affect any bonus payment under sections 504 or 505
agreed to by the employee and the Administration before the
termination date;
``(2) prevent an employee from being allowed to complete a
term appointment made under section 507(a) if the appointment
was made before the termination date;
``(3) prevent the Administrator from converting any term
employees to career or career-conditional status under section
507 if the term appointment was made before the termination
date;
``(4) prevent an employee from continuing to receive a rate
of basic pay fixed under section 508 before the termination
date; or
``(5) prevent an employee assigned under section 3372 of
title 5, United States Code, from completing the extended term
made under section 509 if the extension was made before the
termination date.''.
Section-By-Section Analysis of
H.R. 1085, NASA Flexibility Act of 2003

Section 1. Short Title.

``The NASA Flexibility Act of 2003.''

Section 2. Compensation for Certain Excepted Personnel.

Amends section 203(c) of the National Aeronautics and Space Act of
1958 to tie the pay scale for NASA Excepted (NEX) Employees to level
III of the Executive Schedule rather than the obsolescent pay scale of
grade 18 of the General Schedule. Directs that the amendment in this
section takes effect on the first day of the first pay period beginning
on or after the date of enactment of this Act.

Section 3. Workforce Authorities.

Amends the National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958 to provide an
additional title, ``Title V Workforce Authorities'' with the following
sections included under that title.

Section 501. Definitions.

Defines terms used in the text. Defines the term ``critical need''
as a specific and important requirement of NASA's mission that the
agency is unable to fulfill because NASA lacks the appropriate
employees either because of the inability to fill positions or because
employees lack the requisite skills. Defines the term ``redesignation
bonus'' as a bonus which could be paid to an employee moving from one
government job to another, including within NASA, without relocating to
a different geographic region.

Section 502. Planning, Notification, and Reporting Requirements.

Requires the NASA Administrator to submit a Workforce Plan to
Congress not later than 90 days before exercising any of the
authorities under this title. The Workforce Plan shall be developed in
consultation with the Office of Personnel Management. Requires that
this Workforce Plan describe: (1) each of NASA's critical needs and the
criteria used in its identification; (2) the functions, approximate
number, and classes or other categories of positions or employees that
address critical needs and that would be eligible for each workforce
authority provided in this title and proposed to be exercised, and how
the exercise of those authorities with respect to the eligible
positions or employees involved would address each critical need
identified; (3) any critical need which would not be addressed by the
workforce authorities provided in this title and the reasons why those
needs would not be so addressed; (4) the specific criteria to be used
in determining which individuals may receive the benefits described in
sections 504, 505, and 506 (including, in the case of sections 504 and
505, the criteria for granting bonuses in the absence of a critical
need), and how the level of those benefits will be determined; (5) the
safeguards or other measures that will be applied to ensure that this
title is carried out in a manner consistent with merit system
principles; (6) the means by which NASA employees will be afforded the
notification required for the Workforce Plan or any modifications
thereof; and (7) the methods that will be used to determine if the
workforce authorities provided in this title have successfully
addressed each critical need identified. Requires that NASA provide the
Workforce Plan to all employees 60 days before exercising any of the
workforce authorities provided in this title. Authorizes the NASA
Administrator to modify the Workforce Plan, provided that not later
than 90 days before implementing any such modifications the
Administrator submit a description of proposed modifications to
Congress and submit such description not later than 60 days beforehand
to all employees. Directs that none of the workforce authorities
provided in the title may be exercised in a manner inconsistent with
the Workforce Plan. Requires the NASA Administrator to submit an
evaluation and analysis of the actions taken under this title not later
than six years after its enactment. Requires that this evaluation and
analysis include: (1) an evaluation using the methods described in the
Workforce Plan of whether the authorities exercised under this title
successfully addressed each critical need identified; (2) to the extent
that they did not, an explanation of the reasons why any critical need
was not successfully addressed; and (3) recommendations for how the
Administration could address any remaining critical need and could
prevent those that have been addressed from recurring. Directs NASA to
submit its annual performance plan to the Congress that it already
submits to OMB under current law.

Section 503. Workforce Authorities.

Specifies the workforce authorities provided in each of the
following sections of this title. Prohibits all Senate-confirmed
Presidential appointees at NASA from being eligible to benefit from the
workforce authorities under this title.

Section 504: Recruitment, Redesignation, and Relocation Bonuses.

Authorizes the NASA Administrator to pay recruitment,
redesignation, and relocation bonuses to an individual in accordance
the authority provided in this section and the Workforce Plan if the
individual is: (1) newly appointed as an employee of the Federal
Government; (2) currently employed by the Federal Government and is
newly appointed to another position in the same geographic area; or (3)
currently employed by the Federal Government and must relocate to a
different geographic area to accept a position with the Administration.
Authorizes recruitment, redesignation, and relocation bonuses under the
following formula: (1) If the position addresses a critical need, the
amount of a bonus may not exceed 50 percent of an employee's annual
salary (including comparability payments) multiplied by an agreed-upon
service period; (2) If the position does not address a critical need,
the amount of a bonus may not exceed 25 percent of an employee's annual
salary (including comparability payments) multiplied by an agreed-upon
service period; and (3) In either case, the total bonus may not exceed
the employee's annual salary (including comparability payments) at the
beginning of the employee's period of service. Requires that payment of
a bonus is contingent on the employee entering into a service agreement
with NASA. Requires that the service agreement, at a minimum,
establish: (1) the required service period; (2) the payment schedule
and method of payment which may include a lump-sum payment, installment
payments, or a combination thereof; (3) the amount of the bonus and the
basis for calculating such amount; and (4) the conditions under which
the agreement may be terminated before the agreed-upon service period
has been completed, and the effect of the termination. Requires that an
employee's service period may not be less than six months and may not
exceed four years. Requires NASA to establish a plan for paying such
bonuses, subject to OPM approval, before paying a bonus under this
section. Directs the NASA Administrator to submit an annual report to
Congress with specific information about the bonuses paid under this
section for the previous calendar year not later than February 28 of
each year.

Section 505. Retention Bonuses.

Authorizes the NASA Administrator to pay higher retention bonuses
than is provided under current law and in accordance with the authority
provided in this section and the Workforce Plan if the Administrator
determines that the unusually high or unique qualifications of the
employee or a special need of NASA makes it essential to retain the
employee and the employee would be likely to leave in the absence of a
retention bonus. Authorizes retention bonuses under the following
formula: (1) If the position addresses a critical need, the amount of a
bonus may not exceed 50 percent of an employee's annual salary
(including comparability payments); or (2) If the position does not
address a critical need, the amount of a bonus may not exceed 25
percent of an employee's annual salary (including comparability
payments). Requires that payment of a bonus is contingent on the
employee entering into a service agreement with NASA unless NASA pays a
retention bonus in biweekly installments to the employee. Requires that
the service agreement, at a minimum, establish: (1) the required
service period; (2) the payment schedule and method of payment which
may include a lump-sum payment, installment payments, or a combination
thereof; (3) the amount of the bonus and the basis for calculating such
amount; and (4) the conditions under which the agreement may be
terminated before the agreed-upon service period has been completed,
and the effect of the termination. Requires that the service period may
not be less than six months and may not exceed four years. Requires
that an employee is not entitled to a retention bonus under this
section during a service period when other bonuses were previously
established for the employee. Requires NASA to establish a plan for
paying retention bonuses, subject to OPM approval, before paying a
retention bonus under this section. Directs the NASA Administrator to
submit an annual report to Congress with specific information of the
retention bonuses paid under this section for the previous calendar
year not later than February 28 of each year.

Section 506. Voluntary Separation Incentives.

Authorizes the NASA Administrator to pay Voluntary Separation
Incentive (VSI) payments up to 50 percent of an employee's annual
salary if the employee is in a position that fills a critical need.
Requires that VSI payments under this section are limited to only 10
employees in any calendar year, unless OMB approves a greater number of
employees and Congress is notified. Requires that a NASA employee is
not eligible to receive a VSI payment authorized under this section if
the employee received certain other bonuses in the previous twelve
months. Requires the proposed use of workforce authorities in this
section be included in the agency's plans to OPM on the intended use
voluntary separation incentive payments required under current law.
Directs NASA to submit a copy of its plan on the use of incentive
payments to Congress within 15 days after OPM's approval of the plan.

Section 507. Term Appointments.

Authorizes the NASA Administrator to make term appointments within
NASA for not less than one year and not more than six years. Authorizes
the NASA Administrator to convert a term appointment to a permanent
appointment in the competitive service within NASA without further
competition if: (1) the individual was hired under the open,
competitive examining procedures under current law; (2) the original
announcement stated the appointment may be converted from term to
career-conditional; (3) the individual has completed at least two years
of the term appointment; (4) the employee's performance was at least
fully successful or equivalent; and (5) the position is in the same
occupational series and geographic location and provides no greater
promotion potential than the term appointment. Authorizes the NASA
Administrator to convert a term appointment to a permanent appointment
in the competitive service within NASA through internal competitive
procedures if conditions (1) through (4) above are met. Directs that an
employee converted under this section becomes a career-conditional
employee unless the employee has otherwise completed the service
requirements for career tenure. Directs that an employee converted to
career or career-conditional employment under this section acquires
competitive status upon conversion. Directs the NASA Administrator to
submit an annual report to Congress on the number of term appointments
and conversions made for the previous calendar year not later than
February 28 of each year.

Section 508. Pay Authority for Critical Positions.

Authorizes the NASA Administrator to fix the salary for up to 10
administrative, technical and professional positions described in the
section to the salary level of the Vice-President prescribed in current
law if the position addresses a critical need identified in the
Workforce Plan and the position requires expertise of an extremely high
level in scientific, technical, professional, or administrative fields.
Directs that the NASA Administrator may not delegate this authority.
Requires that an employee receiving pay at a rate fixed under this
section may not be paid an allowance, differential, bonus, award, or
similar cash payment during any calendar year that would cause the
employee's salary total to exceed the annual rate of salary prescribed
for the Vice-President under current law. Directs the NASA
Administrator to submit an annual report to Congress on the number of
critical positions established or disestablished during the previous
calendar year not later than February 28 of each year.

Section 509. Assignments under the Intergovernmental Personnel Act.

Authorizes the NASA Administrator to extend the period of an
employee's Intergovernmental Personnel Act (IPA) assignment up to four
years, rather than two years provided under current law, following an
initial two-year assignment with the concurrence of the employee and
the government or organization concerned.

Section 510. Enhanced Demonstration Project.

Authorizes NASA when conducting a demonstration project to apply
that project to ``such number of individuals determined by the
Administrator'' rather than ``not more than 5,000 individuals'' as
specified under current law.

Section 511. Termination.

Directs that the workforce authorities listed under section 503
shall terminate on October 1, 2009, except if certain specified
conditions for salary, bonuses, or appointments made before the
termination date are satisfied. Requires that this termination shall
not: (1) affect any bonus payment under sections 504 or 505 agreed to
by the employee and the Administration before the termination date; (2)
prevent an employee from being allowed to complete a term appointment
made under section 507 if the appointment was made before the
termination date; (3) prevent the Administrator from converting any
term employees to career or career-conditional status under section 507
if the term appointment was made before the termination date; (4)
prevent an employee from continuing to receive a salary fixed under
section 508 before the termination date; or (5) prevent an employee
assigned under the Intergovernmental Personnel Act from completing the
extended term made under section 509 if the extension was made before
the termination date.
Summary of H.R. 1085, NASA Flexibility
Act of 2003 (Underlying Bill)

NASA Flexibility Act of 2003--Authorizes the NASA Administrator
certain workforce authorities greater than existing civil service
authority that are more remunerative and flexible to implement.

(Sec. 2) Amends the National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958 to
tie the pay scale for NASA Excepted (NEX) Employees to level III of the
Executive Schedule rather than the obsolescent pay scale of grade 18 of
the General Schedule.

(Sec. 3) Amends the National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958 to
provide an additional title, ``Title V--Workforce Authorities'' with
the following sections included under that title.

(Sec. 501) Defines several terms used in the title.

(Sec. 502) Directs the NASA Administrator to submit to Congress and
NASA employees a Workforce Plan and any subsequent modifications
developed in consultation with the Office of Personnel Management
before exercising any of the authorities under this title. Directs the
NASA Administrator to submit to Congress an evaluation of whether or
not the authorities exercised under this bill successfully addressed
NASA's critical needs and recommendations for how NASA could address
any remaining critical need six years after enactment of this title.
Directs NASA to submit its annual performance plan to the Congress that
the agency currently submits to OMB.

(Sec. 503) Specifies the workforce authorities and restrictions of
this title.

(Sec. 504) Authorizes the NASA Administrator to pay higher
recruitment and relocation bonuses than provided under current law.
Defines a new category of bonus, a redesignation bonus, which could be
paid to an employee moving from one government job to another,
including within NASA, without relocating to a different geographic
region. Authorizes recruitment, redesignation, and relocation bonuses
under the following formula: (1) If the position addresses a critical
need, the amount of a bonus may not exceed 50 percent of an employee's
annual salary (including comparability payments) multiplied by an
agreed-upon service period; (2) If the position does not address a
critical need, the amount of a bonus may not exceed 25 percent of an
employee's annual salary (including comparability payments) multiplied
by an agreed-upon service period; and (3) In either case, the total
bonus may not exceed the employee's annual salary (including
comparability payments) at the beginning of the employee's period of
service. Requires that payment of a bonus is contingent on the employee
entering into a service agreement with NASA. Requires that the service
period may not be less than six months and may not exceed four years.
Requires NASA to establish a plan for paying such bonuses, subject to
OPM approval, before paying a bonus under this section. Directs the
NASA Administrator to submit an annual report to Congress of the
bonuses paid under this section for the previous calendar year.

(Sec. 505) Authorizes the NASA Administrator to pay higher
retention bonuses than is provided under current law if the
Administrator determines that the unusually high or unique
qualifications of the employee or a special need of NASA makes it
essential to retain the employee and the employee would be likely to
leave in the absence of a retention bonus. Authorizes retention bonuses
under the following formula: (1) If the position addresses a critical
need, the amount of a bonus may not exceed 50 percent of an employee's
annual salary (including comparability payments); or (2) If the
position does not address a critical need, the amount of a bonus may
not exceed 25 percent of an employee's annual salary (including
comparability payments). Requires that payment of a bonus is contingent
on the employee entering into a service agreement with NASA unless NASA
pays a retention bonus in biweekly installments to the employee.
Requires that the service period may not be less than six months and
may not exceed four years. Requires that an employee is not entitled to
a retention bonus under this section during a service period when other
bonuses were previously established for the employee. Requires NASA to
establish a plan for paying retention bonuses, subject to OPM approval,
before paying a retention bonus under this section. Directs the NASA
Administrator to submit an annual report to Congress of the retention
bonuses paid under this section for the previous calendar year.

(Sec. 506) Authorizes the NASA Administrator to pay Voluntary
Separation Incentive (VSI) payments up to 50 percent of an employee's
annual salary if the employee is in a position that fills a critical
need. Requires that VSI payments under this section are limited to only
10 employees in any calendar year, unless OMB approves a greater number
of employees and Congress is notified. Requires that a NASA employee is
not eligible to receive a VSI payment authorized under this section if
the employee received certain other bonuses in the previous twelve
months. Directs NASA to submit a copy of its plan on the use of
incentive payments to Congress within 15 days after OPM's approval of
the plan.

(Sec. 507) Authorizes the NASA Administrator to make term
appointments within NASA for not less than one year and not more than
six years. Authorizes the NASA Administrator to convert a term
appointment to a career-conditional appointment under certain
conditions: (1) the individual was hired under the open, competitive
examining procedures in title 5; (2) the original announcement stated
the appointment may be converted from term to career-conditional; (3)
the individual has completed at least two years of the term
appointment; (4) the employee's performance was at least fully
successful or equivalent; and (5) the position is in the same
occupational series and geographic location and provides no greater
promotion potential than the term appointment. Directs the NASA
Administrator to submit an annual report to Congress on the number of
tern appointments and conversions made for the previous calendar year.

(Sec. 508) Authorizes the NASA Administrator to fix the salary for
up to 10 administrative, technical and professional positions described
in the section to the salary level of the Vice-President if the
position addresses a critical need identified in the Workforce Plan and
the position requires expertise of an extremely high level in
scientific, technical, professional, or administrative fields. Directs
that the NASA Administrator may not delegate this authority. Directs
the NASA Administrator to submit an annual report to Congress on the
number of critical positions established or disestablished during the
previous calendar year.

(Sec. 509) Authorizes the NASA Administrator to extend the period
of an employee's Intergovernmental Personnel Act (IPA) assignment up to
four years with the concurrence of the employee and the government or
organization concerned.

(Sec. 510) Authorizes NASA when conducting a demonstration project
to apply that project to ``such number of individuals determined by the
Administrator'' rather than ``not more than 5,000 individuals'' as
specified under current law.

(Sec. 511) Directs that the workforce authorities listed under
section 503 shall terminate on October 1, 2009, except if certain
specified conditions for salary, bonuses, or appointments made before
the termination date are satisfied.
XXIV. Proceedings of the Full Committee Markup on H.R. 1085, NASA
Flexibility Act of 2003, July 22, 2003

The Committee met, pursuant to call, at 10:20 a.m., in room
2318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Sherwood L.
Boehlert (chairman of the committee) presiding.
Chairman Boehlert. The hearing will come to--the markup
will come to order. I want to welcome everyone here for this
morning's markup.
Today we will be bringing to fruition much of the work the
Committee has conducted over the past 7 months. The six bills
we will approve will protect the environment, improve
education, increase air passenger safety, prevent fires, enable
buildings to better withstand earthquakes, and enable NASA to
conduct its business more efficiently and effectively. Not bad
for a day's work.
I will save my comments on the NASA bill until we get to
that item on the agenda. But let me say that the rest of these
bills are bipartisan and they, as usual, reflect months of
cooperative work by the Republicans' and Democrats' staffs and
Members alike. They are all carefully crafted, well-targeted
approaches to solving real problems. The harmful algal bill,
for example, will help support new research on the serious
threat to the environment and human health. I want to
congratulate Chairman Ehlers and Mr. Udall for their work on
this measure. I should add that my area in upstate New York has
a particular interest in this issue.
Harmful algal blooms are a growing problem in Oneida and
Keuka Lakes and some of the leading experts in the country at
the State University College of Environmental Science and
Forestry recently rewarded a major grant to study this
phenomenon. After working--however, NOAA took some of the
funding away to fund other laboratory activities. After working
with NOAA, the funding was restored. To prevent this in the
future, I worked with Mr. Ehlers to amend the legislation to
ensure that this game of research will not occur in the future.
The Minority Serving Institution bill reflects months of
work, and I want to thank Mr. Forbes and Mr. Towns for working
so cooperatively with us to amend their original bills. I also
wanted to thank Ms. Johnson and Senator McCain for their
cooperative work on this. The version of the bill we have
before us today will provide needed funding for minority
institutions without changing the nature and mission of the
National Science Foundation. I should add that we will,
however, continue to work with NSF to increase its support of
minority institutions through its ongoing programs. I know the
Administration has objections to this bill, but I believe we
should move forward, as the Senate did, and we can see if there
are any ways to accommodate Administration concerns as the bill
moves forward, but move forward it must.
Mr. Forbes has also worked with the Committee and
particularly with Chairman Rohrabacher on his Federal Aviation
Administration Reauthorization bill. We are already deeply
engaged in the staff level conference negotiations on the
larger FAA bill, as this measure will put the Committee on
record supporting these provisions as part of the conference.
Today's bill has been our starting point in the negotiations.
Chairman Smith has worked assiduously on the fire and
earthquake bills before us today. The earthquake bill takes the
important step of making the National Institutes of Standards
and Technology the lead agency for this program. After over a
decade of complaints about the way the Federal Emergency
Management Agency has handled that role, the time has come to
make some changes. This is especially true given that FEMA has
been absorbed into the new Department of Homeland Security. The
bill does make clear, however, that FEMA continues to have
responsibilities that are essential to the program. The fire
bill creates a new program that originated in bills offered by
Representative Camp and Senator McCain to create new standards
for fire equipment and to require those standards to be met in
most cases when equipment is purchased with federal money. This
should upgrade the ability of our fire departments to provide
for the public safety. And whenever I mention fire safety
programs or any programs related to the emergency responders, I
am always thankful that this Committee is graced by the
presence of Curt Weldon, who is just a national leader of
outstanding ability and commitment in this area.
All of these important measures reflect a great deal of
work, and they will do a great deal of good. I look forward to
their passage today and to their passage on the Floor this
fall.
With that, the Chair now turns to the distinguished
gentleman from the Lone Star State, Mr. Hall of Texas.
Mr. Hall. Thank you. And I have a few opening remarks about
the NASA bill, that I would like to make before we start
considering amendments to the legislation.
First, I have to say that I am disappointed that we are not
deferring consideration of this legislation until after the
Gehman Board has completed its report on the Space Shuttle
Columbia accident. As the Chairman knows, the Democratic
Members of this Committee have formally requested such a delay.
While I know that the Chairman has said that he believes we
shouldn't wait, the reality is that we are marking up this
legislation just days before the start of the August recess. As
a result, this legislation will not be going to the Floor until
September, at the very earliest. Based on Admiral Gehman's
statements, the Columbia Accident Investigation Board will have
issued its report well before then.
And I will say more about my own amendment at the
appropriate time, but its intent is to anticipate some of the
Gehman Board's likely findings and recommendations. I would
prefer to have those findings and recommendations in front of
us as we debate the amendments, but the schedule we are on
makes that absolutely impossible. However, since this appears
to be the only NASA legislation that would be addressed by the
Committee during this session, I don't think we can avoid
addressing the issues raised by the shuttle accident as we
consider this legislation.
Well, we have a lot to consider this morning, so I will
conclude my remarks at this point and yield back the balance of
my time.
[Statement of Mr. Hall follows:]

Opening Statement of Hon. Ralph M. Hall

I just have a few opening remarks that I would like to make before
we start considering amendments to this legislation. First, I have to
say that I am disappointed that we are not deferring consideration of
this legislation until after the Gehman Board has completed its report
on the Space Shuttle Columbia accident. As the Chairman knows, the
Democratic members of this Committee had formally requested such a
delay. While I know that the Chairman has said that he believes that we
shouldn't wait, the reality is that we are marking up this legislation
just days before the start of the August recess. As a result, this
legislation will not be going to the Floor until September at the
earliest. Based on Admiral Gehman's statements, the Columbia Accident
Investigation Board will have issued its report before then.
Admiral Gehman has indicated that at least half of his report will
deal with management and workforce issues. We may wind up not agreeing
with his Board's recommendations. We may think that they go too far--or
not far enough. Whatever we conclude, it seems to me that this
Committee would benefit from having the Board's findings and
recommendations available to us before we mark up NASA workforce
legislation--especially since this bill is not going to be considered
by the House anytime soon.
However, assuming that the Chairman decides to proceed with the
markup of this legislation today, I and some of my colleagues will be
offering a number of amendments that address some key issues--and that
we hope the Chairman will support. Those issues range from issues
raised by the Space Shuttle Columbia accident to the current lack of
challenging goals to motivate the NASA workforce.
I'll say more about my own amendment at the appropriate time, but
its intent is to anticipate some of the Gehman Board's likely findings
and recommendations. I would prefer to have those findings and
recommendations in front of us as we debate the amendments, but the
schedule we are on makes that impossible. However, since this appears
to be the only NASA legislation that will be addressed by this
Committee during this Session, I don't think we can avoid addressing
the issues raised by the Shuttle accident as we consider this
legislation.
Well, we have a lot to consider this morning, so I will conclude my
remarks at this point and yield back the balance of my time.

Chairman Boehlert. Thank you very much, Mr. Hall.
Our first order of business today is to recognize the
newest Member of the Committee, the gentleman from Texas, Mr.
Neugebauer. I am certain that you all will join me in welcoming
him to the Committee. I ask unanimous consent to expand the
ratio--I know Mr. Hall would like to say a few words about his
colleague from Texas.
Mr. Hall. Yeah, I am looking for the words I am about to
say. The words escape me except that we are honored to have him
and look forward to working with him in the future. And I ask--
I am going to object to almost any unanimous consent that you
request, Mr. Chairman, but I am going to make a unanimous
consent that I be allowed to speak about him a little bit later
in the day.
Chairman Boehlert. Without objection. We will allow you to
extol his virtues for as long as you would like whenever you
want. Thank you very much.
I ask unanimous consent to expand the ratio of the
Subcommittee on Research from 11 Republican Members and 9
Democrats to 12 Republicans and 10 Democrats. Without
objection, so ordered.
I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from Texas, Mr.
Neugebauer, be appointed to the Subcommittee on Research.
Without objection, so ordered.
Pursuant to notice, the Committee on Science is meeting
today to consider the following measures: H.R. 1085, the NASA
Flexibility Act of 2003, as amended; H.R. 1856, the Harmful
Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research Amendments Act of 2003, as
amended; H.R. 2801, the Minority Serving Institution Digital
and Wireless Technology Opportunity Act of 2003; H.R. 2734, the
Federal Aviation Administration Research and Development
Reauthorization Act, as amended; H.R. 2608, the National
Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program Reauthorization Act of
2003, as amended; and H.R. 2692, the United States Fire
Administration Authorization Act of 2003.
We will start with H.R. 1085, the NASA Flexibility Act of
2003. I ask unanimous consent for the authority to recess the
Committee at any point, and without objection----
Mr. Hall. I would object, Mr. Chairman. I do object.
Chairman Boehlert. You do object? All in favor, say aye.
There you--the ayes appear to have it.
Mr. Hall. I would ask for a recorded vote, Mr. Chairman. I
would like to be heard on it.
Chairman Boehlert. Right to a vote. The Clerk will call the
roll.
Mr. Hall. Do I understand that you overrule my right to
speak on the amendment?
Chairman Boehlert. Well, it is my understanding from
Counsel. What do I know about these things? I go to Counsel and
ask for expert advice. Counsel, what do----
Mr. Hall. You ought to ask me.
Chairman Boehlert. Well, first I will ask Mr. Hall.
Mr. Hall. Well, we are not going to call the law or cross
the river or anything. If you want to vote, let us go ahead and
vote.
Chairman Boehlert. Well, we are going to have consultation.
We are not going to be like some other infamous players in this
drama on Capitol Hill and call each other names or anything
else. We will try to work this out. Let us figure out what is
going on.
Mr. Hall. What is a fruitcake? I guess, if we get our tail
kicked, we might as well have some fun, guys.
Chairman Boehlert. Here is what the Chair is going to do,
in the interest of comity. The Chair is going to recognize Mr.
Hall for 3 minutes, and then we will have a vote.
Mr. Hall.
Mr. Hall. Mr. Chairman, the reason that I object to it is
that we are going to have a hard day, and we have some
differences. We have not been able to get together on a lot of
these things--we don't believe that we really ought to be
proceeding as we are, as I stated in my opening remarks. But I
remember a time here not too long ago when we had the Honda
amendment up, for example. You had asked for approval and
unanimous consent earlier, and we had agreed to it, and you had
the authority. I don't question your authority. I don't even
question your purpose, because you have a goal in mind. Delayed
any hearing until you could get your forces back here in place
to prevail in the vote, and you had the right to do that, and
you did that. I want us today--we are going to be on course. We
can be here until late tonight if we have to argue every issue
at every crossroads that we come to.
I think the Honda amendment is the reason I object to you
having the right to recess at any time. I would just ask for a
regular order and suggest regular order and urge the Members on
this side and all of the reasonable Members on that side to
vote with me.
And I yield back my time.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you for the explanation.
See how we do things in this Committee? We give the other
side an opportunity to speak its peace, and then we proceed.
Now the Chair will recognize Mr. Smith for a----
Mr. Smith of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Chair
have the authority to recess at any point.
Chairman Boehlert. Without objection, so ordered.
Mr. Hall. Here I move to table then.
Chairman Boehlert. Vote. All in favor of tabling, say aye.
Opposed no. The nos appear to have it. The nos have it.
Mr. Hall. I ask for a recorded vote, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Boehlert. The Clerk will call the roll.
The Clerk. Mr. Boehlert?
Chairman Boehlert. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Boehlert votes no. Mr. Lamar Smith?
Mr. Smith of Texas. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Smith votes no. Mr. Weldon?
Mr. Weldon. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Weldon votes no. Mr. Rohrabacher?
Mr. Rohrabacher. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Rohrabacher votes no. Mr. Barton?
Mr. Barton. [No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Calvert?
Mr. Calvert. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Calvert votes no. Mr. Nick Smith?
Mr. Smith of Michigan. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Smith votes no. Mr. Bartlett?
Mr. Bartlett. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Bartlett votes no. Mr. Ehlers?
Dr. Ehlers. [No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Gutknecht?
Mr. Gutknecht. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Gutknecht votes no. Mr. Nethercutt?
Mr. Nethercutt. [No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Lucas?
Mr. Lucas. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Lucas votes no. Mrs. Biggert?
Mrs. Biggert. No.
The Clerk. Mrs. Biggert votes no. Mr. Gilchrest?
Mr. Gilchrest. [No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Akin?
Mr. Akin. [No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Johnson?
Mr. Johnson. [No response.]
The Clerk. Ms. Hart?
Ms. Hart. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Hart votes no. Mr. Sullivan?
Mr. Sullivan. [No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Forbes?
Mr. Forbes. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Forbes votes no. Mr. Gingrey?
Mr. Gingrey. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Gingrey votes no. Mr. Bishop?
Mr. Bishop. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Bishop votes no. Mr. Burgess?
Mr. Burgess. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Burgess votes no. Mr. Bonner?
Mr. Bonner. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Bonner votes no. Mr. Feeney?
Mr. Feeney. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Feeney votes no. Mr. Neugebauer?
Mr. Neugebauer. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Neugebauer votes no. Mr. Hall?
Mr. Hall. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Hall votes yes. Mr. Gordon?
Mr. Gordon. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Gordon votes yes. Mr. Costello?
Mr. Costello. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Costello votes yes. Ms. Johnson?
Ms. Johnson. Yes.
The Clerk. Ms. Johnson votes yes. Ms. Woolsey?
Ms. Woolsey. Aye.
The Clerk. Ms. Woolsey votes yes. Mr. Lampson?
Mr. Lampson. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Lampson votes yes. Mr. Larson?
Mr. Larson. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Larson votes yes. Mr. Udall?
Mr. Udall. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Udall votes yes. Mr. Wu?
Mr. Wu. [No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Honda?
Mr. Honda. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Honda votes yes. Mr. Bell?
Mr. Bell. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Bell votes yes. Mr. Miller?
Mr. Miller. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Miller votes yes. Mr. Davis?
Mr. Davis. [No response.]
The Clerk. Ms. Jackson Lee?
Ms. Jackson Lee. Aye.
The Clerk. Ms. Jackson Lee votes yes. Ms. Lofgren?
Ms. Lofgren. [No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Sherman?
Mr. Sherman. [No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Baird?
Mr. Baird. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Baird votes yes. Mr. Moore?
Mr. Moore. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Moore votes yes. Mr. Weiner?
Mr. Weiner. [No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Matheson?
Mr. Matheson. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Matheson votes yes. Mr. Cardoza?
Mr. Cardoza. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Cardoza votes yes.
Chairman Boehlert. How is Mr. Nethercutt recorded?
The Clerk. Mr. Nethercutt is not recorded.
Chairman Boehlert. How is Mr. Akin recorded?
The Clerk. Mr. Akin is not recorded.
Chairman Boehlert. How is Dr. Ehlers recorded?
The Clerk. Dr. Ehlers is not recorded.
Dr. Ehlers. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Ehlers votes no.
Chairman Boehlert. How are the staff--no, no. The Clerk
will report.
The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, yes, 16; no, 21.
Chairman Boehlert. The question is now on Mr. Smith's
motion to grant the Chair authority to recess at any time. All
in favor say aye. Opposed no. The ayes have it. The ayes have
it.
We will now consider the bill H.R. 1085, the NASA
Reauthorization--the NASA Flexibility Act of 2003 as amended. I
am going to open by repeating what I said about this bill at
our Subcommittee markup, because everything I said then is just
as true today, especially my primary point: we need to act as
soon as possible to assist NASA at this critical time. I think
it is simple and obvious that NASA needs to improve its ability
to attract and retain the best and the brightest. Within 5
years, 1/4 of the NASA workforce will be eligible to retire.
That point has been made in numerous reports by the Government
Accounting Office, including the latest report issued in
January, not long before the tragic loss of the Space Shuttle
Columbia. So I don't think we can afford to wait any longer in
dealing with this issue.
I know that some of my colleagues will suggest that we wait
until Admiral Gehman reports before taking up this bill. I
strongly disagree. Admiral Gehman's report is not likely to say
anything specific about workforce reform. That is hardly the
Gehman Board's focus. And let me point out, Mr. Hall and I have
had lengthy conversations with Admiral Gehman and the Board
Members. If anything, Admiral Gehman will simply reiterate what
we already know, that NASA needs to do more to attract and
retain the best possible workforce. We can begin to help NASA
do that today by approving H.R. 1085. And I should add that if
we are wrong, we will have a chance to amend the bill further
on the Floor once the Gehman Report is released.
This bill is a carefully tailored approach to NASA's
problems. We didn't just take what NASA gave us. We rejected
some ideas immediately out of hand, such as creating an
industry exchange program and allowing demonstration projects
to become permanent automatically. We altered the language of
NASA's proposals to make sure that they accomplished their
stated purpose and no more. And we added significant reporting
requirements, without saddling the agency with anything onerous
or pointless.
Also, the authorities that we provide NASA in this bill are
not radical departures from current law. They are extensions of
existing authorities. For example, the bill allows NASA to pay
higher bonuses than it can now, but it can already pay bonuses.
In short, H.R. 1085 is a moderate, targeted, careful approach
to enable NASA to overcome one of its fundamental pressing
problems. In the next few months, this Committee is going to
spend a lot of time figuring out how to address a range of
issues at NASA. Here is something we know how to do right now.
It is time to act. Let us do it.
I understand that we will have some difficult votes today,
and a lot of them are going to be procedural, and they are
going to take up a lot of time. Let me say at the outset, no
one is going to call anybody names. No one is going to call the
cops. No one is going to ask anybody to vacate any space. This
is a place where we have a collegial atmosphere, and it has
always been pleasant, and we want it to continue. We are going
to have differences. That is the nature of a system like this.
But the fact of the matter is we are charged with sorting out
our differences. And we have got to keep our eye on the overall
objective: to give NASA some much needed flexibility to do what
we expect it to do to attract the best and the brightest to
help it with its very important mission.
I just want to point out that while this bill has been
available for all to read since our June markup, we did not
receive any Democratic amendments until 5:30 last night. And
some of them arrived after 6:00. That is understandable on
occasion, but I just want to put that on the record so we will
all understand that. Nevertheless, we have gone through the
amendments carefully, and believe we have separated the wheat
from the chaff. So let us proceed with this bill.
With that, I am proud and pleased to turn to my
distinguished Ranking Member, the gentleman from Texas, Mr.
Hall.
Mr. Hall. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I won't take a lot of
time to answer your statements, except that we will have some
helpful and correcting amendments as the day wears on.
[Statement of Mr. Hall follows:]

Opening Statement of Hon. Ralph M. Hall

Mr. Hall. I yield back my time.
Chairman Boehlert. Okay. Without all--without objection,
all Members may place opening statements in the record at this
point.
[The statements follow:]

Statement of Hon. Jerry F. Costello

Good morning. Today, the House Science Committee is considering six
bills for mark-up. Most are non-controversial and receive wide
bipartisan support.
However, I have strong reservations regarding H.R. 1085, the NASA
Flexibility Act of 2003. I believe we must wait for recommendations and
guidance from the Gehman Commission that will address management
issues. If we are going to address the problems concerning NASA, we
need to take into account the goals and vision of NASA and manned space
flight. I understand that NASA needs to do more to attract and retain
the best possible workforce; however, I believe we can assist NASA by
waiting to hear what recommendations the Gehman Commission makes so we
can address all the management problems affecting NASA and its
workforce. I believe we must also continue to review NASA's existing
workforce authority and why it is underutilized.
Mr. Chairman, instead of rushing to complete this significant
legislation, I believe we must take a step back and review all our
options before moving forward on legislation that does not address the
problem.
Aside from H.R. 1085, I believe the other pieces of legislation
have been considered in a bipartisan fashion and expand programs in
numerous agencies. For example, H.R. 2692, the United States Fire
Administration (USFA) Authorization Act of 2003, authorizes funding for
USFA activities, such as training, fire research and public education
over the next three years. Over the last three decades, America's fire
safety record has significantly improved. However, there are still
opportunities for further improvements in our fire safety record, such
as encouraging the use of sprinkler systems in homes. H.R. 2692 will
lead us in the right direction. As a member of the Congressional Fire
Services Caucus, I am proud to support this legislation.
Further, I am glad the House Science Committee is moving forward on
the FAA Research and Development Reauthorization Act of 2003. As a
conferee to the FAA bill for the Science Committee, I look forward to
working with my colleagues to enhance the research and development
programs as laid out in the legislation before this committee.
Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the committee for all their hard work
on these important issues and look forward to today's proceedings.
______

Opening Statement of Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee

Mr. Chairman, I appreciate your commitment to improving NASA, and
to America's mission in space in general. I am pleased that we are
focusing on the challenges that face NASA, and looking for creative
strategies for rejuvenating the aging workforce. However, I associate
myself with the remarks of Democratic Ranking Member Hall and Mr.
Gordon on the issue of the timing of this markup. Soon we will receive
a detailed report from Admiral Gehmen and the Columbia Accident
Investigation Board, that will give us not only technical information
about what brought down the shuttle, but also comprehensive
recommendations for improving the hierarchical structure and
communications and management at NASA--in order to improve safety.
Instead of waiting for that report, and learning from it, so that
we can put safety first--we are jumping the gun and putting bonuses and
``flexibility'' above safety. I will offer an amendment later that
addresses this safety issue and ensures that we get our priorities back
in order.
I wish we could have heard Admiral Gehman's recommendations before
deciding whether to give the Administrator the option of redesigning
the workforce. I hope we can work toward rejuvenating the NASA
workforce in a way that will enhance safety, in a bipartisan fashion
once the CAIB issues its report and hearings here in the Science
Committee begin in a couple of months.
Thank you.

Chairman Boehlert. And in line with the previous promise of
the majority, we recognize Mr. Gordon for 5 minutes.
Mr. Gordon. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I just want to echo my--the remarks made earlier by Mr.
Hall. As you know, I opposed the markup of this bill at the
Subcommittee level, because I strongly believe that we should
wait until the Columbia Accident Investigation Board has
completed its work. As Mr. Hall has noted, Admiral Gehman has
indicated that management and workforce issues are going to be
a substantial part of the Board's report. I think it would be
to the Committee's benefit for us to be able to see and assess
the Board's findings and recommendations in this area before we
markup a workforce legislation.
In his May 20 letter to me, the Chairman indicated that he
did not believe that the Board would be addressing the
workforce incentives included in this legislation. We will have
to wait for the Board's report to know whether or not that is
the case or not. However, my concern is not primarily whether
the Gehman Board has specific recommendations regarding such
things as recruitment or retention bonuses, it is whether the
Board uncovers some serious management and workforce issues
that require legislative attention by this Committee. Based on
the comments of the Board Members, it appears that they will be
identifying such issues in this report.
If that is the case, we need to be focusing on those issues
in order to ensure that we truly are addressing the most
important problems facing the NASA workforce. Otherwise we will
have applied at most a Band-Aid that only gives limited
assistance to that workforce. In that regard, I am reminded of
the fact that NASA's own documentation indicates that it has
not been making full use of its existing bonus authority, not
because the bonus levels authorized are too low, but because
overall budgetary problems at the centers prevent them from
fully funding those bonuses, something this legislation does
not fix.
Mr. Chairman, as Mr. Hall has indicated, a number of us
will be offering amendments to this legislation if you decide
to proceed with the markup. I hope that you can support some.
Since you have indicated that there will not be a NASA
authorization bill this session of Congress, this bill
represents our only opportunity to deal with important
workforce-related issues that we feel strongly need attention.
I hope that we can approach our task constructively and achieve
an outcome that has good bipartisan support.
And let me also say, Mr. Chairman, you mentioned that some
of our amendments did not get to you until 5:30 or 6:00. That
shouldn't--that is wrong. You should have gotten them before.
But I also want to remind you that your major amendment we did
not receive until 7:15 last night. So I think there really
needs to be an effort on both parts, I hope that we can talk
about--we are going to proceed on with this bill today, but we
need to talk about our procedures to have better consultations
so that we are in sync.
[Statement of Mr. Gordon follows:]

Opening Statement of Hon. Bart Gordon

Mr. Chairman, I want to echo the remarks made by Ranking Member
Hall. As you know, I opposed the markup of this bill at the
subcommittee level because I strongly believe that we should wait until
the Columbia Accident Investigation Board has completed its work. As
Mr. Hall has noted, Admiral Gehman has indicated that management and
workforce issues are going to be a substantial part of the Board's
report. I think it would be to the Committee's benefit for us to be
able to see and assess the Board's findings and recommendations in this
area before we mark up workforce legislation.
In his May 20th letter to me, the Chairman indicated that he did
not believe that the Board would be addressing the workforce incentives
included in his legislation. We will have to wait for the Board's
report to know whether that will be the case or not. However, my
concern is not primarily whether the Gehman Board has specific
recommendations regarding such things as recruitment or retention
bonuses--it is whether the Board uncovers some serious management and
workforce issues that require legislative attention by this Committee.
Based on the comments of Board members, it appears that they will be
identifying such issues in their report.
If that is the case, we need to be focusing on those issues in
order to ensure that we truly are addressing the most important
problems facing the NASA workforce. Otherwise we will have applied at
most a ``bandaid'' that only gives limited assistance to that
workforce. In that regard, I am reminded of the fact that NASA's own
documentation indicates that it has not been making full use of its
existing bonus authority--not because the bonus levels authorized are
too low, but because overall budgetary problems at the Centers prevent
them from fully funding those bonuses--something this legislation does
nothing to fix.
Mr. Chairman, as Mr. Hall has indicated, a number of us will be
offering amendments to this legislation if you decide to proceed with
the markup. I hope that you will support them. Since you have indicated
that there will not be a NASA Authorization bill this session of
Congress, this bill represents our only opportunity to deal with
important workforce-related issues that we feel strongly need
attention. I hope that we can approach our task constructively and
achieve an outcome that has good bipartisan support.
Thank you, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Gordon. So with that, Mr. Chairman, I thank you and I
yield back the balance of my time.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you very much, Mr. Gordon.
Just a couple of observations. First of all, I have met a
number of times, as has Mr. Hall and as have several Members of
this Committee, with Admiral Gehman. And he was indicating
repeatedly that the report is--that this bill has--is totally
separate from what he is going to be reporting and
recommending. He has no problem with us going forward with this
report. Anyone who looks at the space program, anyone who looks
at the current needs of NASA can agree that this bill should go
forward. They need, like, ASAP, retroactively, if possible, the
flexibility we are going to provide.
Interestingly enough, some of the amendments that are being
proposed, and some of them we will accept, I might add, from
the Democrat side, but some of them that are going to be
proposed really should be deferred until we have the benefit of
the Gehman Committee Report. We recognize some instances where
that should be true. And I don't want anyone to leave this room
feeling that we are not going to reauthorize NASA in this
Congress. We are probably not going to be able to get it
completed this year because of the schedule, but we are going
to do--deal with the reauthorization of NASA.
So with that, let us go on. I ask unanimous consent that
the substitute to H.R. 1085----
Mr. Hall. Would the gentleman yield before you go on?
Chairman Boehlert. I would be glad to yield to the
distinguished gentleman.
Mr. Hall. Why do you think it is so important to rush to
judgment when you haven't had a reauthorization bill since you
have been Chairman? What is the hurry? Why can't we wait for
that report?
Chairman Boehlert. You mean the reauthorization of this
bill?
Mr. Hall. Yes.
Chairman Boehlert. Oh, no. The--this bill----
Mr. Hall. But we have had no reauthorization bill, that I
remember, in the last two and a half--NASA reauthorization----
Chairman Boehlert. You are right. And----
Mr. Hall [continuing]. For the last 2\1/2\ or maybe 3
years.
Chairman Boehlert. The reauthorization expires at the end
of this year, and so then we should go forward with the
reauthorization. We would have that completed by now had----
Mr. Hall. Mr. Chairman, it expired last year.
Chairman Boehlert. The point is, on February 1, 10:59--8:59
on a sad Saturday morning, everything changed with respect to
this Committee and the manner in which to address NASA. We had
every intention of going forward this year early on with the
reauthorization of NASA. That is on hold for very obvious
reasons. But what should not be held hostage is our desire to
give NASA the flexibility it needs to do what we expect it to
do. And we want to give them this opportunity for things like
bonuses, retention flexibility, recruitment flexibility. No one
can argue with the basic premise of this bill.
The only argument has been, the only difference of opinion
between this side and your side, and they meld so often, and
very effectively I might add, and good public policy results
from that, the only real disagreement has been the timing. And
everyone--some people keep insisting that we wait until we have
the benefit of the Gehman Commission Report. And we are saying
unequivocally, based upon conversations with Admiral Gehman and
Members of the Board, that what they are proposing in their
report is not, in any way, shape, or manner, contrary to what
we are suggesting in this legislation. And I say let us get on
with the job.
Mr. Hall. Mr. Chairman, we have had differences. Less than
45 minutes ago, I was told you were going to oppose my
amendment.
Chairman Boehlert. Is that the amendment we got yesterday
at 5:30, Mr.--Counsel?
The Counsel. Yes.
Chairman Boehlert. Yes. Yeah, that is----
Mr. Hall. And that you didn't answer at 7:30 last night.
Chairman Boehlert. Well, but how can we develop our
Manager's Amendment until we have the benefit of your input?
Because the Manager's Amendment reflects the interests of the
entire Committee, Republican and Democrat alike. So we can't go
forward with the Manager's Amendment until we know what all
sides to the argument want to advance.
Mr. Hall. We told you a long time ago we were going with my
amendment. I think you had that knowledge, but if you didn't, I
accept your word for that.
Chairman Boehlert. Well, we knew you were going to have an
amendment, and we always know you are going to have an
amendment, as you should have an amendment. You are entitled to
have an amendment, but we didn't know the details of it. Quite
frankly, I am enamored with some of the things you have in your
amendment, and I am unalterably opposed to other things you
have in your amendment.
Let us go forward. Let us go forward. I ask unanimous
consent that the substitute to H.R. 1085, as adopted by the
Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics be considered as the
original text for the purpose of the markup at Full Committee.
Hearing no objection, so ordered.
I ask unanimous consent that the bill is considered as read
and open to amendment at any point and that the Members proceed
with the amendments in the order of the roster. Without
objection, so ordered.
The bill is now open for amendment.
The first amendment on the roster is the Manager's
Amendment offered by me. I ask unanimous consent that the
amendment be considered en bloc. Without objection, so ordered.
This is our first amendment. Per our discussions with the
majority at government reform and government affairs, the
amendment drops the voluntary separation payment, caps the
scholarship pay back period at 4 years, reduces the layover
period for changes to the workforce plan to 60 days, requires
NASA to submit reports for 6 years rather than 10, and adds the
Senate provision requiring the workforce report to include a
reaction to the Columbia Accident Investigation Board.
The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk. En Bloc Amendment to H.R. 1085 offered by Mr.
Boehlert.
Chairman Boehlert. Now I just reversed the order. I just
gave my statement before the amendment was offered, so the
amendment is now offered. Do you have the statement explaining
what it is?
I ask unanimous consent to dispense with the reading. And
without objection, so ordered.
And I just explained the amendment. Now is there further
discussion on the amendment?
Mr. Hall. Mr. Chairman, I have some discussion on it.
Chairman Boehlert. The Chair recognizes Mr. Hall.
Mr. Hall. Mr. Chairman, I had not really intended to seek a
recorded vote, even on your amendment, but at this time, I see
very little reason to support it. If anything, the fact that
there have been major changes to the workforce bill just hours
prior to both the Subcommittee markup and now this Full
Committee markup indicates that this is still not a mature
piece of legislation, I am sorry to say. I am told that these
latest changes are not the result of negotiations with the
minority on these proposed provisions. The amendment reinforces
my opinion that we shouldn't be marking up the bill at this
time.
If anything, the latest en bloc amendment seems to weaken
the oversight requirements on NASA at a time when I think we
should be strengthening them. This is not the time to get weak
on safety, and it is not the time to get weak on reporting.
This is a time to upgrade that. This is a time to seek safety
as our number one thrust in this bill or any other bill that
emanates or passes through this Committee. And I am afraid that
the innocuous provision that asks NASA, simply asks them to
include a reaction to the Columbia Accident Investigation Board
recommendations does very little to address the serious issues
being considered by the Board. And of course, the workforce
plan itself is essentially non-binding on NASA.
Quite simply, the proposed provision has no teeth, and NASA
will not be required to implement any of the Gehman Board's
recommendations. We could do that if we had them. And we are
just a few days away from having them. Nothing is going to
happen for the next 3, 4, 5, or 6 weeks. Mr. Chairman, I
reluctantly conclude that this amendment really doesn't address
our concerns with the bill. It doesn't even start to. Actually,
I think, you have weakened the report requirements. And I just
don't think that is good, and I urge you to reconsider it.
I yield back my time.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you very much.
Just let the Chair state, without any hesitation or
equivocation so that everyone is crystal clear, everyone in
this Committee, every single Member, safety, safety, safety
first and foremost. We are not, in any way, shape, or manner,
putting that commitment in jeopardy.
Secondly, we don't just ask NASA, we require NASA to
respond to the Columbia Accident Investigation Board. If there
is no further discussion, the vote occurs on the amendment.
Mr. Gordon. Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Boehlert. All in favor, say----
Mr. Gordon. Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Boehlert. Mr. Gordon.
Mr. Gordon. Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, as often is the case with amendments, there
is good news and bad news. The good news--and let me concede
this. The good news is that there are some aspects of this bill
that--on your en bloc that do improve the bill. The bad news is
that we did not receive this until 7:15 last night. It does
include some portions, as Mr. Hall said, that we think harm the
bill. But this is a product, just unilaterally, of the work of
the majority of the Science Committee and the majority of the
Government Reform Committee with no effort to bring even modest
improvements with consultation from the majority. We did not
see this until 7:15 last night.
Again, there are good aspects to this. I think that we
could have made it a little bit better. It is always going to
be your bill. The vast majority of all of this will be your
bill. We would like to have a--play a positive role, where we
can, in trying to make it a little bit better, and we were not
given that opportunity in this one.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you very much for your comments on
a dialogue that has been in process for several months now. We
all agree on the basic problem. We want to provide a solution.
We are not willing to wait for that solution. We want to move
forward, so if----
Mr. Rohrabacher. Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Boehlert. Yes. Mr. Rohrabacher, the distinguished
Chair of the Subcommittee on Space?
Mr. Rohrabacher. Yes, it is almost the--for this
discussion, I thought I might be the extinguished rather than
the distinguished Chairman.
I just--I mean, I sympathize with our colleagues on the
other side of the aisle, but just to note, we did have a
markup, and we did have a hearing on this. And we have had
discussion on this over the last few months, and so this
hasn't--this issue has not been, you know, locked away. It has
been open, and we have had action on it at the Subcommittee, so
just to note.
Mr. Gordon. Would my friend yield?
Mr. Rohrabacher. I certainly will.
Mr. Gordon. I don't think anybody in this body has a better
Subcommittee Chairman than I do. Yes, you are correct; this has
been on the table a long time. We have talked about it. Again,
no one could ask any more of you. But there is a difference
between the general bill of the subject and an en bloc
amendment that we didn't get until last night. A lot of these
issues have not been on the table, have not been discussed. So
where we are now is we have agreed to disagree as to the
timing, in terms of should we wait for Gehman or not. You know,
we have--or the Committee has decided to go forward.
Now the question is how can we get the best bill. And that
is what we want to try to do is be a part of helping you get
the very best bill. And so again, we need to distinguish
between something--the general discussion. We are past the
general discussion. We are past whether or not we are going to
go forward today. Now we are talking about specific matters to
try to make the bill better.
Mr. Rohrabacher. Reclaiming my time, I can't find anything
I disagree with my colleague about. Thank you.
Chairman Boehlert. Can you believe that? We are getting
along well here.
The vote occurs on the amendment. All in favor, say aye.
Opposed no. The ayes have it. The ayes have it, and the
amendment is agreed to.
Mr. Hall. I would like a recorded vote, please.
Chairman Boehlert. The Clerk will call the roll.
The Clerk. Mr. Boehlert?
Chairman Boehlert. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Boehlert votes yes. Mr. Lamar Smith?
Mr. Smith of Texas. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Smith votes yes. Mr. Weldon?
Mr. Weldon. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Weldon votes yes. Mr. Rohrabacher?
Mr. Rohrabacher. Aye.
The Clerk. Yes. Mr. Rohrabacher votes yes. Mr. Barton?
Mr. Barton. [No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Calvert?
Mr. Calvert. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Calvert votes yes. Mr. Nick Smith?
Mr. Smith of Michigan. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Smith votes yes. Mr. Bartlett?
Mr. Bartlett. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Bartlett votes yes. Mr. Ehlers?
Dr. Ehlers. [No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Gutknecht?
Mr. Gutknecht. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Gutknecht votes yes. Mr. Nethercutt?
Mr. Nethercutt. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Nethercutt votes yes. Mr. Lucas?
Mr. Lucas. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Lucas votes yes. Mrs. Biggert?
Mrs. Biggert. Yes.
The Clerk. Mrs. Biggert votes yes. Mr. Gilchrest?
Mr. Gilchrest. [No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Akin?
Mr. Akin. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Akin votes yes. Mr. Johnson?
Mr. Johnson. [No response.]
The Clerk. Ms. Hart?
Ms. Hart. Yes.
The Clerk. Ms. Hart votes yes. Mr. Sullivan?
Mr. Sullivan. [No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Forbes?
Mr. Forbes. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Forbes votes yes. Mr. Gingrey?
Mr. Gingrey. [No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Bishop?
Mr. Bishop. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Bishop votes yes. Mr. Burgess?
Mr. Burgess. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Burgess votes yes. Mr. Bonner?
Mr. Bonner. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Bonner votes yes. Mr. Feeney?
Mr. Feeney. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Feeney votes yes. Mr. Neugebauer?
Mr. Neugebauer. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Neugebauer votes yes. Mr. Hall?
Mr. Hall. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Hall votes no. Mr. Gordon?
Mr. Gordon. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Gordon votes no. Mr. Costello?
Mr. Costello. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Costello votes no. Ms. Johnson?
Ms. Johnson. [No response.]
The Clerk. Ms. Woolsey?
Ms. Woolsey. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Woolsey votes no. Mr. Lampson?
Mr. Lampson. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Lampson votes no. Mr. Larson?
Mr. Larson. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Larson votes no. Mr. Udall?
Mr. Udall. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Udall votes no. Mr. Wu?
Mr. Wu. [No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Honda?
Mr. Honda. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Honda votes no. Mr. Bell?
Mr. Bell. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Bell votes no. Mr. Miller?
Mr. Miller. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Miller votes no. Mr. Davis?
Mr. Davis. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Davis votes no. Ms. Jackson Lee?
Ms. Jackson Lee. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Jackson Lee votes no. Ms. Lofgren?
Ms. Lofgren. [No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Sherman?
Mr. Sherman. [No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Baird?
Mr. Baird. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Baird votes no. Mr. Moore?
Mr. Moore. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Moore votes no. Mr. Weiner?
Mr. Weiner. [No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Matheson?
Mr. Matheson. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Matheson votes no. Mr. Cardoza?
Mr. Cardoza. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Cardoza votes no.
Chairman Boehlert. How is Mr. Johnson recorded?
The Clerk. Mr. Johnson is not recorded.
Mr. Johnson. Mr. Johnson of Illinois votes yes.
Chairman Boehlert. How is Mr. Ehlers of Michigan recorded?
The Clerk. Mr. Ehlers is not recorded.
Dr. Ehlers. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Ehlers votes yes.
Chairman Boehlert. How is Mr. Wu of Oregon recorded?
The Clerk. Mr. Wu is not recorded.
Mr. Wu. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Wu votes yes.
Chairman Boehlert. The Clerk will report.
The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, yes, 22; no, 16.
Chairman Boehlert. Okay. The amendment is agreed to.
The next amendment on the roster is amendment number two
offered by Ms. Jackson Lee of Texas.
Ms. Jackson Lee. I thank the Chairman----
Chairman Boehlert. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk. Amendment to H.R. 1085 offered by Ms. Jackson
Lee of Texas.
Chairman Boehlert. I ask unanimous consent to dispense with
the reading. Without objection, so ordered.
Ms. Jackson Lee is recognized for 5 minutes to offer her
amendment.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I would
like to associate myself with the words of the Ranking Member
and the Chairman.
First of all, the words of the Ranking Member, and let me
thank him for his leadership. I think all of us have gone
through this for the number of years that we have served on
this Committee, and that is that we do wish to work across
party lines in this Committee. And we believe that this
Committee does extremely important work, but timing is always a
question of relevance. And I do associate myself with the idea
of wishing that this legislation would be delayed until we
could get the full Gehman Report and have a full understanding
of the complete needs of NASA as it reinvents itself in this
very crucial time.
Mr. Chairman, we have noted the good news is that a large
percentage of Americans are dedicated, committed, and loyal to
the human space shuttle program. That is great news, because I
believe this Committee is also committed to such. And I would
like to associate my words with the Chairman where we have
worked across party lines in a collegiate manner in this
Committee. And I am delighted that the Chairman would only use
first responders for the duties that they are to--that are
serious as opposed to duties coming into Committee rooms with
Members of Congress. So I thank him for that.
Saying that, I do have an amendment that deals with the
question of safety, and I would simply like to say, as an
opening point, that we do need to change the culture of NASA.
Let me share with my colleagues a statement by--in the New York
Times article dated July 17, ``Shuttle Investigator Faults NASA
for Complacency Over Safety''. NASA managers grew so complacent
about safety that at time inspectors were prevented from
performing spot checks, an independent investigator said
yesterday.
Brigadier General Duane Deal of the Air Force, a member of
the independent board investigating the shuttle Columbia
disaster, told The Associated Press that the program that
oversees shuttle inspections within the National Aeronautics
and Space Administration would ``take a pretty big hit'' in the
final report by the board, which is due at the end of August.
That was a New York Times article dated July 17, and I ask
unanimous consent to submit it into the record.
Chairman Boehlert. Without objection.
[The information follows:]

[From the New York Times, July 17, 2003]

Shuttle Investigator Faults NASA for Complacency Over Safety

(By John Schwartz)

NASA managers grew so complacent about safety that at times
inspectors were prevented from performing spot checks, an independent
investigator said yesterday.
Brig. Gen. Duane Deal of the Air Force, a member of the independent
board investigating the shuttle Columbia disaster, told The Associated
Press that the program that oversees shuttle inspections within the
National Aeronautics and Space Administration would ``take a pretty big
hit'' in the final report by the board, which is due at the end of
August.
General Deal, who has conducted 72 private interviews with NASA
workers as part of the investigation, called the inspection program
poor, and said that inspectors were prevented from making spot checks
and in one case had to buy their own magnifier when the procurement
process dragged on for months.
He said the decline in inspections over time suggested that some
NASA managers were ``perhaps out of touch with the realities of manned
spaceflight'' and its high level of risk.
Attempts to reach General Deal yesterday through the board were not
successful.
But in public briefings, he and other members of the board have
spoken extensively about the decline in inspections and the need for
NASA to go back thinking of the shuttle as an experimental vehicle, not
an operational craft.
Adm. Harold W. Gehman Jr., the board's chairman, said at a briefing
last week that NASA should not have the expectation that ``when the
thing lands, that you can turn it around and get it back into the air
again quickly.''
In a briefing on May 28, General Deal said that the interviews were
showing widespread dissatisfaction with the quality assurance programs
at NASA. ``We've interviewed many, many people, from line technicians
all the way up through management, and none of them out there agree
that we're at the 100 percent point,'' he said. ``It's time for a
relook.''
During that briefing, General Deal said that the number of
mandatory inspection points on the shuttle had dropped to around 8,500
from more than 40,000.
He said the board interviewers had encouraged NASA safety workers
to talk about general issues as well as specific ones. Along with the
questions whether they have the budget and the people to do the job
well, he said, ``We ask what I commonly call the `King for a Day' or
`Queen for a Day' question: `If you were in charge of all of NASA,
what's been gnawing at you? What would you change if we gave you the
right budget?' ''
The board has conducted some 200 interviews, with a promise of
anonymity.
Kyle Herring, a NASA spokesman, said it would be inappropriate to
discuss statements by board members before the final report comes out.
Mr. Herring said the NASA administrator, Sean O'Keefe, had been
``unwavering'' in his commitment to carry out the board's
recommendations once the report is published and had appointed a task
group to oversee the accomplishment of those recommendations. ``NASA
will take every one of those recommendations seriously,'' he said.
In a board briefing with reporters last Friday, General Deal said
the goal of the report would be to reinvigorate the safety culture of
NASA at all levels. ``You can revise the programs out there and fix the
top of the pyramid, but if we're not taking care of the bottom of it,
things are going to crumble,'' he said.

Ms. Jackson Lee. In addition, in an article dated--
Washington Post, July 12, ``Gehman commented similarly on e-
mail, released recently by NASA, that had been sent to the
Columbia crew during the flight, in which a flight director
casually dismissed the foam strike as `not even worth
mentioning.' Gehman said, `It tells me how widespread and
deeply ingrained this sense was that foam can't hurt an
orbiter.'
``The astronauts in orbit responded to the e-mail report in
kind, with lighthearted dismissal.'' This is a Washington Post
July 12 that I would like--July 12 that I ask unanimous consent
to put in the record.
Chairman Boehlert. Without objection.
[The information follows:]

[From the Washington Post, July 12, 2003]

NASA Errors To Be Cited In Report--Mistakes Termed `Equal' to Direct
Cause of Accident

(By Kathy Sawyer and Eric Pianin)

The board investigating the Columbia accident has concluded that
NASA management and safety system failures were as much a factor in the
destruction of the shuttle and its seven-member crew as the foam that
delivered a fatal blow to the shuttle's wing during liftoff.
Retired Adm. Harold W. Gehman Jr., chairman of the Columbia
Accident Investigation Board, told reporters yesterday that the final
report will give the same weight to the space agency's decision-making
errors as it will to the direct physical cause of the Feb. 1 loss of
the vehicle and its crew.
``We've now decided that these things are equal,'' he said. He
spoke in Washington at the final formal briefing the board has
scheduled before the release of its report near the end of August.
On Monday, the last in a series of impact tests sponsored by the
panel proved conclusively that its theory on the disaster's cause is
valid: A piece of foam insulation that fell off Columbia's propellant
tank and struck the front of the wing during the Jan. 16 launch could
easily have punched out a piece of the heat-shield material known as
RCC, for reinforced carbon carbon, leading to the catastrophe two weeks
later.
The test Monday, designed to re-create the launch-day impact, not
only left a 16- to 17-inch hole in the carbon fiber panel, board member
Scott Hubbard reported yesterday, it also dislodged an adjoining T-
seal, broke a lug that held the seal in place, and left ``a maze'' of
cracks running through the carbon fiber panel around the hole.
Board members said the launch-day breach in the wing was probably a
little smaller--in the six- to 10-inch-wide range--but ``in the same
ballpark.''
Gehman said there has been a pervasive and virtually unquestioned
assumption within the shuttle program that the foam could not possibly
have done such damage, even though NASA engineers had no data to prove
it.
This led to a series of flawed decisions, including the failure by
top managers to act on engineers' requests for spy satellite images of
the shuttle in orbit. Several board members said yesterday that, based
on Monday's test, the damage was likely severe enough that an
inspection in space could well have revealed it, depending on lighting,
shadow, contrast and other conditions.
The board has also determined that on Jan. 16, the foam chunk was
almost twice as large as the next largest piece that had fallen off the
tank during previous launches. ``The fact that this piece of foam * * *
is much, much larger than NASA's previous experience is, of course,
important,'' Gehman said, ``because it gets into the question of why
didn't that alarm the engineers in the program? That's kind of basic to
our investigation.''
Shuttle engineers referred to the Jan. 16 debris strike with the
phrase ``in family,'' meaning similar to past experience and, they
assumed, well-understood.
Gehman commented similarly on e-mail, released recently by NASA,
that had been sent to the Columbia crew during the flight, in which a
flight director casually dismissed the foam strike as ``not even worth
mentioning,'' Gehman said: ``It tells me how widespread and deeply
ingrained this sense was that foam can't hurt an orbiter.''
The astronauts in orbit responded to the e-mail report in kind,
with lighthearted dismissal.
In an informal exchange after the briefing, Gehman said the board
has met twice with the astronaut corps, urging its members to ``get
more aggressive and formal'' in addressing potential safety issues.
After the investigation into the 1986 Challenger accident, a
presidential panel recommended that present or former astronauts play a
more prominent role in shuttle management and safety, and they have. In
addition to veteran astronauts currently in high management positions,
the active corps has small groups of astronauts that follow specific
issues, Gehman noted. They ``have responded positively'' to his
suggestion to do even more.
Panel members have expressed confidence that NASA will fix the
short-term, mechanical problems such as foam shedding from the external
tank, but they indicated that an independent body should be given
responsibility for monitoring the needed changes in the broader system
and culture. This is among several questions the board will leave for
Congress or NASA to address, Gehman said.
Congress intends to respond swiftly to the board's final report
this fall with a series of hearings and action on a new spending bill
to provide NASA with the funds it will need to correct problems and
resume shuttle operations sometime next year, according to
congressional aides.
The Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee has
scheduled at least two hearings, to begin shortly after Labor Day, an
aide to Chairman John McCain (R-Ariz.) said, while the House Science
Committee will begin a series of hearings in September that will
continue throughout the fall.
The witness lists for the public hearings are certain to include
current and former NASA officials and contractors who were allowed to
testify in secret before the board.

Ms. Jackson Lee. This amendment specifically will provide a
work plan requirement to include a description of the
safeguards that will be applied to ensure that the safety or
survival of any spacecraft or crew is not compromised. Simply
saying that as this legislation moves forward, I would hope
that bonuses and management flexibility do not come before
safety.
I would be concerned--or am concerned by reports that NASA
may not have given high enough priority to safety and quality
assurance in the past. We will learn more by the report. But I
believe that it is extremely important that as we give
authority to the Administrator and give flexibility to relocate
or re-designate workers or to encourage experienced people to
retire that we do not lose critical knowledge and expertise and
compromise missions in the future.
I am aware of the fact that the underlying bill includes a
provision that the NASA Administrator must submit a written
plan to Congress 90 days before exercising any new workforce
authorities. But I am also aware of a particular circular that
is utilized, OMB8-76 that involves outsourcing and
privatization. I am obviously opposed to that and in large
scale throughout the government. And I understand that this
Administration strengthened that. I don't want to outsource
safety. I don't want to privatize safety, and I don't want to
outsource the expertise that we are needing to make NASA and
the human space shuttle flight more safe.
This will require the--this amendment will require that the
Administrator does a thorough assessment of how flexibility
might affect various programs, manned and unmanned. We must
protect our heroic astronauts, but it would also be tragic if
we began to lose more multi-billion dollar satellites or probes
because we saved a few thousand dollars offering someone early
retirement.
I would like to see a well thought out system set up by the
Administrator to screen the job descriptions of any employees
impacted by this act. If those employees have roles in safety
or quality assessment, a detailed assessment should be done of
how to compensate for the loss of their expertise.
I believe it is possible to have flexibility while ensuring
safety, but it will take some forethought in planning. For too
long, it seems, safety has been an afterthought. For many years
in this particular Committee, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member,
all of us have spoken about safety. I have spoken about safety,
I think, for the 10 years or so that I have been on this
Committee, almost 10 years. The culture in NASA has to change.
This amendment will be a beginning, but it is not the end. And
I hope that this Committee, as it reviews the Gehman Report,
will have an extensive review of the single most important
question for human space flight, and that is safety. I hope my
colleagues will support this amendment.
[Statement of Ms. Jackson Lee follows:]

Statement of Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee

Mr. Chairman, this amendment will help ensure that we do not put
bonuses and management ``flexibility'' before safety. I am concerned by
reports that NASA may not have given high enough priority to safety and
quality assurance in the past. We will learn more about it from the
Gehman report later, however, I understand that in some cases there is
only a single safety expert responsible for a given project subsection.
Therefore, I am worried that if we give the Administrator
flexibility to relocate or redesignate workers, or to encourage
experienced people to retire--we could lose critical knowledge and
expertise, and compromise missions in the future.
I am pleased that the underlying bill includes a provision that the
NASA Administrator must submit a written plan to Congress 90 days
before exercising any of the new workforce authorities. My amendment
adds that that plan will describe: ``the safeguards and other measures
that will be applied to ensure that this chapter is carried out in a
manner that does not compromise the safety or survival of any
spacecraft or crew thereof.''
This will require the Administrator does a thorough assessment of
how flexibility might affect various programs--manned and unmanned. We
must protect our heroic astronauts, but it would also be tragic if we
began to lose more multi-billion dollar satellites or probes, because
we saved a few thousand dollars offering someone early retirement. I
would like to see a well-thought out system set up by the Administrator
to screen the job descriptions of any employees impacted by this Act.
If those employees have roles in safety or quality assessment, a
detailed assessment should be done of how to compensate for the loss of
their expertise.
I believe it is possible to have flexibility while ensuring safety,
but it will take some forethought and planning. For too long, it seems,
safety has been an afterthought. This amendment will help set that
right. I hope you can support it.
Thank you.

Chairman Boehlert. Thank you very much.
The gentlelady makes a valued addition to this measure, and
the Chair is prepared to accept your amendment. I will
recognize Mr. Hall in just a moment to have further comment,
but once again, this put emphasis where emphasis is due. In
this Committee in this Congress, I don't think there is any
dividing line when it comes to safety. We are of one mind.
Thank you very much for a valued addition. The Chair is
prepared to accept it, but before doing so, will recognize Mr.
Hall.
Mr. Hall. Yeah, Mr. Chairman, I thank you for accepting it,
and I certainly add my support for Ms. Jackson Lee's amendment.
It is a very sensible addition to the workforce plan that NASA
is to provide under the terms of the bill. And as the Chairman
has said, anything that relates to safety, we are all for it,
and it is very important. I thank the gentlelady and yield back
my time.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you very much. The vote is on the
amendment. All in favor say aye. Opposed no. The ayes appear to
have it. The amendment is agreed to.
The next amendment on the roster is amendment number three
offered by Mr. Miller. The Clerk will report.
The Clerk. Amendment to H.R. 1085 offered by Mr. Miller.
Chairman Boehlert. Mr. Miller is recognized--I ask
unanimous consent to dispense with the reading. Without
objection, so ordered.
Mr. Miller is recognized for 5 minutes to offer his
amendment.
Mr. Miller. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The purpose of bonuses is to reward good performance that
the Chairman has pointed already in this hearing or in this
markup the importance of attracting very well qualified, very
committed employees to NASA. Bonuses help attract and retain
good employees by rewarding hard work and excellent
performance. And the tragic events--we have been tragically
reminded of just how important it is to have that kind of
workforce at NASA, that we do need to have the best engineers
and scientists on the planet employed at NASA.
I am, however, very concerned that the bonuses are being
used for employees of NASA who are not scientists, who are not
engineers, but who are political appointees. They are not
career employees. They are not engineers. They are not
scientists. Their only real qualification is that they have
political loyalty, political connections, but is not to say
that they are unqualified or not doing good work. But certainly
the purpose of the bonus is to reward those career employees to
keep them in the government service and not the people who
serve for a short period of time during a given Administration.
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, NASA has been
extraordinary in their use of bonuses for the political
appointees. Eleven out of eleven got bonuses last year. The
only other agency in the Federal Government that got 100
percent was the Agency for International Development, which
gave bonuses to three of three as opposed to eleven of eleven.
And for purposes of comparison, Department of Defense, 1
percent; Department of Labor, 2 percent; Department of
Commerce, 2 percent; and others in that vein. Certainly giving
these bonuses to 11 of 11 does raise the specter of political
cronyism of a political reward. It is hard to imagine that all
of these people are doing such extraordinary work and that it
is not creating resentment among the ranks of the very career
professional folks that we want to retain.
So that is the purpose of this amendment. Other
Administrations have not used bonuses for political appointees,
and certainly that is a very strong argument that I embrace.
And this amendment would prohibit bonuses for those political
employees, appointees.
Chairman Boehlert. I thank Mr. Miller. At this time, I
would like to offer a second-degree amendment, and the Clerk
will distribute my second-degree amendment.
Mr. Hall. Mr. Chairman, we know what the amendment is and
we think it is a good amendment. We will accept it.
Chairman Boehlert. Then the vote is on the amendment.
Mr. Hall. Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Boehlert. Well, wait. First of all, the Clerk has
to dispense it, and then the Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk. Amendment offered by Mr. Boehlert to the
amendment offer by Mr. Miller of North Carolina.
Chairman Boehlert. I ask unanimous consent to dispense with
the reading. Without objection, so ordered.
And I recognize myself for 1 minute to thank Mr. Hall for
agreeing to accept the amendment to perfect the amendment.
So the vote now is on the amendment, as----
Mr. Miller. Mr. Chairman, could I just ask a question? I
believe I do hold with Mr. Hall and agree that this is an
amendment that is perfectly fine, but I just had a couple of
questions, if I may direct them to the Chair.
Chairman Boehlert. Direct it to Counsel.
Mr. Miller. Who are the folks that are now excluded from
this exclusion? Who are the folks who are limited term
appointees? What kind of duties do they have? What are their
job duties?
The Counsel. Yes, sir. A limited term appointee is defined
in Title 5, because an individual appointed on a nonrenewable
appointment for a term of 3 years or less to an SES position,
because the duties of that position will expire at the end of
such term. And in discussions with NASA, a limited term
appointee is typically used for project-based work, and they
currently have nine of those employees. And they have zero
limited emergency appointees, which allows a limited term
appointment for 18 months versus 3 years.
Mr. Miller. Mr. Chairman, I agree that those do not fall
really in the category of political appointees, and I agree
that----
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you very much.
Mr. Hall. Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Boehlert. Mr. Hall.
Mr. Hall. I would like to say that I plan to vote for the
Miller Amendment. And I don't consider this amendment to be any
reflection on the political appointees of NASA. I think they
are just as dedicated to government service as the civil
servants are, but as I look at it, it is a simple matter of
what problem we are trying to address with this legislation. I
think you ought to probably even, with your amendment, going to
oppose this--the Miller Amendment?
Chairman Boehlert. No.
Mr. Hall. Okay.
Chairman Boehlert. Cooperation.
Mr. Hall. I guess we agree that the funds available for
that purpose are going to be limited, and we ought to apply
these funds where they will have the most pressing needs, and
those are the civil service workforce. We don't want to dilute
that effort, and I urge my colleagues to support the Miller
Amendment as amended.
Chairman Boehlert. So the vote is on second-degree
amendment to the Miller Amendment. All in favor, say aye.
Opposed, no. The ayes appear to have it.
The vote now is on the base amendment, as amended. All in
favor, say aye. No. The ayes appear to have it. The amendment
is agreed to.
Moving right along, the next amendment on the roster is
amendment number four, offered by Mr. Miller. Mr. Miller, are
you ready to proceed? All right. The Clerk will report the
amendment.
The Clerk. Amendment to H.R. 1085 offered by Mr. Miller.
Chairman Boehlert. I ask unanimous consent to dispense with
the reading. Without objection, so ordered. And Mr. Miller is
recognized for 5 minutes to offer his amendment.
Mr. Miller. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I agree that many of the safeguards in the civil service
system that were adopted as a great reform to end a system of
patronage and cronyism have, at some times, led the Federal
Government to being a lumbering unresponsive bureaucracy. And
we do need to consider other ways to make government function
more efficiently. And certainly, some demonstration projects,
some experiments to see how certain kinds of different
personnel policies may work better is entirely appropriate.
However, NASA already has authority to have such
demonstration projects for up to 5,000 employees. They are
not--they currently have no demonstration projects at all. And
rather than having us see what they are doing now, telling us
what they might do instead or in addition to what they are
trying now, they want to go to 8,000, which is a pretty large
number, particularly in view of the fact that they have had
authority to use--to have demonstration projects for up to
5,000 employees, and they haven't done it at all.
In addition, in answer to questions that Mr. Gordon posed
to NASA after a hearing on this topic, they were not very clear
at all on what kinds of things they would try with this
additional authority. Mr. Chairman, NASA has its plate full.
They do need to figure out what went wrong and what they need
to do to change. Trying to come up with a whole menu of
experiments in personnel to go beyond the 5,000 out of 18,000
employees is perhaps something they should not be encountering
right now and undertaking right now. And it certainly
undermines our ability, the Congress's ability, to oversee--to
maintain our oversight of exactly what they are doing.
Let us leave them at 5,000. Let us see what they do with
the 5,000. If they need more, let us let them come back later.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you very much.
And the Chair opposes the amendment. And let me point out
that this is something we worked out very carefully will all
concerned. And the largest union representing the employees
supports this amendment. They understand it. They know what our
objectives are. We are talking about a large agency with over
18,000 people. We want to restrict--it won't surprise you to
learn, Mr. Miller, NASA said, ``No holds barred. We want to do
whatever we want to do when we want to do it.'' And we said,
``That is not the way we are going to respond to your
request.'' We want to have it in a manageable form. So I think
the provision gives NASA the workforce flexibility it needs
based on 25 years experience in Federal Government ofconducting
demonstration projects. We drastically scaled back, as I pointed out
earlier, their proposal. They just wanted to do anything at any time,
and we said, ``Hell no. That is not the way we are going to respond to
you. We are going to have it and something that we think is manageable
and passes the smile test.''
So the Chair will reluctantly oppose it. Is there anyone
else who wishes to speak to this?
Mr. Gordon. Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Boehlert. Mr. Gordon.
Mr. Gordon. Mr. Chairman, let me just remind the Committee
that NASA has already had--already has the authority to have
demonstration projects yet they have never used it. And so why
in the world when--since they already have the authority and
haven't used it are they asking for such a massive one now on
top of the fact that we have asked them, ``What are you going
to do with it?'' And they won't tell us.
Chairman Boehlert. Would the gentleman yield?
Mr. Gordon. Yes, sir.
Chairman Boehlert. Because you have got new management over
at NASA, and in some instances, they are waking up to some of
the realities of doing business in a highly sophisticated, very
technologically oriented business. And they are beginning to
realize what they should have realized earlier, but at least
better late than never that they need some additional authority
and flexibility to do what we expect them to do.
Mr. Miller. If I could reclaim my time, if there is some
time----
Chairman Boehlert. As long as you--are you through? The
Ranking Member just brought me a sweet, and so I am going to
have a sweet while I listen to your sweet words.
Mr. Gordon. Well, there is new management, but it is not
quite as new as it was over a year ago. And once again, I think
that it is putting the horse before the cart to say, ``Here is
a major demonstration project, even more than you have now,''
without them telling us what they are going to do with it.
So I have made my point. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you very much.
I just point out that all of the protections in current law
are still there. They have to go forward and get OPM approval,
so this is not just sort of carte blanche saying, ``Do whatever
you want to do in any way--any manner you see fit,'' because we
all hope and pray that the result is something that will be
acceptable to us. There will be some restrictions on them.
And the Chair recognizes Mr. Weiner.
Mr. Weiner. I yield my time to the gentleman, Mr. Miller.
Mr. Miller. And Mr. Chairman, I ask that the Chairman will
yield to a question or two.
Chairman Boehlert. I will do my best to yield to the
question, and I will do my best to give the answer. If I don't
know the answer, I will finesse it until the staff tells me
what to say.
Mr. Miller. Mr. Chairman, you said that the principal union
representing NASA employees supports this amendment. Is it
really accurate to say that they support it or that they do not
oppose it?
Chairman Boehlert. Support. I think that--the largest union
supports this provision in this form. We have a letter. We
would be glad to include the letter in the record.
Mr. Miller. Okay. Well, I would like to see that. I can't
help but notice that the number in this bill of 8,000 employees
is the number of employees at NASA who are not members of the
union. Is there an understanding that the employees who will be
part of this demonstration project are the non-union employees?
Chairman Boehlert. Counsel, bail me out here, Counsel.
The Counsel. Yes, sir. To answer the question--first off,
we will be--here is the letter we will be sending up to you,
sir.
Chairman Boehlert. Would you give Mr. Miller a copy of the
letter, because we--and let me assure Mr. Miller the way you
are going to respond. No one is more interested in the
workforce, quite frankly, than their union representatives. And
they have a history of being very, very attentive to their
needs. And we worked this with them. We don't want to go
through the back door and have them waiting on the sideline. We
worked it through them and the letter that you now have
indicates their response. And then I will let Counsel respond
to your specific question.
The Counsel. Sir, to your question on what is required in--
with NASA management and labor organizations in existing
demonstration project authority, which this amendment does not
touch, in other words, this continues as law. Employees within
a unit with respect to a labor organization are accorded
exclusive recognition under Chapter 71 of this title and shall
not be included within any project under Subsection A of this
section if the project would violate a collective bargaining
agreement, as defined in law, between the agency and the labor
organization, unless there is a written agreement with respect
to the project between the agency and the organization
permitting the inclusion.
Do you want me to get you a copy of this, sir?
Mr. Miller. Was that yes?
The Counsel. They would need to--sir, they would need to
re-negotiate the collective bargaining agreement in order to be
a part of that demonstration process.
Mr. Miller. So the understanding, in effect, is that all of
the 8,000 non-union employees would be subject to the
demonstration projects?
The Counsel. They would need to be consulted, sir.
Mr. Weiner. Permit me to reclaim my time. Can I ask the
offer the--the offer of the amendment question. Is there
anything precluding this Committee at such time as they finally
wake up and decide they want to do these demonstration projects
returning to the Committee and asking for authorization
authority in a separate piece of legislation?
Mr. Miller. Mr. Weiner, that is pretty much what I said
when I first explained the amendment is that they have had the
right along with the authority to have up to 5,000 employees on
a demonstration project. They have not used that authority at
all. They have not had any demonstration projects----
Mr. Weiner. But even if we do reclaiming----
Mr. Miller. Right.
Mr. Weiner. Even if we passed your striking amendment,
there is nothing stopping us in considering a freestanding bill
tomorrow if they suddenly decide----
Mr. Miller. That is correct. That is correct. But we might
ask hard questions like, ``What are you going to do with this
authority?'' Which has not been a question that has been
addressed to this point.
Chairman Boehlert. If there is no----
Mr. Hall. Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Boehlert. Yes. Mr. Hall.
Mr. Hall. Mr. Chairman, I want to add my support to Mr.
Miller's amendment. I think he has explained it very well, and
I would like to reinforce what he said. When NASA sent over
their enhanced workforce demonstration proposal, they were
seeking, as has been said here, to have the entire NASA
workforce included, and nothing less would do. Nothing less
would be accepted. Now NASA is saying, ``Nevermind, 8,000
employees will do just fine.'' Well, if 8,000 employees is an
acceptable substitute for 18,000 employees, why not the 5,000
employees allowed under existing law, as has been pointed out
here?
NASA has presented no clear basis for 8,000 versus 5,000 to
this Committee. And before the fact, NASA has never even
attempted a workforce demonstration project, even though they
could, once again, as Mr. Miller has stated, under existing
law, so they have no basis for knowing what would be an
acceptable number. NASA has also been unwilling, and has
refused to tell this Committee what exactly it intends to do
with the enhanced demonstration project authority that it is
seeking.
Now the reality is that NASA is going to have its hands
full with dealing with the aftermath of the Space Shuttle
Columbia accident and the management issues that have surfaced.
I think NASA needs to get its house in order before it goes
seeking additional workforce authorities. I urge Members to
support this amendment.
I yield back my time.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you very much.
If there is no further discussion, the vote is on the
amendment. All in favor, say aye. Opposed no. The nos appear to
have it.
Mr. Miller. Mr. Chairman, I ask for a recorded vote.
Mr. Hall. I ask for a recorded vote.
Chairman Boehlert. The Clerk will call the roll.
The Clerk. Mr. Boehlert?
Chairman Boehlert. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Boehlert votes no. Mr. Lamar Smith?
Mr. Smith of Texas. [No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Smith votes yes. Mr. Weldon?
Mr. Weldon. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Weldon votes no. Mr. Rohrabacher?
Mr. Rohrabacher. I pass.
The Clerk. Mr. Barton?
Mr. Barton. [No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Calvert?
Mr. Calvert. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Calvert votes no. Mr. Nick Smith?
Mr. Smith of Michigan. [No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Bartlett?
Mr. Bartlett. [No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Ehlers?
Dr. Ehlers. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Ehlers votes no. Mr. Gutknecht?
Mr. Gutknecht. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Gutknecht votes no. Mr. Nethercutt?
Mr. Nethercutt. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Nethercutt votes no. Mr. Lucas?
Mr. Lucas. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Lucas votes no. Mrs. Biggert?
Mrs. Biggert. No.
The Clerk. Mrs. Biggert votes no. Mr. Gilchrest?
Mr. Gilchrest. [No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Akin?
Mr. Akin. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Akin votes no. Mr. Johnson?
Mr. Johnson. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Johnson votes no. Ms. Hart?
Ms. Hart. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Hart votes no. Mr. Sullivan?
Mr. Sullivan. [No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Forbes?
Mr. Forbes. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Forbes votes no. Mr. Gingrey?
Mr. Gingrey. [No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Bishop?
Mr. Bishop. [No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Burgess?
Mr. Burgess. [No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Bonner?
Mr. Bonner. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Bonner votes no. Mr. Feeney?
Mr. Feeney. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Feeney votes no. Mr. Neugebauer?
Mr. Neugebauer. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Neugebauer votes no.
Chairman Boehlert. How is Mr. Smith of Texas recorded?
The Clerk. Mr. Smith of Texas is not recorded.
Mr. Smith of Texas. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Lamar Smith votes no. Mr. Hall?
Mr. Hall. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Hall votes yes. Mr. Gordon?
Mr. Gordon. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Gordon votes yes. Mr. Costello?
Mr. Costello. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Costello votes yes. Ms. Johnson?
Ms. Johnson. Aye.
The Clerk. Ms. Johnson votes yes. Ms. Woolsey?
Ms. Woolsey. Aye.
The Clerk. Ms. Woolsey votes aye. Mr. Lampson?
Mr. Lampson. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Lampson votes yes. Mr. Larson?
Mr. Larson. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Larson votes yes. Mr. Udall?
Mr. Udall. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Udall votes yes. Mr. Wu?
Mr. Wu. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Wu votes yes. Mr. Honda?
Mr. Honda. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Honda votes yes. Mr. Bell?
Mr. Bell. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Bell votes yes. Mr. Miller?
Mr. Miller. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Miller votes yes. Mr. Davis?
Mr. Davis. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Davis votes yes. Ms. Jackson Lee?
Ms. Jackson Lee. Aye.
The Clerk. Ms. Jackson Lee votes yes. Ms. Lofgren?
Ms. Lofgren. [No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Sherman?
Mr. Sherman. [No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Baird?
Mr. Baird. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Baird votes yes. Mr. Moore?
Mr. Moore. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Moore votes yes. Mr. Weiner?
Mr. Weiner. Aye
The Clerk. Mr. Weiner votes yes. Mr. Matheson?
Mr. Matheson. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Matheson votes yes. Mr. Cardoza?
Mr. Cardoza. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Cardoza votes yes.
Chairman Boehlert. Well, let us see. First of all, Mr.--how
is Mr. Burgess recorded?
The Clerk. Mr. Burgess is not recorded.
Mr. Burgess. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Burgess votes no.
Chairman Boehlert. How is the distinguished Chairman of the
Subcommittee, Mr. Rohrabacher?
The Clerk. Mr. Rohrabacher is not recorded.
Mr. Rohrabacher. The distinguished Chairman of the
Subcommittee always backs the Chairman of the Full Committee
and votes no.
The Clerk. Mr. Rohrabacher votes no.
Chairman Boehlert. Dr. Bartlett?
Mr. Bartlett. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Bartlett votes no.
Mr. Hall. Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Boehlert. Mr. Sherman? How is Mr. Sherman
recorded?
The Clerk. Mr. Sherman is not recorded.
Chairman Boehlert. The Clerk will report.
The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, yes, 20; no, 20.
Chairman Boehlert. The amendment is defeated, and we
proceed onto the next.
The next amendment on the roster is amendment number five
offered by Mr. Rohrabacher from California. Are you ready, Mr.
Rohrabacher, to proceed?
Mr. Rohrabacher. I guess I am ready.
Chairman Boehlert. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk. Amendment to H.R. 1085 offered by Mr.
Rohrabacher.
Chairman Boehlert. I ask for unanimous consent to dispense
with the reading. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr.
Rohrabacher is recognized for 5 minutes to offer his amendment.
Mr. Rohrabacher. This amendment, it changes and amends what
is currently in this bill dealing with the scholarship program.
Our Subcommittee had hearings and Full Committee had hearings
looking into NASA--the NASA workforce requirements. And one of
the great complaints we got were, of course, that NASA is not
being able to attract engineering and science students to fill
its ranks with capable people. And at the same time, we have
also had hearings reflecting that. We have a scholarship
program--excuse me, that we have graduate programs in science
and engineering in which a vast--in which the majority of
students taking part in these graduate programs throughout the
United States are non-U.S. citizens. And in fact, many of them
are foreigners that return home with the skills that we give
them.
This amendment would modify the scholarship program that is
currently in the bill by suggesting that where the bill already
suggests that there indicates that there will be 2 years of
service for every 1 full year of scholarship for every
engineering and science student that participates in the
program. We have had a--somewhat of an internal debate as to
how extensive this scholarship program should be. I suggested
that this just be a--would be only available to graduate to
undergraduate students. In our debate over whether it should be
extended to all engineering and science students, we have
reached a compromise, Mr. Chairman, in which the scholarship
program is available to juniors and seniors as well as graduate
student programs. But freshmen and sophomores will not be
available, because at that point, people are just going through
their prerequisites.
So my amendment codifies this compromise that has been
reached that juniors and seniors and graduate students would be
covered by the scholarship program. My amendment also covers
the concern by Mr. Wu who was making sure that the scholarships
would be available not just to U.S. citizens but also to legal
residents, people who are in this country legally and certainly
have every right of every other resident and citizen of the
United States. So this amendment covers that concern. And I
understand that there will be en bloc language or there was
some language included in the en bloc amendment that will be
altered by the--by an amendment at the last--the final
amendment to this series of amendments that will further shape
this scholarship program. And I appreciate that very much.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you very much, Mr. Rohrabacher.
And I want to say, this Committee is providing leadership, as
evidenced by you and Mr. Wu, on scholarship for service. It
just makes so much sense, and we are going to continue to
provide that leadership. Is there anyone else that----
Mr. Gordon. Mr. Chairman, I would like to add my support to
this thoughtful compromise.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you very much, Mr. Gordon.
Mr. Hall. Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Boehlert. Mr. Hall?
Mr. Hall. I certainly support the Rohrabacher Amendment as
I support most Rohrabacher Amendments and have for years and
years and years. And I would make a suggestion while I have the
opportunity, that my amendment, I think, is coming up next, and
why don't we go vote to give you time to think through my
amendment a little more and have more time to consider it.
Chairman Boehlert. All right. The question is on the
amendment as offered by Mr. Rohrabacher in cooperation with Mr.
Wu. All in favor say aye. No. The ayes appear to have it. And
the amendment is agreed to.
I think we have got to go forward now at this particular
juncture before we hear from our distinguished colleague from
Texas, Mr. Hall. So the Committee will stand in recess. We
don't have enough time to go forward now. Let us go forward and
we will be back shortly.
[Recess.]
Chairman Boehlert. Next on the amendment roster is
amendment number seven offered by Mr. Hall from Texas. Are you
ready to proceed, Mr. Hall?
Mr. Hall. Yes, Mr. Chairman. I have an amendment at the
desk.
Chairman Boehlert. The Member will suspend.
The Chair recognizes Mr. Forbes.
Mr. Forbes. Mr. Chairman, I wish to reserve a point of
order.
Chairman Boehlert. The Member has reserved a point of
order. Mr. Hall may proceed with his amendment. The Clerk will
report the amendment.
The Clerk. Amendment to H.R. 1085 offered by Mr. Hall.
Chairman Boehlert. I ask unanimous consent to dispense with
the reading. Without objection, so ordered.
Mr. Hall is recognized for 5 minutes to offer his
amendment.
Mr. Hall. Mr. Chairman, my amendment is straightforward. It
consists of a series of provisions intended to address a number
of the key issues raised by the Space Shuttle Columbia
accident.
I would briefly like to describe these provisions. They are
all related to ensuring the health and safety of the NASA
workforce and the safety of the Space Shuttle program in
general. First, the Gehman Board has highlighted problems with
NASA's independent safety office, indicating that it has
inadequate resources to provide the safety oversight needed by
the agency, the funding and civil service personnel ceiling
history of NASA's Office of Safety and Mission Assurance
clearly shows a decline in both areas. And I ask unanimous
consent that that history be entered into the record of this
markup. And without objection, I hope you will do so.
Chairman Boehlert. Sir?
Mr. Hall. I ask unanimous consent that the funding and
civil service personnel ceiling history of NASA's Office of
Safety and Mission Assurance clearly shows the decline, I
think, in both areas, but there would be people that could
analyze it and say it is in decline or it is not in decline. I
just simply ask unanimous consent that their--that history be
entered into the record of this markup.
Chairman Boehlert. Without objection.
[The information follows:]

The NASA Office of Safety and Mission Assurance was established in
December 1986.
Budget numbers are research and development funds that are managed
by the Headquarters Office of Safety and Mission Assurance. They fund
development of tools and processes pertaining to system safety,
reliability, maintainability, non-destructive testing, quality
assurance, software assurance, and risk management, as well as limited
independent assessment of Centers and programs. The numbers do not
include safety and mission assurance funding managed by NASA programs
and Centers.

SAFETY & MISSION QUALITY
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cumulative Cumulative
obligations disbursements
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1986................................ $10,625,487 $10,490,027
1987................................ 21,242,564 18,118,069
1988................................ 15,082,574 8,760,314
1989................................ 22,836,605 22,836,609
1990................................ 31,445,914 31,445,914
1991................................ 33,421,817 33,421,819
1992................................ 34,428,996 34,438,993
1993................................ 33,960,602 33,960,599
1994................................ 36,372,481 36,372,468
1995................................ 35,961,152 35,960,988
1996................................ 32,329,766 32,329,683
1997................................ 34,962,082 34,900,261
1998................................ 30,408,666 28,644,020
1999................................ 28,481,075 26,889,829
2000................................ 27,820,752 26,374,740
2001................................ 28,407,483 27,397,807
2002................................ 30,919,107 24,520,872
2003................................ 5,918,219 1,435,518
------------------------------------------------------------------------
UPN budget for Safety & Mission quality is $28.3M in FY 2003 and $28.5M
in FY 2004.

Civil Service ceilings for the Office of Safety and Mission Assurance at
NASA

Fiscal year:
1987.......................................................... 64
1988.......................................................... 68
1989.......................................................... 73
1990.......................................................... 82
1991.......................................................... 82
1992.......................................................... 86
1993.......................................................... 72
1994.......................................................... 83
1995.......................................................... 64
1996.......................................................... 50
1997.......................................................... 44
1998.......................................................... 40
1999.......................................................... 40
2000.......................................................... 40
2001.......................................................... 42
2002.......................................................... 43
2003.......................................................... 47
2004.......................................................... 47

Mr. Hall. All right. My amendment simply reverses that
decline and helps to strengthen--I think we help to strengthen
the Office of Safety and Mission Assurance. It also directs the
NASA Administrator to provide Congress with a formal response
to the Gehman Board's safety-related findings and
recommendations. I just don't think that is asking too much. I
think he ought to do that. He ought to want to do that. And I
am hopeful that he will do that. We need to hear what NASA
intends to do in response to the Board's recommendations in
this area.
Second, my amendment addresses a safety issue that I feel
very strongly about, and that is an issue that other Members on
both sides of the aisle have suggested. That is the need to
provide a crew escape system for the astronauts that fly the
Space Shuttle. I think we absolutely have to start addressing
that. I think we have addressed it before. Their answer has
always been it is either too heavy, the materials would not be
workable, it is too expensive. When we are dealing with lives
of youngsters, and if I had a son that was an astronaut, I am
not sure I would want him flying in these four shuttles that we
have left until we work out the absolute, without any question,
causation of the last serious loss and tragedy that we had.
We need to provide crew escape systems for the astronauts,
and my amendment provides a step in that direction. In the 17
years since the Challenger accident, NASA has done very little
to address Space Shuttle crew escape. Buzz Aldrin has pushed
for that. Others have pushed for that. It makes sense. It is
something we ought to do. It is something we can't say we don't
have enough money to do when lives are held certainly in
constant fear of that that might happen. No one expected this
accident that happened with the Columbia. No one could foresee
the Challenger that was destined from its--from the takeoff
from the rings that were frozen there. There is just something
that we can do about things like that. And if we can't preclude
the happening or the causation of those serious accidents like
that, we can do something about their opportunity to escape
from it, to have some hope, some parachute that would let them
down to the Earth as they have something that occurs up there.
In the past, their agency has argued that weight and cost
impacts made it impractical. Well, I don't think that the
combined talents of NASA and the aerospace industry are
incapable of rising to the challenge of coming up with a viable
escape system. And that is all we are asking for. We need to
collect the best ideas. And after we have picked one, we need
to move out and equip the remaining shuttle fleet with a crew
escape system that can protect the entire crew, not just two of
them or four of them as they say--some of them say they can do
today. We ought to protect that entire crew.
Third, my amendment contains a provision that I think is
just plain good common sense. The bill before us, as well as
other legislation, would allow NASA to offer generous buyouts
to the NASA employees. Early retirement for people that we
probably need. Well, I think that before any buyouts are
approved, the NASA Administrator needs to certify to this
Congress that critical Space Shuttle and Space Station safety
skills won't be lost. That would be a prudent step at any time,
but it is even more important now with the Shuttle fleet facing
a difficult return to flight status and the Space Station
program limping along with the Shuttle fleet grounded.
Fourth, my amendment addresses another concern that has
been raised by the Gehman report by the Board: the extent of
contracting out and NASA's Space Shuttle program. Admiral
Gehman has expressed his own concerns over NASA's level of
dependence on contractors for important Shuttle functions, but
we don't know what he is going to say, because we are going
ahead with this legislation before we get his report. He has
made indications of what is going to be in it, but we don't
know. I don't want to prejudge what the Gehman Board is going
to say in this area. However, I think it is important for this
Committee to put the brakes on any additional contracting out
beyond what already exists until we have heard from the Gehman
Board on this issue as well as NASA's response.
Mr. Chairman, the loss of the Space Shuttle Columbia and
its brave crew was a tragedy. I know it was a tragedy to you.
It is a tragedy to Republicans and Democrats alike, to the
American people. But it is up to this Committee to learn from
that tragedy and to take measures to support the health and
safety of the NASA workforce.
I hope that you and the other Members of this Committee
will support this amendment. The Senate bill doesn't go far
enough, and there have been efforts to try to say, ``Well, we
will just substitute the Senate bill.'' It excludes my
amendment, and it doesn't go far enough. And any message should
be safety in reporting. Nick Lampson's vision ought to be
included in this for space human program. My crew escape thrust
is just not in there, and it doesn't go far enough. Yes, it is
better, I think, than what we have. I think it is better than
what we are passing. But it is not good enough, and it doesn't
assure those men and women that have bet their future. And when
they are strapped to that missile, they bet their life that
they are going to get to come back. Give them an even shot.
Give them a way out if something happens that is unforeseen,
and most accidents are unforeseen.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. You have been kind and generous
with the time. I yield back my time.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you very much. The gentleman
doesn't have any time to yield back, but because we were so
anxious to hear what you had to say, we extended the time
afforded you. So thank you. I wish I could support this
amendment, but both out of respect for Mr. Hall and for the
issue it raises, I think I owe the Committee a full explanation
in my reasoning for not supporting this amendment on this
particular bill at this time.
The first portion of the amendment puts in place specific
safety requirements. We have no idea, at this point, if the
safety measures in the Hall Amendment are the right ones to
pursue. We don't know if the Office of Safety should continue
as it does now, how much money it should have, or how many
people. And we are not alone in feeling at sea. The
Appropriations Committee put off any discussions on those
issues just yesterday, because of a lack of information. My
Democrat friends keep saying we ought to wait until the Gehman
Commission reports before taking up items on which Admiral
Gehman will offer guidance. This safety provision is precisely
the kind of item on which the Gehman Board will have plenty to
say, and I couldn't agree more with the Democrats in their
urging that we ought to wait until the Gehman Commission Report
before addressing this area.
The concern with safety is one we all share. The sensethat
H.R. 1085 does not solve all of NASA's problems and that many, many
more significant steps will have to be taken, we all agree with that.
H.R. 1085 just takes care of some of the easy things. Major issues,
such as how to ensure safety, need to wait for the Gehman Report. We
can't be voting on these matters today if we are going to be fully
informed.
The same can be said perhaps even more so about the crew
safety provisions of this amendment. Is there anyone on this
Committee on either side of the aisle that isn't concerned
about crew safety? The answer is clearly no.
The other two sections of the Hall Amendment raise other
issues. His third provision prevents the use of voluntary
separation payments. We have already removed from the bill
today through my amendment, any expansion of voluntary
separation authority. This amendment would go further and
prevent NASA even from using its authorities under current law.
There is no indication that NASA is misusing its authorities
and no reason to take NASA--to make NASA the only federal
agency that cannot take advantage of current law.
The last provision in the amendment is a sweeping
prohibition against contracting out. It is so broad that it
might even prevent contracting out for some of the very studies
that would be required by other Democrat amendments. I agree
that NASA's contracting processes have to be examined, and they
raise questions. This is one of the issues on which I am most
interested in hearing from Admiral Gehman and the Columbia
Accident Investigation Board. It is also the reason we rejected
NASA's, what I think, is misguided proposal to create an
industry exchange program. Contracting out is one of those
issues on which we need more information. The language here is
so broad that it could have unintended consequences. We don't
even know what kinds of routine contracts might be let in the
next few months that would be blocked by this amendment.
So I respect Mr. Hall and the issues he is raising. Those
are issues that need to be raised. Those are issues this
Committee needs to address. We will deal with these issues
after the Gehman Board reports in numerous hearings and in
conjunction with that consideration of the authorization bill.
Therefore, I reluctantly oppose the amendment, but I applaud
Mr. Hall for bringing up these very important subjects. And I
would ask that--is there any other Member who wishes to be
heard on this amendment?
Mr. Hall. Would the gentleman yield?
Chairman Boehlert. I would be glad to yield to Mr. Hall.
Mr. Hall. In order that you have all of the information, I
am sure you are aware of the fact that the buyouts are still in
the Homeland Security Act and that this addresses that.
Chairman Boehlert. We--my statement said that, and we
referred to it. We referred to that. The answer is yes, and the
statement refers to that. Anything else, Mr. Hall?
Mr. Hall. Have you reconciled that? Do you understand what
I am saying?
Chairman Boehlert. Yeah. Yeah. This amendment would go
further and prevent NASA even from using its existing authority
under current law. There is no indication that NASA is misusing
its authorities and no reason to make NASA the only federal
agency that cannot take advantage of current law.
Mr. Hall. Mr. Gordon.
Mr. Gordon. Go ahead.
Chairman Boehlert. Ms. Johnson.
Ms. Johnson. Just a simple question. Do you know when this
report will be coming, when the Committee will hear it? How
soon?
Chairman Boehlert. The tentative date now, Ms. Johnson, is
August 26. The initial date was July 23, and when Mr. Hall and
I had a lengthy meeting with Admiral Gehman and the Columbia
Accident Investigation Board, as a matter of fact, 10 of the 13
Board Members were there. We had about a 3-hour meeting----
Ms. Johnson. August 26 while we are out?
Chairman Boehlert. Right.
Ms. Johnson. Who is he going to give it to?
Chairman Boehlert. Oh, the--they are going to give it to
everybody. We are going to get it in a hurry, unless we are----
Ms. Johnson. We are still on recess.
Chairman Boehlert. I understand, but quite frankly, most of
us spend a good share of recess working, and we don't get
enough appreciation for the fact that--you know, so many people
think that--when they look at the schedule that Congress
begins----
Ms. Johnson. Well, all of us work----
Chairman Boehlert. Let us see. You have got this recess and
you have got that recess. What are you people doing up there?
You seem to spend almost as much time in recess as you do
working. Those recesses, as a practical matter, and the
gentlelady knows full well, really are mislabeled. They are
district work periods, and most of us work in all of those
recesses. And we all have families, and I will tell you this, I
am going to take a week's vacation with my family. I hope you
do, too.
Who seeks--Mr. Forbes.
Mr. Forbes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Chairman, I have reserved a point of order, and now I
will press the point of order. While the amendment has some
good aspects, unfortunately, the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Texas is not germane to the bill, and I would
ask the Chair's ruling on that.
Chairman Boehlert. Would the gentleman suspend for a
moment? Would you defer it, because we want to give the
majority--the minority side a chance to further comment on Mr.
Hall's well-intentioned amendment?
Who seeks recognition? Mr. Gordon.
Mr. Gordon. I would have two comments, Mr. Chairman. First
is, you know, I can't say that I disagree with your argument
that we should wait for the Gehman Board before we proceed on
these types of serious issues. I mean, I--again, I think that
is the proper position. However, this seems like the last train
out of town and the reason that we are trying to perform some
good on this bill. Now as you know, we haven't had an
authorization in a couple of years. Why is it going to be
different this year?
Chairman Boehlert. You may consider this the last train,
but it is not going very far. It is going out of this Committee
right over to the Floor. And the Floor actually will be
scheduled after we have the benefit of the Gehman Report, so we
will have plenty of opportunity to deal with this, in a very
meaningful way.
Mr. Gordon. So you are saying then that these issues then
will be relevant and that we can--I guess you are saying on the
Floor, and that we are going to go ahead and rush and pass this
now, but that we can then raise these issues after Gehman comes
back on the Floor on this bill?
Chairman Boehlert. As I have said repeatedly, Admiral
Gehman is not going to be dealing specifically with the items
contained in this narrowly defined bill. Now Mr. Hall wants to
deal with something much broader, subject matter that I agree
has to be dealt with in a very thorough, responsible manner.
That should not prevent us from going forward with this
narrowly defined bill to address a very real problem that
exists right now and that we have an ability to address right
now.
Mr. Gordon. Mr. Chairman, I understand your--I don't agree,
but I understand your position. What I am asking is what will
be the vehicle to address Mr. Hall's very legitimate safety
issues?
Chairman Boehlert. We are going to have--the authorization
bill is the natural vehicle, and we are going to be dealing
with that.
Mr. Gordon. Even though we haven't dealt with it in a
couple of years, you are saying we are going to get one done
here?
Chairman Boehlert. Oh, sure. I have every intention of
moving forward on the authorization bill. We would have had the
authorization bill behind us----
Mr. Gordon. Well, one more----
Chairman Boehlert [continuing]. At this time in the
legislative calendar except for the tragic moment at 8:59 a.m.
on the morning of February 1. And that changed everything.
Mr. Gordon. One more question on the germaneness issue. As
you know, Mr. Hall's amendment was a multi-part amendment. The
first one was that NASA would report back to Congress on the
recommendations of the Gehman Commission and what they are
going to do about it. I would certainly assume that would be
germane. Could I ask for that information, whether that would
be germane, that aspect of the bill? The first provision? The
first provision?
Chairman Boehlert. My leader here is guiding me. It also
directs the NASA Administrator to provide Congress with a
formal response to the Gehman Board's safety-related findings
and recommendations. We have already done that in the bill.
Mr. Gordon. Is that accomplished in the bill?
Chairman Boehlert. Is that in the base bill?
The Counsel. It is in the En Bloc Amendment.
Chairman Boehlert. In the En Bloc Amendment, and we can
refer to the specific language, if you want us to.
Mr. Hall. We are trying to find out what NASA would intend
to do in response to the Board's recommendations, and you can't
know that until we get the Board's recommendation.
Chairman Boehlert. Yeah, well, I agree with that. The Board
has got to have recommendations.
Mr. Hall. And you know, how much time are we going to have
with probably Congress adjourning early in, maybe, October?
Chairman Boehlert. You want to bet?
Mr. Hall. Yeah, I will bet.
Chairman Boehlert. All right. Let us have a wager. Is it
legal in the District of Columbia to wager?
Mr. Hall. No, but we can go to Las Vegas and place your
bet.
Chairman Boehlert. The fact of the matter is I think we all
are pretty well acclimated to the basic logical response that
we are not going to be out of here early October.
Mr. Hall. Mr. Chairman, would you continue with the
gentleman from Tennessee's----
Chairman Boehlert. We will continue with the gentleman----
Mr. Hall [continuing]. In the event I drop part of my
amendment, your attitude on holding the other part germane. For
example, if I would drop everything except the crew escape, and
nobody can differ on that, where would you be? That would
certainly be germane, wouldn't it?
Chairman Boehlert. But it isn't germane. Yeah. No, it isn't
germane on a workforce reauthorization bill. Look. You know and
I know all of the conversations we have had informal and formal
with--before the world and in a Committee hearing where we have
recorders here that we are both vitally interested in crew
escape and we want to do everything humanly possible to deal
with it. But this is not the vehicle to deal with that. We are
going to deal with that after the Gehman Commission Report. We
are going to deal with that in the reauthorization. Part of the
problem in this town is that too many people just rush to
judgment in a whole wide range of areas before thinking it
through thoroughly. I want the best possible review and
analysis of a crew escape vehicle. I want not a seat of the
pants judgment. I want something that is documented and that
has been thoroughly vetted with a whole wide variety of experts
who can give us the best possible opinion.
What I am trying to do today, and I think the gentleman
knows full well, is move forward with a narrowly targeted bill
to address a very real problem that exists at NASA today as we
are deliberating. We can do that. The items you raise in your
comprehensive amendment, though not germane to this bill, are
very important to the overall program. And I certainly want to
work cooperatively with the gentleman to address items like
safety, crew reentry, escape vehicles, and that type of thing.
Anyone else seek to be recognized?
Mr. Gordon. Mr. Chairman, if I could, just for a point of
clarification, again, I really am not trying to be
argumentative. Again, we didn't get this bill until 7:15 last
night. You may have covered it. You know, what I am asking
may----
Chairman Boehlert. No, that has nothing to do with it,
quite frankly.
Mr. Gordon. Well, no, okay. Again, I just want information,
because you may have covered it. A part of Mr. Hall's amendment
said that within 60 days after the date of enactment of this
act, the Administrator that is of NASA shall submit to the
Committee on Science of the House of Representatives and the
Committee of Commerce and Transportation a response to the
findings and recommendations of the Columbia Accident
Investigation Board relating to the safety and mission
assurance. Again----
Chairman Boehlert. I have already said to the gentleman,
and the gentleman's time is expired, and the Chair is being
generous because we enjoy this colloquy in terms of
enlightenment, but I have already pointed out, that is
incorporated in the En Bloc Amendment.
Mr. Gordon. And could--again, I am not trying to be
argumentative. We can't find it. Just tell us where it is so we
can read it, if you don't mind. Again, I don't want to be
argumentative, I am just--you know, I think this is something--
--
Chairman Boehlert. All right. If you would look at the En
Bloc Amendment. In paragraph nine, line one through line six,
``Any reforms to the Administration's workforce management
practices recommended by the Columbia Accident Investigation
Board, the extent to which those recommendations were accepted,
and if necessary, the reasons why any of these recommendations
were not accepted.'' That, to me, is pretty clear.
Mr. Gordon. Okay. That is just part. We are asking for
safety and mission assurance, also.
Chairman Boehlert. Those are not germane to this bill. We
are dealing with workforce restructuring----
Mr. Gordon. Okay.
Chairman Boehlert [continuing]. To deal with a very real
problem here and now. That is not to say that the subject
matter you are bringing up does not deserve the fullest
possible airing of all views and our undivided attention. It is
not the vehicle here and now that we are discussing. It is
another time, another vehicle, another place that doesn't
denigrate or lessen, in any sense of the word, the importance
of the subject matter that Mr. Hall is bringing up in his
amendment and you, not to be argumentative, are arguing very
persuasively for it.
Now is there anyone else that seeks recognition?
Mr. Hall. Mr. Chairman, I am not really----
Chairman Boehlert. I will go with--now wait a minute. I
will go with Mr. Lampson.
Mr. Lampson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I just wanted to associate myself with the remarks made by
both the Ranking Member Mr. Hall and the Ranking Member on the
Space Subcommittee, Mr. Gordon. I think that if anyone leaves
this meeting, they should leave with the feeling that our
utmost concern does have to do with the safety of the folks who
are involved with our exploration in space and that they have a
feeling that we are concerned and express every interest in a
real future for our space involvement, a vision, a set of
goals, something that people can latch on to and realize that
there is going to be a long-term future for NASA. That, to me,
is what makes a difference in having people want to join that
workforce and to be comfortable in knowing that they are going
to be able to come back to their families at the end of the day
and not having lost anything.
We say, too often, that we want to do something. It seems
to me that this amendment presents an opportunity for us to do
something. When are we going to act? I believe that we should
act on this and include this measure in there. And then if
there are problems with it, then we can also fix them when we
get to the Floor.
Chairman Boehlert. Well, the gentleman should note that we
have already accepted Ms. Jackson Lee's outstanding amendment
that enriched the bill and that focuses on safety. We don't
want to compromise safety at all. I mean, everybody raise their
right hand and take the pledge, ``I will not, in any way,
compromise safety.'' That is not the subject for discussion
here. The Chair is very patient. What I am trying to emphasize,
and I will say it again and again and again until somehow we
begin to appreciate what we are dealing with is a very real
problem that exists here and now in terms of NASA's workforce.
We are trying to respond to that problem by giving the agency
the authority to do some things we think will help them solve
the problem they have with their workforce.
We are not using this vehicle to reauthorize NASA. We are
not using this vehicle to determine whether or not we want to
compromise safety or give it added emphasis or determine how
many employees are going to be in which section of the agency.
We are only dealing with a very narrowly targeted bill to
address a real problem.
There are other problems in NASA. We all can agree on that.
Safety is first and foremost. We have already all agreed to
that. A crew escape mechanism is something that we are all
vitally interested in. Let me point out this fall when we get
back from our recess, I hope we are all well rested and ready
to go, because we are going to be spending a lot of time in
this room and these hallowed halls dealing with hearings from
getting the input from experts on all of the various subjects
covered in Mr. Hall's amendment.
Now is there anyone else who seeks recognition on the
amendment? Mr. Bell.
Mr. Bell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The distinguished Chairman states that he wishes he could
support Mr. Hall's amendment but, for various reasons, cannot.
And so my suggestion to my friends on the other side of the
aisle would be to satisfy the Chairman's wishes by going ahead
and supporting the amendment and then allow him to live
vicariously through you.
The--it is an incredibly important amendment. And I am--in
all seriousness, would agree with the Chair that on February 1,
everything did change, that in the wake of the tragedy, we now
have an opportunity to perhaps find a silver lining and that
NASA can redefine its mission, refocus its mission, and
certainly dedicate itself anew to safety. I find the timing of
this legislation, along with a number of my colleagues on this
side of the aisle, to be rather confusing and somewhat curious.
I have had an opportunity to visit with Admiral Gehman, as I
know many Members of the Committee have. And he has made it
very clear that the report and--to be brought forth will be
fairly wide in its scope and will not just focus on the causes
of the tragedy but will be making suggestions as to how to
improve the overall operations of NASA.
If our goal today is to try to be proactive instead of
reactive to the Gehman Report, it seems like we would do our
best to anticipate what is going to be included in that report,
what is going to be suggested in that report. And we all know
that it is no big secret that one of the major points of
emphasis is going to be safety. Therefore, it would seem to
follow that if we are going to say we are going to do as much
as humanly possible, then we are going to do as much as humanly
possible. And Mr. Hall has brought forth very specific and
important recommendations as to how, at this juncture, to go
about improving the safety of the operations at NASA. So
instead of just talking about it and saying that we can all
take a pledge that we are committed to the safety of this
agency, it seems like we can actually demonstrate that by our
actions here today and support Mr. Hall's amendment instead of
just finding a way to keep it from being heard. And that would
be my advice, Mr. Chair, and I would hope that you would take
it under serious consideration.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you very much, Mr. Bell.
The Chair recognizes Mr. Forbes.
Mr. Forbes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Chairman, I would just restate my point of order that I
believe that the amendment from--offered by the gentleman from
Texas is--
Chairman Boehlert. The Chair is ready to rule. The
gentleman raising the point of order is correct. The amendment
is not germane and is out of order, because the bill deals with
recruitment--
Mr. Hall. Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Boehlert. Let me finish my statement. Deals with
recruitment--
Mr. Hall. Let me start mine.
Chairman Boehlert. Well, the gentleman has already been
heard not once, but several times on the issue. And if we are
going to sit here all day and all night, we will never get to
that summer recess that Ms. Johnson and I both want.
So the bill deals with the recruitment in personnel
matters, and the amendment goes beyond that subject matter.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Hall. Mr. Chairman, am I allowed to talk on my
amendment now, the germaneness of it?
Chairman Boehlert. You certainly are.
Mr. Hall. We are not really talking about timing or whether
these amendments ought to stand alone, these points that I made
there. We are talking about germaneness. Now how can you say
that this amendment is not germane at this time? You may not
agree with it being brought up at this time, but by adopting
the Boehlert En Bloc Amendment with provisions relating to
safety, you use that word safety, and the CAIB, Mr. Boehlert,
you opened up the subject matter for germaneness purposes. It
is germane. I don't think there is a court in the land that
wouldn't call this germane.
Also, if the Chairman will concede that astronauts are a
part of the workforce, my amendment ought to be germane.
Safety--certainly safety makes this amendment germane. Ask a
question. Would you feel safe sending the four remaining
vehicles up as is? I think not. Question: Should the priority
be given to getting people their bonuses faster or to improving
the safety of the shuttle crews as soon as possible? Mr.
Chairman, I would strongly argue that the amendment is germane.
Give us a vote. You may vote us down but just not on
germaneness, not on a technicality. It is too important. This
bill broadly focuses on the general subjects of NASA workforce
authorities. Surely amendments concerning the safety of the
NASA workforce and the administration of NASA as it affects the
welfare of the workforce, or more precisely, as personnel are
certainly in order. And this is--really is a germane subject.
Go on and vote us down. You have got the votes to do that, but
I think there are people over on your side that think we ought
to certainly make some inquiries of NASA, give them some
nudging. Give them some nudging.
Chairman Boehlert. Does the gentleman appeal the ruling of
the Chair, because the Chair has already ruled?
Mr. Hall. I don't want to do that. I am asking the Chairman
to reconsider and give us--
Ms. Jackson Lee. Can I speak?
Mr. Hall [continuing]. A vote on it. I do think it is
germane. I don't think it is a question of whether or not it is
germane.
Chairman Boehlert. The Chair has ruled, and now the next
procedure and--
Mr. Hall. Then, Mr. Chairman, I appeal the ruling of the
Chairman. I don't like to do that.
Mr. Forbes. Mr. Chairman, I move to table the appeal, Mr.
Chairman.
Chairman Boehlert. The question is on the motion to table
the appeal. All in favor, say aye.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Mr. Chairman, are you cutting off debate?
Chairman Boehlert. Opposed, no. The ayes have it. The
motion to appeal--
Mr. Hall. Mr. Chairman, I ask for a recorded vote.
Chairman Boehlert. The Clerk will call the roll.
The Clerk. Mr. Boehlert?
Chairman Boehlert. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Boehlert votes no. Mr. Lamar Smith?
Mr. Smith of Texas. Whoa. Whoa. Whoa. Mr. Boehlert, you
just voted against yourself.
Chairman Boehlert. Yes.
Mr. Hall. I move that the voting close.
The Clerk. Mr. Boehlert votes yes. Mr. Lamar Smith?
Mr. Smith of Texas. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Smith votes yes. Mr. Weldon?
Mr. Weldon. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Weldon votes yes. Mr. Rohrabacher?
Mr. Rohrabacher. Yeah.
The Clerk. Mr. Rohrabacher votes yes. Mr. Barton?
Mr. Barton. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Barton votes yes. Mr. Calvert?
Mr. Calvert. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Calvert votes yes. Mr. Nick Smith?
Mr. Smith of Michigan. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Smith votes yes. Mr. Bartlett?
Mr. Bartlett. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Bartlett votes yes. Mr. Ehlers?
Dr. Ehlers. [No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Gutknecht?
Mr. Gutknecht. [No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Nethercutt?
Mr. Nethercutt. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Nethercutt votes yes. Mr. Lucas?
Mr. Lucas. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Lucas votes yes. Mrs. Biggert?
Mrs. Biggert. Yes.
The Clerk. Mrs. Biggert votes yes. Mr. Gilchrest?
Mr. Gilchrest. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Gilchrest votes yes. Mr. Akin?
Mr. Akin. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Akin votes yes. Mr. Johnson?
Mr. Johnson. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Johnson votes yes. Ms. Hart?
Ms. Hart. Yes.
The Clerk. Ms. Hart votes yes. Mr. Sullivan?
Mr. Sullivan. [No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Forbes?
Mr. Forbes. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Forbes votes yes. Mr. Gingrey?
Mr. Gingrey. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Gingrey votes yes. Mr. Bishop?
Mr. Bishop. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Bishop votes yes. Mr. Burgess?
Mr. Burgess. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Burgess votes yes. Mr. Bonner?
Mr. Bonner. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Bonner votes yes. Mr. Feeney?
Mr. Feeney. [No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Neugebauer?
Mr. Neugebauer. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Neugebauer votes yes. Mr. Hall?
Mr. Hall. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Hall votes no. Mr. Gordon?
Mr. Gordon. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Gordon votes no. Mr. Costello?
Mr. Costello. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Costello votes no. Ms. Johnson?
Ms. Johnson. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Johnson votes no. Ms. Woolsey?
Ms. Woolsey. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Woolsey votes no. Mr. Lampson?
Mr. Lampson. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Lampson votes no. Mr. Larson?
Mr. Larson. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Larson votes no. Mr. Udall?
Mr. Udall. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Udall votes no. Mr. Wu?
Mr. Wu. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Wu votes no. Mr. Honda?
Mr. Honda. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Honda votes no. Mr. Bell?
Mr. Bell. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Bell votes no. Mr. Miller?
Mr. Miller. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Miller votes no. Mr. Davis?
Mr. Davis. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Davis votes no. Ms. Jackson Lee?
Ms. Jackson Lee. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Jackson Lee votes no. Ms. Lofgren?
Ms. Lofgren. [No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Sherman?
Mr. Sherman. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Sherman votes no. Mr. Baird?
Mr. Baird. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Baird votes no. Mr. Moore?
Mr. Moore. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Moore votes no. Mr. Weiner?
Mr. Weiner. [No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Matheson?
Mr. Matheson. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Matheson votes no. Mr. Cardoza?
Mr. Cardoza. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Cardoza votes no.
Chairman Boehlert. How was Mr. Weldon recorded?
The Clerk. Mr. Weldon of Pennsylvania is recorded as yes.
Chairman Boehlert. How is Mr. Ehlers recorded?
The Clerk. Mr. Ehlers is not recorded.
Dr. Ehlers. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Ehlers votes yes.
Chairman Boehlert. The Clerk will report.
The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, yes, 22; no, 19.
Mr. Barton. Mr. Chairman, could I strike the words?
Chairman Boehlert. The gentleman is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. Barton. Briefly. Briefly.
Chairman Boehlert. Yeah.
Mr. Barton. This Committee has had a long history of
bipartisanship. I am looking up at these paintings, Mr. Brown,
and Mr. Rowe, and Mr. Teige, Mr. Sensenbrenner, and Mr. Walker.
I don't--and I don't think we are going to, but I certainly
don't want the Science Committee to become what has happened
over in the Ways and Means Committee. And had we had a policy
vote, I would have voted with Mr. Hall on the policy. But you
are the Chairman, and I think we should always vote, those of
us in the Majority, to support the Chairman on procedural
grounds. But I certainly hope that you meant it when you told
Mr. Hall that you would work with him on the policy issues in
the authorization bill that is coming, because I think the
issues that Mr. Hall raises are extremely important issues. And
this Committee should address those issues in a bipartisan way.
And I know you have a long history of bipartisanship. And I
just want to encourage you to honor your commitment to Mr. Hall
at the appropriate vehicle.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you very much. That is a
commitment I fully intend to honor. Mr. Hall and I have
enjoyed, from the moment I assumed this Chair, the best
possible relationship. And those who are in the audience should
observe the manner in which we are proceeding. We have strong
differences of opinion being expressed up here, butmidway
through the deliberations, Mr. Hall brought me a nice piece of candy.
Somebody else said, you know, we have got to finish this by 5:30,
because we have got to get to Mr. Hall's fund-raiser, and that was not
from a Democrat, it was from a Republican.
The point is, we may disagree but we don't--we are not
disagreeable, and this Committee is not going to change. And
this Committee allows people to be heard. And Mr. Barton, as I
stressed to you, I couldn't agree more with the importance of
the subject matter addressed in the Hall Amendment. And we are
going to deal with that in a very responsible way. We are just
saying not this vehicle, not this time.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Boehlert. This is a very narrowly defined vehicle.
And we are going to move forward to deal with a very real
problem in a meaningful way involving the workforce, then we
are going to proceed to deal with all of the other things, as
Mr. Hall rightfully pointed out, deserve our undivided
attention to----
Mr. Barton. Thank you. And I yield back my time, Mr.
Chairman.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you very much.
Ms. Jackson Lee.
Ms. Jackson Lee. I move to strike the last word.
Chairman Boehlert. The gentlelady is recognized.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
I would like to certainly acknowledge the Chairman's
graciousness in accepting the amendment that I offered, but I
am disappointed when I was conspicuous enough to want to speak
on the amendment that I was not acknowledged to be able to
participate in the debate. So I will take this time to say that
I disagree with the Chairman's position and the ruling of the
Chair. We have lost the vote, but let me offer these words on
the record.
First of all, we are dealing with workforce. Crew equals
workforce. The crew are employees of NASA, and so I believe
that the ruling was incorrect.
Secondarily, I would say, Mr. Chairman, for those of us who
live in the community, if you look at the article that I have
submitted into the record, the investigator said that they
interviewed 200 people anonymously because people are in fear
of telling the truth. Thank goodness that they have been
interviewed anonymously. There is a major culture change that
NASA needs to experience. The cavalier attitude that they had
on the question of safety is an enormous challenge for all of
us.
And what I would say that even though Dr. Martin Luther
King is not a space expert who--in his lifetime and certainly
not in his death, he wrote a book, ``Why We Can't Wait''. And I
believe that is an appropriate statement for what we did not do
today. We cannot wait, because there is a terrible culture at
NASA that needs to be changed. Mr. Hall's legislation or
amendment suggested that we have 86 individuals put in the
safety unit. There is nothing non-germane with that. That has
to do with workforce. He also suggested an authorization of $50
million if I am reading that correctly. And I would only say
that we are making a terrible mistake by waiting, because this
bill--this amendment does not put in permanent concrete. It has
flexibility. What it says to NASA is that they should begin to
look at these issues now, and in particular they should not
outsource very vital safety questions.
And let me say this, Mr. Chairman, being on this Committee
since I came to this Congress, I know that I can go through the
record and cite any number of times that collectively we have
all spoken about safety. And I can also cite specific times
that I have raised the question to the extent of being at odds
with a number of chairpersons on this Committee, not you, but a
number of them that didn't think that this was a serious issue.
It is serious. And for those of us who have had one on one
contacts with the astronauts, friends of ours, who say, ``Come
talk to me off the record.'' This is a disaster waiting to
happen if we do not address the safety question now and not
later.
And so I am sorry and disappointed that we found that Mr.
Hall's very thoughtful amendment was not germane. I am
certainly appreciative of the Committee's willingness to accept
the amendment that I offered. By my friends, I warn you. Yeah,
we are waiting on the Gehman Report. We have got all of the
loyalty of the United States of America, because the public
says, ``We like human space shuttle.'' But I tell you that you
have a culture that needs to be changed. And the right thing
for us to do today was to send a message to NASA that we will
not let up on safety and that we will start thinking about
safety now when we should have thought about it right after
Challenger. We didn't do anything about that, and we lost the
lives of wonderful husbands, wives, parents. People are still
mourning, and yet we don't want to act on Mr. Hall's amendment.
I think, as a bipartisan Committee, we could have done
better than that. And I want to thank Mr. Smith for his
bipartisan peanuts that I have just eaten, hoping that I would
have a bipartisan spirit, but safety is such a crucial issue,
we should have sent a notice out today that we are not fooling
around with safety, passing Mr. Hall's amendment. And I am
disappointed that the ruling was so rendered. I would ask for
reconsideration of the Chairman's ruling.
Chairman Boehlert. I thank the gentlelady for her comments.
The next amendment is amendment number eight offered by Ms.
Eddie Bernice Johnson.
Mr. Gordon. Mr. Chairman, if I could strike the last word,
and I will bring closure to this and----
Chairman Boehlert. Mr. Gordon is recognized.
Mr. Gordon. Because we are--at least my closure, because we
are beating a dead horse here.
I have no--we are past--we know we are going to go forward
with this. Mr. Barton has made it clear that we all want to
deal with this issue of safety later. I just want to point
out--and again, let us go forward, but I want to point out that
at the end of this week, we are going to be out until
September. The schedule says that the--get out before Columbus
Day. So we are on a short time limit. NASA says they want to
launch again before the year is over, and if not, they want to
launch early next year. And if they don't launch by, I guess,
February or so, then we really have a problem in terms of the
Space Station. And you know we don't get much done in January
and February.
So let us just keep these things in mind. I don't--I mean,
I know you are sincere about going forward. I just lay this
calendar out so that we can keep it in mind. And I don't need a
response. I just wanted to lay that out.
Thank you.
Mr. Hall. Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you very much.
Mr. Hall.
Mr. Hall. I would like to really and truly strike the last
word.
Chairman Boehlert. Mr. Hall is recognized.
Mr. Hall. We have voted, and we have been outvoted and
outvoted and outvoted 22 to 19 several times. And it came
pretty close one time on a tie vote, but I think we are all of
one accord about safety. I don't question anybody's judgment on
safety. My God, we pray for these people. We cry for them when
we lose them. We appropriate for them as a--youngsters coming
up in the program. I think we need to really address crew
safety, so although I know from my early raisings on the
ranching farm back in Texas that you don't ever rope a yearling
when they are running downhill. And you are running downhill
right now. You are winning. Every time we look up, we get 22 to
19. But I believe it is unanimous in this Committee that we
want to address safety. I am going to have an amendment just a
little bit later for our crew safety and give us a chance to
vote on that. I hope you will support that.
I yield back my time.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you very much, Mr. Hall.
Now the Chair recognizes Ms. Eddie Bernice Johnson from
Texas for amendment number eight. Are you prepared?
Ms. Johnson. Yes, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Boehlert. All right. The Clerk will report the
amendment.
The Clerk. Amendment to H.R. 1085 offered by Ms. Eddie
Bernice Johnson of Texas.
Chairman Boehlert. I ask unanimous consent to dispense with
the reading. Without objection, so ordered.
Ms. Johnson is recognized for 5 minutes to offer her
amendment.
Ms. Johnson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This amendment
provides for a sense of Congress that NASA should conduct a
continuing program for the recruitment of minorities and women
to eliminate the under-representation in the various categories
of civil service. We know that NASA is very short of qualified
staff and the pool to draw them is getting slimmer. And yet if
we would use much of what is available, we would probably be in
a little bit better shape. And Mr. Chairman, I understand that
you accepted this amendment?
Chairman Boehlert. Yes, I have. I think it is a good
amendment, and I am proud to identify with it.
Ms. Johnson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Boehlert. Is there anyone else who seeks
recognition?
If not, the vote is on the amendment. All in favor, say
aye. Opposed, no. The ayes have it, and the amendment is agreed
to.
The next amendment on the roster is amendment number nine
offered by Mr. Gordon from Tennessee.
Mr. Gordon. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I have an amendment at the desk.
Chairman Boehlert. The Clerk will report.
Mr. Gordon. Mr. Chairman, I believe this amendment should
be non-controversial, but what I would----
Chairman Boehlert. Let the Clerk report.
Mr. Gordon. Okay. Excuse me.
The Clerk. Amendment to H.R. 1085 offered by Mr. Gordon.
Chairman Boehlert. I ask unanimous consent to dispense with
the reading. Without objection, so ordered.
Mr. Gordon is recognized.
Mr. Gordon. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think this amendment
will be non-controversial. I suggest everybody take a deep
breath of air. I would also suggest that all of those Members
that have a NASA facility in their district or close by listen
carefully to this. I think you will be interested about this
amendment.
Basically, my amendment is intended to ensure that NASA
does the assessment and planning necessary to ensure that it
has both the workforce and the infrastructure needed to carry
out its human space flight programs over the coming years. It
is also intended to ensure that Congress has the information it
needs to make sure that NASA has the appropriate level of
resources.
This amendment is consistent with what I thought NASA would
be providing to Congress as a result of the Strategic Resource
Review. NASA was directed to do an agency-wide review of its
workforce and infrastructure needs and capabilities by the
Office of Management and Budget as well as by the Appropriation
Committee. I believe that such information is essential if
Congress is to evaluate the potential workforce legislation as
well as judge the likely NASA resource requirements we will be
looking for over the next decade.
I was therefore concerned to learn at our Subcommittee
hearing last year that the Strategic Resource Review had been
closed down by NASA with little to show for it. The questions
that should have been addressed by the Strategic Resource
Review are still important and relevant, and Congress still
needs information if it is to carry out its responsibilities.
For example, in response to a written question that I
submitted to NASA after the February 27 hearing, the NASA
Administrator acknowledged that, and I quote, ``The fiscal year
2004 budget proposal shows a decreasing civil service workforce
in FTE run out through fiscal year 2008.'' That leads to the
obvious question: why is NASA projecting a decrease in the
civil service workforce? Is NASA planning to outsource even
more of its jobs over the next 5 years in spite of concerns
expressed by Admiral Gehman over contracting out in the shuttle
program? Or is NASA planning to do fewer projects, close
facilities, or otherwise scale back its activities? Congress
needs to have answers to those questions.
And while I am concerned about the workforce and
infrastructure needs of the entire agency, I think that the
Columbia accident has made it clear that we need to focus
particular attention at this program--at this time on the
future requirements of the human space flight program.
As a result, I have structured my amendment to direct NASA
to do a Strategic Resource Review for all of NASA's human space
flight activities. Congress needs NASA to tell us what its
human space flight goals are in the future as well as what the
workforce and infrastructure, let me say that again,
infrastructure requirements are to achieve these goals. You
cannot have the best workforce in the world--you can have the
best workforce in the world, but if you don't provide the
necessary tools and facilities, they aren't going to be able to
achieve their goals that you have set before them.
If we are interested in helping to attract and retain the
best NASA workforce to meet our human space flight goals, we
need to make sure that the infrastructure is there to support
them, whether it is as Cape Kennedy, Marshall Space Fight
Center, Johnson Space Center, or wherever else the work may be
done. I think, Mr. Chairman, that my goal tries to achieve
that.
And let me say, Mr. Chairman, finally that as you are
painfully aware, I have raised concerns about timeliness
earlier. Let me admit that here I am a failure. Although you
have had this amendment, I wanted--I have submitted a different
amendment at the desk. Originally, this amendment said that you
could not go forward with this workforce flexibility act until
we received the report back from NASA on the Strategic Resource
Review. I did that because we need some reason, or you know,
way to get NASA to make this important report. I took that out,
and so there is nothing dilatory here at all. This is a
straight request that they simply give us a resource review of
what is the infrastructure needs to carry out the goals of our
human space flight.
Mr. Chairman, I think this is reasonable, and I apologize
for the late change, but it was done in an effort to try to
make it more palpable to you and this Committee.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you very much.
The Chair reluctantly opposes this. The issues that this
amendment raises, 20-year goals for human space flight and
infrastructure needed to support those goals, along with the
necessary NASA workforce levels, are exactly the issues that
should be raised in a very meaningful way and discussed in a
very meaningful way when considering NASA's reauthorization.
NASA is asked to address its workforce shortfalls and
workforce levels, as the amendment calls for, when NASA is to
report on the agency's critical needs in the workforce plan
already required in H.R. 1085. More reports, more reports, more
reports. We have already got a requirement in H.R. 1085. And we
should deal with this in a very substantive way when we deal
with the reauthorization.
Is there anyone else who seeks to be heard on the
amendment?
Mr. Hall. Mr. Chairman, I would like----
Mr. Gordon. Really, what we are doing here is asking for a
report that NASA has refused to do even though OMB requested
it, even though the Appropriations Committee requested it. And
so although this bill may ask for some type of resource review
concerning personnel, it does not talk about the infrastructure
that is needed so that that personnel can do its job. Ask the
folks at Kennedy. Ask the folks at Johnson whether they are--
they feel that those resources, those infrastructure resources
are adequate. I think you will find they will say not, but we
need to know where we are going to go with it.
Chairman Boehlert. That report, incidentally, was completed
by NASA in August 2002. And it is my understanding that both
sides have received the report.
Mr. Gordon. Mr. Chairman, I will remind you that we had a
hearing with Administrator O'Keefe where I specifically asked
that question. I said Mr. O'Keefe, when you were at OMB, your
own OMB requested this report. The Senate Appropriations
Committee requested, or I guess I should say, you know,
required it. He came back at that hearing before us and said
that they weren't doing a good job and so they weren't going to
have to continue with it. So we do not have that report, and--
--
Chairman Boehlert. The hearing was before the final report
came out. Subsequent to that hearing, which Mr. O'Keefe
testified, the hearing--the report was issued. And the Majority
and Minority have both received that.
Mr. Gordon. Right. We have received it, and Mr. O'Keefe
himself has said that it was not adequate and that he was not
going to go forward with it. So we do not have that fulfilled
report.
Chairman Boehlert. There are a number of things going on at
NASA that I think we could all agree, and are more----
Mr. Gordon. This was----
Chairman Boehlert. That are not adequate. But the fact of
the matter is we are dealing with one narrow focus on workforce
restructuring, and this is a bill that deals with it in a
substantive way to address the problem that has been
identified. That does not mean that the other problems being
discussed here, the other concerns being discussed here,
whether it is safety, or crew escape mechanisms, all of those
things are vitally important. But we are not going to do
everything in one narrowly focused bill to deal with a very
real problem. And so I would suggest----
Mr. Rohrabacher. Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Boehlert. Mr. Rohrabacher.
Mr. Gordon. Is it your time or my time?
Chairman Boehlert. No, your time has already expired.
Mr. Gordon. Oh, okay.
Chairman Boehlert. Mr. Rohrabacher.
Mr. Rohrabacher. I would note that Mr. Gordon and I--Mr.
Lampson's amendment later on are an attempt to try to prod NASA
into making some long-term assessments that they just aren't
doing. And quite frankly, we have got to make sure that we deal
with the NASA bureaucracy in a much more, how do you say,
officious way, because we are the public officials who are
elected to set policy for the public on this great--in this--
for NASA and this great asset for the United States. And quite
frankly, I think Mr. Gordon and Mr. Lampson have--are well
motivated and what they are suggesting--now your point Mr.
Chairman is it shouldn't be on this bill. And----
Chairman Boehlert. May the gentleman yield?
Mr. Rohrabacher. Sure. Certainly.
Chairman Boehlert. I have never once doubted the good
intentions and the proper aspects of the motivation of Mr.
Gordon and Mr. Lampson. They are valued Members of this
Committee. They contribute constructively on every single
measure that we consider, whether it is NASA or a whole wide
range of other activities that come before this Committee.
Mr. Rohrabacher. I will--let me suggest that I have been in
various Committees, this one included, where sometimes a bill
is going through and we actually had something on the bill that
wasn't totally in keeping with the long--with the specific
purpose of the bill. But it was made part of the bill in order
to help set policy for NASA. So I would back up the Chairman in
any decision that he makes, but I would think that it is not
totally--I would just say that Mr. Lampson and Mr. Gordon have
some points that wouldn't be unwelcome in the legislation.
Chairman Boehlert. Would the gentleman yield?
Mr. Rohrabacher. Yes, sir.
Chairman Boehlert. No doubt about it. And I would suggest
we deal with that in report language in a very meaningful way.
Let me point out, we are going to get this--we are not the only
actors in this drama. We--I think we are the most responsible
ones, but there are other Committees involved, and this has
been a long process and very delicate negotiations. And you
know how some of our colleagues can be.
I mean, can you imagine some of the other Committees having
a markup as--like this as contentious as it is in certain
substantive ways and yet everybody is smiling and complimenting
each other? And we are doing it the way it should be done.
But--so I would suggest that the comments of Mr. Gordon and Mr.
Lampson and what their amendments propose to do and much of
what Mr. Hall proposes to do we write a very strong report.
Mr. Rohrabacher. Well, I am reclaiming my time but just
suggest that we all appreciate that you don't have the cattle
prod mentality of some chairmen, but maybe we need to use the
cattle prod on the NASA bureaucracy sometimes. And I think this
is what this attempt is to do.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you very much.
Mr. Lampson. Mr. Chairman, would you yield for a short
question?
Chairman Boehlert. Who is--who seeks recognition? Yes, Mr.
Lampson?
Mr. Lampson. Would this amendment that is offered by Mr.
Gordon detract from anything within your bill that you are
intending to try to accomplish?
Chairman Boehlert. Yeah. No. It presents problems as we
deal with the other Committees, because the--you know, things
that have several Committees with overlapping jurisdiction
don't just come together neatly as we all would like. You know,
there are turf battles and everything else. We don't have
battles in this Committee. I mean, we work across the center
aisle, and we try to fashion a reasonable compromise. And if we
didn't have any other Committee to be concerned about, much of
what has transpired previously today would not have been
necessary. But we have other Committees that we have to deal
with. And so I like to deal with reality. I mean, the world is
one way. It is not as I would like it, but the world is that
way, and I can't change it overnight.
Mr. Gordon. If there is still time, I would like to
Mr. Lampson. I yield to Mr. Gordon.
Mr. Gordon. Mr. Chairman, you know, again, this is our
Committee, not somebody else's Committee. We should try to do
what we think is right here.
Chairman Boehlert. Well, we always do, but we also have to
keep our eye on the objective of this Committee.
Mr. Gordon. Right.
Chairman Boehlert. We can talk--excuse me----
Mr. Gordon. Sir, go ahead.
Chairman Boehlert. You have spoken several times. The Chair
is generous with the time, and I will continue to be generous,
but the fact of the matter--well, you are recognized.
Mr. Gordon. If Mr. Lampson would--I am just----
Mr. Lampson. I yield.
Mr. Gordon [continuing]. Trying to finish up his time.
Again, all I am pointing out is that all we are doing here is
asking NASA to do what President Bush's OMB asked him earlier
to do, what the Senate Appropriations Committee asked them to
do so that we would have some of this planning information, not
to get into an I told you--I don't want to be in an I told you
so situation. I want to be able to help them to plan out a
future and so that we can understand that we have to know what
are--what are the infrastructure needs of Kennedy, what are the
infrastructure needs of Johnson and other facilities here.
Again, all we are doing is asking them to do what the
Administration and the appropriators have already asked them to
do and they have not completed.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you very much.
We will--that is why I mentioned the value of using the
report language effectively to advance the best interests of
what both sides of the aisle agree we have to advance.
Mr. Smith of Michigan. That would be helpful. Thank you,
sir. I think what we need to really have, Mr. Chairman, is some
good testimony and good debate of what are the goals of the
space program. There is a lot of interest, of course, in manned
space flight, but I would suggest to you that depending on what
our goals are, we also need to figure out what should be the
balance between unmanned flight and manned flight.
In our Research Subcommittee, we have had testimony that
the dollars spent on research could be much more effective in
unmanned space flight and actual research on the ground with
simulation. So I think one goal that this Committee needs to
look at, and I appreciate the interest of our Texas delegation
with manned space flight, but really we need to get to--and
when Mr. Lampson was talking about his amendment, and I
appreciate his amendment, my suggestion to him was that we also
need to fit in there the unmanned space flight andwhat are our
goals on unmanned space. And so I just conclude, Mr. Chairman, to
suggest that with the tightness of the budget in the future, the goals
of the overall space flight program aren't just to put men in space but
are to accommodate the new exploration of space to have a better
knowledge of outer space to accrue some of the wisdom that research can
give us in terms of our ability to better accommodate the potential
future of outer space.
Mr. Rohrabacher. Would the gentleman yield?
Mr. Smith of Michigan. I would yield and after Mr.
Rohrabacher is finished, I would yield back the balance of my
time.
Mr. Rohrabacher. I certainly think that the distinguished
Chairman of the Research Committee is correct that space is not
just manned--a manned system and that we should be looking at
our space exploration and space utilization beyond manned.
However, let me note to the distinguished Chairman of the
Subcommittee that Mr. Gordon and Mr. Lampson are Members of the
Space and Aeronautics Subcommittee, and our responsibility does
definitely include overseeing manned space. And they have not
been receiving, as I have not been receiving, the type of
answers to the questions of long-term strategy that I think
would give me confidence that the job is being done. And thus,
I could understand Mr. Lampson and Mr. Gordon's concern here.
And--but the Chairman wants to make sure we accomplish this on
another bill and another vehicle, and I think that is
legitimate as well.
Chairman Boehlert. The gentleman is correct. Thank you very
much. The question is on the amendment.
Mr. Gordon. Mr. Chairman, I will withdraw my amendment
since you have assured us that you are going to put this in the
request to----
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you very much.
Mr. Gordon [continuing]. The Strategic Review in the report
language. I think it is clear that everyone here thinks we need
more planning, we need to better understand, and I think that a
sincere effort to accomplish that through the--we don't care
how it is done. We just want the information, and I thank you
for putting it in the report language.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you.
The gentleman asks unanimous consent to withdraw his
amendment. Without objection, so ordered.
The next amendment is amendment number ten offered by Mr.
Lampson of Texas. Would you defer to your senior colleague on
your side of the aisle and follow his wise ways? Mr. Lampson,
I--
Mr. Lampson. I have an amendment at the desk, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Boehlert. The Clerk will read the amendment.
The Clerk. Amendment to H.R. 1085 offered by Mr. Lampson.
Chairman Boehlert. I would ask unanimous consent to
dispense with the reading. Without objection, so ordered.
Mr. Lampson is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Lampson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
You know, I am not sure there is anything up here with the
possible exception of the work that I do on missing and
exploited children that I feel as strongly about as I do on
space. And I have been going--taking students since I was a
physical science teacher in 1968 to 1969 and later focusing on
our accomplishments in space. And I know what it did to inspire
children to study harder in the areas of math and science and
engineering and to dream about going to work at NASA.
And it is interesting to note that over the last 10 years,
NASA's workforce has been cut from 25,000 down to 18,000
employees. And even before the Columbia accident, the future
direction of many of NASA's programs, such as the Space Station
and the Space Shuttle, were left out there to be determined.
There were no specific statements about where we were going and
what we were going to be doing. America's human space flight
program is adrift with no clear vision or commitment to any
goals after the completion of the International Space Station.
And to follow-up with what Mr. Smith said earlier, except
that there are some, Mr. Smith, with robotic efforts in space.
We do have specific goals that reach out--and missions that are
planned to take us for a long period of time.
Given that outlook, why should a good scientist or engineer
or project manager seek to join NASA or stay there if offered
other options, and I don't think they would? The intent of my
amendment, therefore, is to require the NASA Administrator to
provide Congress with a vision and a concrete set of goals for
the Nation's human space flight program after the International
Space Station.
The--what I remember from a hearing where Mr. O'Keefe came
and told us about many of the things that he was proposing that
NASA consider that would bolster the opportunity to entice
people to come to work for NASA, those monetary incentives, I
remember getting up from this dais and walking out and sitting
down with a group of about 15 or 20 college students sitting
here in the audience. And I quietly asked those young folks
whether it was those incentives that we were talking about or
if it was something else that might most entice them to want a
career with NASA. And the answer was, ``We want something to
do. We want to be able to live a dream and to have a shot at
accomplishing that dream. And that is more important to us than
some monetary reward might be.''
So the basic premise of this is that raises and retention
bonuses are not the way to keep and retain NASA employees,
rather an exciting, goal-based vision for human space flight is
how you keep the best and the brightest NASA employees. So my
amendment requires the NASA Administrator, within 90 days of
enactment, to establish a phased series of goals over the next
20 years, including human visits to the Earth to sun libration
points, Earth to orbit crossing asteroids, deployment of a
human-tended research and habitation facility on the moon,
human expeditions to the surface and moons of Mars.
And the real obstacle that we face in overcoming the drift
in the Nation's human space flight program is not
technological, and it is not financial. I said it earlier. It
is just the lack of a commitment of getting started. Take the
first step. Act instead of talk. A recent national poll
conducted earlier this month found that more than half the
people surveyed believe that we should not resume the Space
Shuttle program until the future of the space program has been
redefined. Fifty-two percent of our citizens, or those who were
polled, at least, believe that we should return to the moon in
the near future and establish a base. We need to move forward
and outward beyond low Earth orbit. And in the process, we will
revitalize our space program. We will energize our industrial
and academic sectors. We will create new opportunities for
international cooperation and, more than anything, will inspire
our young people to want to goback into its involvement with
NASA.
So I, indeed, ask for support of this amendment and think
that it is extremely germane to the workforce creation that
George Abbey, within the first 6 months of my being in Congress
5-6 years ago, asked us to begin to address.
And I yield back my time.
Chairman Boehlert. The gentleman's timing is impeccable. We
have 11 seconds left in your 5 minutes.
Here is where we are right now. We have three other
amendments. All of the arguments that need to be made have been
made, it is just that not everyone has made them. That is an
old saw on Capitol Hill. So we have the following choice facing
us. We can have a vote on this amendment and then go over and
vote on the Floor and then come back and then be interrupted by
another one. No new light will be shed on the subject matter
over the next 2 hours. A lot of Members will be inconvenienced.
I am here as long as this hearing is going forward. So is Mr.
Hall. So is there a determined effort on the part of my
distinguished colleagues on the other side to press the point,
or will you follow the lead set by Mr. Gordon?
The point has been made. There are some honest differences
of opinion. And let us wrap up this bill. What is your
pleasure, Mr. Hall?
Mr. Hall. Mr. Chairman, if you mean wrapping it up as
putting all four of those amendments up here for an up or down
vote, I am going to have to ask you for regular order.
Chairman Boehlert. Indeed, regular order. I understand. All
right.
Mr. Hall. Each one is entitled--there is something
different about it.
Chairman Boehlert. No, no. And I understand. I understand.
They are all in a general--very similar in nature, but we will
proceed. Is there anyone else that seeks recognition to speak?
Mr. Hall. Before you vote on this one--my wife is in the
dining room and can't pay her bill. I have to get over there in
just a minute.
Chairman Boehlert. We would like to get a vote in on this.
We have got 10 minutes now. Who else seeks recognition?
Mr. Hall. I have sought recognition, not just about----
Chairman Boehlert. Mr. Hall.
Mr. Hall [continuing]. My wife, but about my friend, Nick
Lampson.
Nick, you are directing the Administrator to take certain
actions that we have asked him to take and that he has not
taken, correct?
Mr. Lampson. Yes, sir, that is correct.
Mr. Hall. I would remind you that this is the same
Administrator that came before this Committee and withheld the
fact that he had been appointed Administrator and danced around
all of the questions we asked him. And do you know how hard it
is to get any action out of him?
Mr. Lampson. Unfortunately, I do. Yes, sir.
Mr. Hall. And are you aware of the fact that as another
example--you have talked as an example at the Columbia accident
there was no commitment by the Administrator to restoring the
research capabilities that had been planned for the Space
Station. And there is still no commitment. Now is your
amendment based on the fact that as another example a few years
ago, NASA challenged a group of its bright young engineers to
come up with a low-cost, reliable crew rescue vehicle for the
Space Station and they did? It was an X-38 CRV. Did you know
that is the one that was canceled by--unceremoniously by Mr.
O'Keefe?
Mr. Lampson. Unfortunately, I----
Mr. Hall. We have to direct him to do something to get him
to do what the Congress wants done?
Mr. Lampson. Yes, sir. You are right.
Mr. Hall. I support your amendment, and I ask that we
support it and vote for it.
Mr. Lampson. Thank you.
Mr. Hall. I yield back my time.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you. It is in violation of House
rules to vote while there is a vote in progress on the Floor,
so the Committee will stand in recess to 5 minutes after the--
this vote is finished, if this is the only vote.
[Recess.]
Chairman Boehlert. To get on with the business of the
Committee, the question is on the Lampson Amendment. All in
favor, say aye.
Ms. Lofgren. Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Boehlert. Yes.
Ms. Lofgren. Mr. Chairman, I would move to strike the last
word, and I would like to yield time to Mr. Lampson.
Chairman Boehlert. The gentlelady strikes the last word,
and she yields time to Mr. Lampson.
Mr. Lampson. I just wanted to reemphasize before we took
the vote on this that--how important I felt that it is to
consider what this can do to energize the workforce considering
go back in or going to NASA. It is something that really a lot
of folks have made many comments to me about, not just George
Abbey. I think he was the first that explained the real problem
that existed at particularly the Johnson Space Center how many
folks were choosing to leave their--at times in their career
that was going to create a greater hardship. And that hardship
is what I think we are trying to address through the big bill
as well as what this amendment can do.
So Mr. Chairman, without belaboring the point, I would hope
that we would give consideration to this under the
circumstances. I would love to see the passage of this bill,
love for you to accept it, and let us go forward with this
included in your big bill.
And I yield back my time to Ms. Lofgren.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you very much.
Ms. Lofgren. I yield back.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you very much. The question is on
the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Lampson.
All in favor, say aye. Opposed nay. The nays have it.
Mr. Lampson. Mr. Chairman, I request the yeas and nays.
Chairman Boehlert. The Clerk will call the roll.
Mr. Lampson. Roll call.
The Clerk. Mr. Boehlert?
Chairman Boehlert. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Boehlert votes no. Mr. Lamar Smith?
Mr. Smith of Texas. [No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Weldon?
Mr. Weldon. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Weldon votes no. Mr. Rohrabacher?
Mr. Rohrabacher. [No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Barton?
Mr. Barton. [No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Calvert?
Mr. Calvert. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Calvert votes no. Mr. Nick Smith?
Mr. Smith of Michigan. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Smith votes no. Mr. Bartlett?
Mr. Bartlett. [No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Ehlers?
Dr. Ehlers. [No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Gutknecht?
Mr. Gutknecht. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Gutknecht votes no. Mr. Nethercutt?
Mr. Nethercutt. [No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Lucas?
Mr. Lucas. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Lucas votes no. Mrs. Biggert?
Mrs. Biggert. [No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Gilchrest?
Mr. Gilchrest. [No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Akin?
Mr. Akin. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Akin votes no. Mr. Johnson?
Mr. Johnson. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Johnson votes no. Mr. Sullivan? I am sorry.
Ms. Hart? Ms. Hart?
Ms. Hart. [No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Sullivan?
Mr. Sullivan. [No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Forbes?
Mr. Forbes. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Forbes votes no. Mr. Gingrey?
Mr. Gingrey. [No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Bishop?
Mr. Bishop. [No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Burgess?
Mr. Burgess. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Burgess votes no. Mr. Bonner?
Mr. Bonner. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Bonner votes no. Mr. Feeney?
Mr. Feeney. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Feeney votes no. Mr. Neugebauer?
Mr. Neugebauer. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Neugebauer votes no.
Chairman Boehlert. How is Mr. Bartlett recorded?
The Clerk. Mr. Bartlett is not recorded.
Mr. Bartlett. Bartlett votes no.
The Clerk. Mr. Bartlett votes no.
Chairman Boehlert. How is Ms. Biggert recorded?
The Clerk. Mrs. Biggert is not recorded.
Mrs. Biggert. No.
The Clerk. Mrs. Biggert votes no. Mr. Hall?
Mr. Hall. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Hall votes yes. Mr. Gordon?
Mr. Gordon. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Gordon votes yes. Mr. Costello?
Mr. Costello. [No response.]
The Clerk. Ms. Johnson?
Mr. Costello. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Costello votes yes. Mr. Johnson--Ms.
Johnson?
Ms. Johnson. Aye.
The Clerk. Ms. Johnson votes yes. Ms. Woolsey?
Ms. Woolsey. [No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Lampson?
Mr. Lampson. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Lampson votes yes. Mr. Larson?
Mr. Larson. [No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Udall?
Mr. Udall. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Udall votes yes. Mr. Wu?
Mr. Wu. [No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Honda?
Mr. Honda. [No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Bell?
Mr. Bell. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Bell votes yes. Mr. Miller?
Mr. Miller. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Miller votes yes. Mr. Davis?
Mr. Davis. [No response.]
The Clerk. Ms. Jackson Lee?
Ms. Jackson Lee. [No response.]
The Clerk. Ms. Lofgren?
Ms. Lofgren. Aye.
The Clerk. Ms. Lofgren votes yes. Mr. Sherman?
Mr. Sherman. [No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Baird?
Mr. Baird. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Baird votes yes. Mr. Moore?
Mr. Moore. [No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Weiner?
Mr. Weiner. [No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Matheson?
Mr. Matheson. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Matheson votes yes. Mr. Cardoza?
Mr. Cardoza. [No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Cardoza votes no.
Chairman Boehlert. How is Mr. Gingrey recorded?
The Clerk. Mr. Gingrey is not recorded.
Mr. Gingrey. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Gingrey votes no.
Chairman Boehlert. How is Mr. Smith of Texas recorded?
The Clerk. Mr. Smith of Texas is not recorded.
Mr. Smith of Texas. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Smith votes no.
Chairman Boehlert. Mr. Rohrabacher?
The Clerk. Mr. Rohrabacher is not recorded.
Mr. Rohrabacher. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Rohrabacher votes no.
Chairman Boehlert. How is Mr. Burgess recorded?
The Clerk. Mr. Burgess is not recorded--is recorded as no.
Chairman Boehlert. How is Mr. Moore recorded?
The Clerk. Mr. Moore is not recorded.
Mr. Moore. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, yes, 12; no, 18.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you very much. The amendment is
defeated.
The next amendment is amendment number 11 on the roster
offered by Mr. Miller of North Carolina. Mr. Miller, are you
prepared to proceed?
Mr. Miller. I am, sir.
Chairman Boehlert. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk. Amendment to H.R. 1085 offered by Mr. Miller.
Chairman Boehlert. I ask unanimous consent to dispense with
the reading. Without objection, so ordered. Mr. Miller is
recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Miller. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
This bill is another--or this amendment is another that
goes to personnel policies. The civil service system was,
again, considered a great, great reform a century ago or more,
replacing the spoils system, when government jobs were simply
political payoffs, that they were given out for basically
cronyism or political patronage, not based upon merit and not
based upon any great sense of duty that they were to do the
people's work and give the people their money's worth. All of
the--I agree, though, that all of those safeguards in the civil
service system may have become, in some instances, an
impediment to efficient government, that they have made
government a lumbering, unresponsive bureaucracy. And I am
certainly willing to support some experiments to try other
methods to make sure that we are recruiting and motivating and
rewarding employees to make sure that we have the best
workforce possible.
Mr. Chairman, I do not agree that this bill is a narrow
focus, as you have said on several occasions. I think that
personnel is central to how an agency operates. The personnel
policies are central to how an agency operates, and I also do
not agree that this does not have to do with safety, because if
human space flight is to be safe, it will be NASA employees who
make it safe. It is very hard to read the responses of NASA to
the inquiries--the questions put to them by Mr. Gordon and not
come away with the impression that they simply, rather than
having specific ideas for how to be more innovative to make
government more flexible and more efficient, they simply found
all of the civil procedures--all of this civil service stuff to
be a nuisance.
And it is also hard not to read the responses and think
they aren't all that keen on Congressional oversight, either.
They also think that we are pretty much a nuisance. They said
that they oppose to having any limitation on how many people
could be in the demonstration projects by saying that that
would create a dual workforce with some people operating under
one set of rules and others operating on another set of rules
and that was intolerable. But now they say if it is 8,000
instead of 5,000, that is all right. We have asked them exactly
what they plan to do. They say, ``We identified additional
tools to enhance these capabilities, and are seeking
legislation to give us the tools.'' And in the next paragraph,
they say, ``Although we are very interested in testing human
capital innovations under the demonstrative project authority,
we do not have a preconceived notion of what the features of
the--other features of the project.'' They have some ideas, but
they don't have some ideas, or maybe they are just not telling
us.
Mr. Chairman, Members of the Committee, this amendment
provides for the National Academy of Public Administration,
which is apparently a well-respected body, to contract--
requires that NASA contract with them and to conduct a study of
exactly what flexibility they have now and how they are using
it and if they are not using it, why they are not using it.
Although this amendment is limited to a one-time thing--or a
one-time provision to look at it now, it certainly is probably
appropriate that in a year or two or after NASA has gotten
enhanced authority to look again at how they are using their
authority.
But I cannot share their annoyance of having to answer to
Congress. This seems to be our job. We should look at how they
are running that agency. And whether human space flight is safe
or not is going to depend very greatly, if not entirely, upon
their employees, whether they have the talented employees, the
dedicated employees, that they need to do the work.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you very much.
The Chair will oppose the amendment. H.R. 1085 already
directs NASA to submit annual performance plans and specific
information on the use of these workforce authorities to
Congress for the next 6 years. The Congress does not need
another, yet another external study from NASA to take the place
of already vigorous Congressional oversight, which this
Committee intends to provide.
Is there anyone else who seeks to be recognized on the
amendment?
Mr. Hall. Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Boehlert. Mr. Hall.
Mr. Hall. Mr. Chairman, I strongly support Mr. Miller's
amendment. Based on testimony and answers that we have received
from NASA to date, NASA hasn't presented convincing evidence it
has made full use of the workforce authorities already
available to it under existing law and if we have not gotten
any clear evidence that NASA even knows how effective these
existing authorities might be if they were fully utilized. Now
that is not just my opinion.
When the GAO testified on NASA's workforce needs last year,
David Walker, who is the GAO Comptroller General, stated, and I
quote, ``At this time, without having performed a more detailed
analysis of NASA's human capital plan, we are not in a position
to assess NASA's use of existing authorities, the sufficiency
of those authorities, and their relationship to agency-wide
human capital need.'' Even they couldn't tell what they were
doing and what they were going to say.
Moreover, NASA has acknowledged it hasn't even collected
basic data. For example, it currently is unable to compare its
success rate in filling positions with that of the industry at
large, a comparison that is very needed. I believe Congress
needs some answers as to how NASA is using the authorities at
NASA, as already provided it. And Mr. Miller's amendment will
help to get those answers. I urge you to adopt his amendment.
I yield back my time.
Chairman Boehlert. Is there anyone else who seeks
recognition? If not, we will vote and--or go to the Floor and
vote. We can't vote, because there is a vote in progress.
And when we return, the first order of business will be to
vote on the Miller Amendment. The Committee stands in recess.
[Recess.]
Chairman. Boehlert. We will resume now, and as we----
Ms. Jackson Lee. Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Boehlert. Went to our recess, the pending order of
business was a vote on the Miller----
Ms. Jackson Lee. Chairman. I would like to strike the last
word.
Chairman Boehlert. The Chair will indulge the gentlelady
from Texas, but if we continue on and in--we recessed with the
idea the first order of business when we come back would be to
vote, but now the gentlelady is here. She was not here before
the vote. We will recognize her, but the fact of thematter is
we will never get out of here if we----
Ms. Jackson Lee. Mr. Chairman, I was given incorrect
information by the staff and I was told that we were still open
on debate on this--
Chairman Boehlert. Our staff would never give out
incorrect----
Ms. Jackson Lee. Well, I am----
Chairman Boehlert. Information on either side of----
Ms. Jackson Lee. What I am going to say that and I----
Chairman Boehlert. The gentlelady is reprimanded.
Ms. Jackson Lee. If there is no--if the--if we are not open
for debate on Mr. Lampson, then I am inappropriately striking
the first word, so I don't know what is the procedure at this
point.
Chairman Boehlert. The last amendment has been disposed of.
The pending amendment----
Ms. Jackson Lee. All right. Well.
Chairman Boehlert. Is the Miller amendment, amendment #12.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Thank you very much.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you, and the vote then is on the
Miller amendment. All in favor say aye. Opposed no. The nos
have it.
Mr. Lampson. Mr. Chairman, may I call for a rollcall vote?
Chairman Boehlert. You certainly may call for a rollcall
vote.
The Clerk. Thank you. Mr. Boehlert.
Chairman Boehlert. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Boehlert votes no. Mr. Lamar Smith.
Mr. Smith. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Smith votes no. Mr. Weldon.
Mr. Weldon. No, not really.
The Clerk. Mr. Weldon votes no. Mr. Rohrabacher.
Mr. Rohrabacher. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Rohrbacher votes no. Mr. Barton. Mr.
Calvert.
Mr. Calvert. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Calvert votes no. Mr. Nick Smith. Mr.
Bartlett. Mr. Ehlers. Mr. Gutknecht. Mr. Nethercutt. Mr. Lucas.
Mrs. Biggert.
Mrs. Biggert. No.
The Clerk. Mrs. Biggert votes no. Mr. Gilchrest. Mr. Akin.
Mr. Akin. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Akin votes no. Mr. Johnson. Mrs.--Ms. Hart.
Mr. Sullivan. Mr. Forbes.
Mr. Forbes. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Forbes votes no. Mr. Gingrey.
Mr. Gingrey. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Gingrey votes no. Mr. Bishop. Mr. Burgess.
Mr. Bonner. Mr. Feeney. Mr. Neugebauer. Mr. Hall. Mr. Hall
votes yes. Mr. Gordon. Mr. Costello.
Mr. Costello. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Costello votes yes. Ms. Johnson.
Ms. Johnson. Aye.
The Clerk. Ms. Johnson votes yes. Ms. Woolsey. Mr. Lampson.
Mr. Lampson. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Lampson votes yes. Mr. Larson. Mr. Udall.
Mr. Udall. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Udall votes yes. Mr. Wu. Mr. Honda. Mr.
Honda votes yes. Mr. Bell. Mr. Miller.
Mr. Miller. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Miller votes yes. Mr. Davis. Ms. Jackson
Lee. Ms. Lofgren. Mr. Sherman. Mr. Baird. Mr. Moore. Mr.
Weiner. Mr. Matheson. Mr. Matheson votes yes. Mr. Cardoza. Mr.
Cardoza.
Ms. Lofgren. I recorded. Excuse me, Mr. Chairman. Jackson
Lee recorded.
The Clerk. Ms. Jackson Lee is not recorded.
Chairman Boehlert. Missed earlier----
The Clerk. Ms. Jackson Lee votes yes. Mr. Ehlers is not
recorded.
Mr. Ehlers. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Ehlers votes no.
Chairman Boehlert. Mr. Bartlett.
The Clerk. Mr. Bartlett is not recorded.
Mr. Bartlett. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Bartlett votes no.
Chairman Boehlert. Chairman Nick Smith.
Mr. Smith. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Nick Smith votes no.
Chairman Boehlert. Mr. Feeney.
Mr. Feeney. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Feeney votes no.
Chairman Boehlert. Is there anyone else that seeks
recognition? Clerk will report when she is prepared to report.
The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, yes 9, no 13.
Chairman Boehlert. The amendment is defeated, and we stand
in recess pending the current vote on the floor. We will resume
immediately thereafter.
[Recess.]
Chairman Boehlert. We, I think, have a bipartisan
agreement. The next amendment to be offered is Boehlert
amendment #13. The Clerk will distribute the amendment. The
Clerk's assistants will distribute the amendment while the
Clerk calls the amendment.
The Clerk. The amendment to H.R. 1085 offered by Mr.----
Chairman Boehlert. Boehlert.
The Clerk. Boehlert.
Chairman Boehlert. All right. I ask unanimous consent to
dispense with the reading. Without objection, so ordered. We
have majority and minority agreement. This is an amendment to
change the Aumblock amendment I had offered earlier. The
amendment strikes language we added earlier, capping the
scholarship payback period at 4 years. With the passage of this
amendment, the bill will read as it had before, which is to say
that a scholarship recipient will have to work two years at
NASA in return for each year of assistance, regardless of how
many years of assistance was provided. Mr. Rohrabacher is the
author of the language in this bill on scholarships, and he
objects to language I had offered earlier to cap the service
period at four years. In deference to the views of the
distinguished Chairman of the Subcommittee and his willingness
to compromise on his earlier amendment, I am offering this
amendment now. Mr. Gordon.
Mr. Gordon. Mr. Chairman, this appears to be a good faith
technical amendment and certainly has my support.
Chairman Boehlert. The vote is on the amendment. All in
favor say aye. Opposed no. The ayes have it and the amendment
is agreed to. Now we have just--one pending amendment, but the
offerer of the amendment is not here, Ms. Jackson Lee. We
have--Mr. Hall has one, too, so I guess we will suspendactivity
pending the arrival of additional colleagues, and there is some
question on the floor whether we are going to have another procedural
vote within a couple of minutes, and some people are--most people, I
think, are staying over there saying why come back over here, or we
would have the bells ring and go back over there. We are going through
this nonsense and both sides are guilty of it. When we were in the
minority, we used to raise hell with the majority, and we were
constantly sending signals that no one ever received, and it just
inconvenienced everybody else. Now, they are in the minority, we are in
the majority, the same thing is happening. We are sending signals that
no one is receiving and everybody is inconvenienced, but that is one of
the peculiarities of this institution. We have been advised that Ms.
Jackson Lee is on her way. The Chair recognizes Mr. Johnson.
Mr. Johnson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move to strike the
last word, and insert----
Chairman Boehlert. Recognized.
Mr. Johnson. Insert in the record that if present, with
respect to the first motion, to allow the Committee to adjourn,
that I would have voted yes, and with respect to amendment #11,
Mr. Miller, present, I would have voted no. If the Committee
record would reflect that, I would be grateful.
Chairman Boehlert. Duly noted. Anything else required?
Anybody else seek any recognition while we are pausing to
reflect on our deeds for the day and are awaiting the arrival
of--offerer of the next amendment? For the purpose of offering
an amendment, the Chair recognizes the distinguished gentlelady
from Texas, Ms. Jackson Lee.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I have
an amendment at the desk.
Chairman Boehlert. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk. Amendment to H.R. 1085, offered by Ms. Jackson
Lee of Texas.
Chairman Boehlert. I ask--being without objection, so
ordered. The gentlelady is recognized for five minutes.
Ms. Jackson Lee. I thank the distinguished gentleman.
Before I begin, I might remind my colleagues that I believe
that over the years, we have in a bipartisan way under several
Chairmen--Chairpersons supported the MURED office that was
established as an office of equal opportunity in 1990 to
address the lack of significant research capabilities at
minority-serving institutions and increase the number of
faculty who could successfully compete in NASA's research grant
peer review system.
I think much has been achieved and there is much to be
achieved. My amendment simply seeks to retain the MURED in the
status that it is in, and as well, to focus on the importance
of this particular task.
As we look to rejuvenating and restructuring the NASA
workforce, I hope we keep in mind an issue that we have all
acknowledged and worked to correct in the past, the scarcity of
minority employees at NASA, especially in senior management
positions.
Might I also add that this Committee has also discussed the
numbers of minorities who were astronauts as well, and the
progress that they made in being able to secure a place on an
actual space shuttle mission. To address this problem, the
Minority University Research and Education Division, and it was
a division, was formed in 1990. As I said, the Division was
initially placed in NASA's Office of Equal Opportunity and its
Minority University Research and Education program has been
very successful at combating the vast disparity in funding
between majority and minority-serving institutions. Funding
minority-serving institutions ensures that the NASA
Administrator will have an excellent pool of diverse candidates
to form the NASA workforce of the future.
Recently, MURED, the division, has been eliminated, and
MUREP, the research grant program, has been transferred to
NASA's Office of Education. I will not, today, go into the
issue of whether the transfer to Education was appropriate. I
am pleased to hear that MUREP is in its new home. It is slated
to receive good funding. However, I am concerned that when you
lose a division status, you lose prominence, you lose focus,
you lose recognition and, of course, you lose goals. I am
concerned that in the long run, this vital and successful
program again loses high profile and, perhaps, the funding in
the future.
We as a Committee are very supportive, but we must ensure
that this very valuable effort by NASA is continued. This
amendment will require that the Minority University Research
and Education initiative is reinstated with its division
status, ensuring that NASA Administrators have a diverse pool
of well-qualified workforce candidates to choose from, a
critical component of workforce flexibility.
This is workforce generated because what we are attempting
to do is to build a research balloon that includes all of
America, and that trains the next generation of researchers,
the next generation of employees at NASA and the next
generation of space researchers and space astronauts, if you
will.
I would ask my colleagues to consider the simplicity of
this amendment, is simply retains the division status. It does
no more and no less, and I would ask my colleagues to look back
at the history of MURED and its success. I am concerned when it
is submerged, because of the lack of focus, and I would ask my
colleagues to consider this amendment, and I would yield back
my time.
Chairman Boehlert. The Chair will oppose the amendment, and
I would ask the author before I go any further if the author
would be willing to withdraw the amendment and address this
subject in a meaningful way in report language.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Mr. Chairman, I know that you have been a
sincere partner in this effort, and I thought about it, and if
we can write language that is strong and effective, I am
looking to get to--I would like to have a vote on this. I would
imagine that I would lose this vote.
Chairman Boehlert. I would imagine so, too. All right,
but----
Ms. Jackson Lee. Maybe I should imagine that I would win
it.
Chairman Boehlert. Lose the issue, but you don't want to
lose the issue, and----
Ms. Jackson Lee. Maybe I should imagine----
Chairman Boehlert. One mind as we address this issue.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Maybe I should imagine that I would win
it, so I am interested in your concept. Can I have just a
second, Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Boehlert. Sure.
Ms. Lofgren. Mr. Chairman. While the gentlelady is
pondering, may I move to strike the last word?
Chairman Boehlert. By all means. The chair yields to the
gentlelady from California.
Ms. Lofgren. I actually think that the gentlelady's
amendment has merit, and while I know that the Chairman has a
strong commitment to the same goals, I am not sure how report
language could accomplish what Ms. Jackson Lee's amendment
would do, and for those of us who have NASA centers either in
their districts or nearby, you can--we can attest to the
tremendous impact that these activities that Ms. Jackson Lee's
amendment addresses has had, especially on low income,
disadvantaged and also minority students.
I had the privilege of attending an event last summer
atNASA Ames that was organized with the National Hispanic University,
San Jose State, Carnegie-Mellon and other institutions, and I will tell
you, it was a very moving experience, because these were high school
students who were going to be going to college as a consequence of
their connection with NASA, I think organized through this division.
Kids who had been nowhere and who the professors from Carnegie-Mellon
told me had come from really not being able to do algebra to almost
ready for calculus in a six week time period. It was stunning what
these young people achieved, and not just in terms of their academic
achievement, but their belief that they could become scientists, and
the interesting thing was that the Ph.D. candidates and professors who
were from--I mean, awesome universities believed that these students
really could be part of the next generation of scientists that we so
desperately need.
So, I understand the desire to move this legislation
without a lot of amendments. I would hope that maybe an
exception might be made in this case, and I just thought that
offering that personal observation experience might be of some
value to the members of the Committee, and I thank the Chairman
for yielding me these 5 minutes to share that experience, and I
yield back.
Chairman Boehlert. I thank you, and you know, there is no
question that--of the gentlelady from California's commitment
nor the commitment of the author to minority institutions, nor
the commitment of the Chair. There should be no doubt this is
something that we view as very, very important, but we can't
expect NASA to reorganize about every half-hour. They are just
going through a reorganization, and I think we should have the
benefit of a report from NASA on just what has happened and how
is it working, and where is it going, and we are reaching out
to some minority groups, and quite frankly, some of the
minority groups have told us they do have some--what I appear
to be legitimate questions about the effect of the amendment,
so it is not, in any way, representing a lessening of my
commitment to minority-serving institutions. As a matter of
fact, we are dealing with a separate bill on that subject,
which I enthusiastically support, but NASA just recently
created this new education enterprise to elevate the priority
of all NASA's education initiatives, and boy, I want them to do
that. I want every agency to do that, and in line with that, we
want them to focus on the importance of the minority students,
and I am convinced that they are going to do that, too, but
they don't have a large experience factor to report back to us
on, but I would like to know what the experience thus far with
this new initiative tells them, and I would like some more time
to reach out to others in the minority community to have the
benefit of their input and counsel.
So, for all of the above reasons, I would be more than
happy to try to work with the gentlelady in having strong
report language in there, but obviously, not accomplishing
exactly what her amendment does, but I have just explained why
I don't think now, the timing is right to do that, but one--I
am just very much supportive of the Minority University
Research and Education Program. I think we have to give it
attention. I think we have to give it resources, and we have to
give it follow-through to make certain it is getting the
attention and the resources are being used to desired ends. Is
there anyone else who would care?
Mr. Gordon. Mr. Chairman, I would strike the last word.
Chairman Boehlert. Mr. Gordon is recognized.
Mr. Gordon. Yes, sir. Mr. Chairman, my preference would be
to have this language in the document. If it is not going to
be, if it is going to be report language, I would suggest that
there should be a time certain on reporting back. As has been
pointed out today, I think there has been some--maybe lack of
responsiveness, maybe it is because of too much to do, but if
we are sincere about wanting a report back, we should have a
time certain, and I yield the balance of my time to the
gentlelady from Texas.
Ms. Jackson Lee. I thank the distinguished gentleman from
Tennessee. The Chairman has given a gracious offer. I would
like--been so moved by the eloquence of Congresswoman Lofgren
on this issue that I would appreciate it if the--I know that
markups are not necessarily where we negotiate report language,
but I would be interested in what thrust the Chairman would
have on this language, with respect to this point.
And might I say, Mr. Chairman, I too have engaged with a
number of groups. I think the comfort level that you are
hearing from them is thank God we have money and thank God we
have an appropriations line, and certainly, I am thankful to
that as well. I think what we are speaking of as it relates to
the division is a viable place--a place setting at the table.
When you are submerged under this holistic education component,
you are in fact submerged. You are subordinate, as opposed to
being able to speak eloquently and with legitimacy about some
of these very deep problems that we have.
The digital divide is one gap, but the educational science
gap is big. I think you can count on two hands the number of
Ph.D.'s graduating in the Class of 2003 that happen to be
minorities or happen to be African-Americans in some of these
very finite areas, and I think that this is a very important
situation in being able to promote research and education in
these institutions, being able for them to secure grants,
because they have the expertise.
Just as an aside, Mr. Chairman, you are on the same
Committee I am, Homeland Security, and had someone in the
Bioshield legislation in a debate suggests that we don't want
to be bothered with, and certainly they were well-meaning, but
minority institutions--because we really need high-powered
institutions to be doing this kind of research, that was
hurtful to me.
I will be kind and not say that it was offensive. I am sure
the person was not intending to be offensive, but it was
certainly hurtful to suggest that our institutions don't have
that kind of expertise, quality, or respect.
Chairman Boehlert. Hit the red light.
Ms. Jackson Lee. And I think that MUREP as a division needs
to be moving in that direction, and I would--let me just yield
to the distinguished Chairman and see what kind of language he
would be suggesting.
Chairman Boehlert. Let me say we will conclude this debate.
I, too, was moved by the comments of the distinguished
gentlelady from California, as I am so often moved by your
remarks, Ms. Jackson Lee. We would have report language. We
would operate in good faith. We would like you to take us at
face value that we will try to develop language that addresses
the issue in a meaningful way. That is the offer, but if you
wish to proceed with the amendment, we will proceed with the
amendment. You tell us, but we are going to act now. Which is
your preference? The distinguished Mr.Palmer will report to--
this is like in Jeopardy.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your
patience. May I just inquire for a direct question? Would the
report language include the direction of the need for making
MURED a division?
Chairman Boehlert. No. Then you want to proceed with the
vote?
Ms. Jackson Lee. Let us proceed, and I thank for your
graciousness.
Chairman Boehlert. Let us go. The Clerk will call the roll.
The Clerk. Mr. Boehlert.
Chairman Boehlert. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Boehlert votes no. Mr. Lamar Smith. Mr.
Smith votes no. Mr. Weldon. Mr. Rohrabacher. Mr. Barton. Mr.
Barton votes no. Mr. Calvert. I'm sorry. Mr. Rohrabacher. Mr.
Rohrabacher votes no. Mr. Barton. Mr. Calvert. Mr. Nick Smith.
Mr. Smith. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Smith votes no. Mr. Bartlett.
Mr. Bartlett. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Bartlett votes no. Mr. Ehlers. Mr. Ehlers
votes no. Mr. Gutknecht.
Mr. Gutknecht. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Gutknecht votes no. Mr. Nethercutt. Mr.
Lucas.
Mr. Lucas. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Lucas votes no. Mrs. Biggert. Mrs. Biggert
votes no. Mr. Gilchrest. Mr. Akin.
Mr. Akin. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Akin votes no. Mr. Johnson.
Mr. Johnson. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Johnson votes no. Ms. Hart. Mr. Sullivan.
Mr. Forbes. Mr. Forbes votes no. Mr. Gingrey. Mr. Bishop.
Mr. Bishop. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Bishop votes no. Mr. Burgess. Mr. Bonner.
Mr. Feeney.
Mr. Feeney. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Feeney votes no. Mr. Neugebauer.
Mr. Neugebauer. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Neugebauer votes no.
Chairman Boehlert. How is Mr. Weldon of Pennsylvania
recorded?
The Clerk. Mr. Weldon is not recorded. Mr. Weldon votes no.
Chairman Boehlert. Mr. Calvert of California.
The Clerk. Mr. Calvert is not recorded.
Mr. Calvert. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Calvert votes no.
Chairman Boehlert. Mr. Nethercutt.
The Clerk. Mr. Nethercutt is not recorded.
Mr. Nethercutt. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Nethercutt votes no.
Chairman Boehlert. Mr. Feeney.
The Clerk. Mr. Feeney is recorded as no.
Chairman Boehlert. Wonderful.
The Clerk. Mr. Hall. Mr. Hall votes yes. Mr. Gordon.
Mr. Gordon. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Gordon votes yes. Mr. Costello.
Mr. Costello. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Costello votes yes. Ms. Johnson.
Ms. Johnson. Yes.
The Clerk. Ms. Johnson votes yes. Ms. Woolsey.
Ms. Woolsey. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Lampson.
Mr. Lampson. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Lampson votes yes. Mr. Larson. Mr. Udall.
Mr. Udall. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Udall votes yes. Mr. Wu. Mr. Honda. Mr.
Bell.
Mr. Bell. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Bell votes yes. Mr. Miller.
Mr. Miller. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Miller votes yes. Mr. Davis. Ms. Jackson
Lee.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Aye.
The Clerk. Ms. Jackson Lee votes yes. Ms. Lofgren.
Ms. Lofgren. Aye.
The Clerk. Ms. Lofgren votes yes. Mr. Sherman. Mr. Baird.
Mr. Moore.
Mr. Moore. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Moore votes yes. Mr. Weiner. Mr. Mathison.
Mr. Mathison. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Mathison votes yes. Mr. Cardoza.
Chairman Boehlert. The Clerk will report.
The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, yes 12, no 18.
Chairman Boehlert. The amendment is not agreed to. Are
there any further amendments?
Mr. Hall. Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Boehlert. Mr. Hall.
Mr. Hall. I have an amendment at the desk.
Chairman Boehlert. A member will suspend. The Chair
recognizes Mr. Forbes.
Mr. Forbes. Mr. Chairman, I wish to reserve a point of
order.
Chairman Boehlert. The gentleman wishes to preserve a point
of order. The gentleman may proceed with his amendment. The
Clerk will distribute the amendment.
Mr. Hall. Mr. Chairman, when I had the other amendment, I
had four different points in it, and we discussed all four--
excuse me. I'll go--that's--yes.
Chairman Boehlert. Mr. Hall, to report the amendment.
The Clerk. Amendment to H.R. 1085 offered by Mr. Hall of
Texas.
Chairman Boehlert. May I ask unanimous consent that the
amendment be considered as read.
Chairman. Boehlert. Mr. Hall is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Hall. Mr. Chairman, thank you. We have discussed this
amendment. It was part of the amendment that I offered a while
ago, and it was rendered as not germane, but during the
discussion, I understood, and maybe I misunderstood, but I
understood to say the Chairman liked part of the amendment and
I tried to hear him say that he thought part of it was germane,
and if I did hear him say that, I am sure the part that he
thought was germane was the part that alluded to the crew
escape systems, because we have all talked about that and
needed it.
There is something that we ought to do, and that is what
this amendment does. It doesn't tell them to go right out and
start building it at this time. It alludes to safety, and
safety involves the first step of getting ideas. It simply says
upon enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall issue a
request to the aerospace industry and other interested persons
for concepts to increase space shuttle crew survivability for a
crew of six or seven astronauts by at least a factor of 20,
relative to the demonstrated crew survival rate of the space
shuttle to date, and then each of those concepts provided in
response were to include estimates of the cost. Just giving us
the background and how much it would take to do this, showing
types of designs, and then the Administrator shall submit to
the Committee on Science of the House of Representatives, their
honorable Chairman, the distinguished gentleman from New York,
the very handsome leader of this Committee here, with generous
outlooks toward his minority lesser lower Democrats that sit to
the right of him. And within 270 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, concepts received in response to the
request issued under the first sentence of this, and any
concept developed by the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration to achieve the same crew survivability
improvement.
This is safety itself. It has safety written all over it.
It involves the crew. We have members on this side who have
given press releases saying they are not going to support the
launching of any more of our shuttles unless we have some
definite answers and more definite answers. We don't have those
answers yet. They are not yet--they may not even be definite
when we get them from the Admiral and his group.
This is safety at its very best. It is only a first step.
Get the ideas and get the costs. How can that not be germane? I
urge this Chairman, and I am going to tell the Chairman ahead
of time, I am not going to appeal his ruling. It puts others
over there who feel as I do in a difficult position, puts you
in a position where your folks might question whether or not
you are really and truly for crew escape, and I know all of you
are for that. I am not going to appeal the ruling. I urge the
Chair to give me a vote on this.
Chairman Boehlert. The distinguished Ranking Member didn't
exactly hear me correct--correctly. We didn't say component
parts were germane. We said, in essence, I like the overall
thrust of the amendment. I like the idea that we are focusing
on safety. I like so many of the ideas embodied in the Hall
amendment in principle, but this is not the time, this is not
the vehicle, and we double-checked with the parliamentarian,
and the parliamentarian says the component part is no more
germane than the amendment in its entirety, and for that
reason, I must oppose it.
Mr. Hall. Mr. Chairman, before you decide, hear me a little
further.
Chairman Boehlert. I welcome the opportunity to hear you a
little further.
Mr. Hall. In a letter, you questioned the use of the
remaining shuttles. Would you think it was more germane if you
knew that it wasn't going to be included in the Admiral's
report, and don't you know that if the Administrator is
standing there and taking the position that he has taken from
the word go, that it is too expensive, can it be too expensive
for safety, for the safety of those young people that are
surveying, the Magellans and Columbuses of space?
Chairman Boehlert. That is why I am anxiously awaiting the
Gehman Commission report. I am anxiously looking forward to the
opportunity to digest that report, and factor in in our
deliberations on reauthorization of the NASA program, the
recommendations of the Gehman Commission.
Mr. Hall. One last word. They plan on more launches, and
some even hope they will have launches before the end of the
year. We are going to be gone. We are gone for 30 days. We come
back, we are going to leave here in October. We need to have
this underway.
Chairman Boehlert. Mr. Hall.
Mr. Hall. I urge you to reconsider the germaneness of this.
Chairman Boehlert. I have reconsidered it.
Mr. Hall. And that is my last plea.
Chairman Boehlert. I have reconsidered it a couple of times
and I would not have directed a personal inquiry to the
parliamentarian if I wasn't serious about this. You and I both
know that we are not going to launch another shuttle before the
end of this year. You and I both know, to the person on this
Committee, we are not going to give the green light to anyone
who doesn't consider the full impact and recommendations of the
Gehman Commission. We are not going to compromise on safety. We
are going to do our job in a very responsible way and we are
going to do it with the right vehicle, and that is the
reauthorization of NASA with the benefit of the Columbia
accident investigation report before us, so that we have a
chance to study it, to analyze it, to react to it and to
restudy it and reanalyze it and react to it yet again, and
those deliberations that we have in connection with our
reauthorization, I can assure you, will emphasize safety,
safety, safety.
Mr. Lampson. Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Boehlert. Who sees Lampson? Is this the Texas
cabal?
Mr. Lampson. What--how can we gain the assurance that there
is going to be an authorization bill during this year?
Chairman Boehlert. You can't gain that assurance. You can
gain the assurance that we are going to probably commence
deliberations on reauthorization, but it is unlikely that we
will finish it by the end of this year, and then we will go
into early '04, but I can give you the assurance that this
Member, as one individual out of the full Committee, as one
Member out of 435, is committed to the proposition that we are
going to take the Gehman Report, we are going to evaluate every
single recommendation in that report. Incidentally, there are
going to be a whole checklist of recommendations of things that
should be done before we return to flight, and you know what, I
am going to take those darn seriously, and no one is going to
say to me, well, we don't have to this, or we don't have to do
that, or that is inconvenient, or we don't like that idea. I am
going to give it the full attention it deserves.
Mr. Lampson. Well, would you agree that the--we will have
some vehicle within which to put these concerns down, to make
NASA give us information back that we have been asking for
months and months and in some cases years?
Chairman Boehlert. Oh, sure.
Mr. Lampson. And have not gotten it.
Chairman Boehlert. Sure. I am not reluctant, yet we don't
need some bill like this. NASA had better understand that its
future depends upon a lot of things, and one of the things that
are going to help determine that future is the response NASA
gives to this Committee for legitimate questions, legitimate
expressions of concern. No one is just going to roll back and
say whatever you want, you guys. We are going to do whatever
you say. That is not the way this Committee operates on either
side of the center aisle.
Mr. Lampson. I think that is part of what my frustration
is, and perhaps it is what--some of what Mr. Hall's may be. We
have asked these things time and time again, and I have gone to
the centers, I have talked with the folks that deal with these
things. I have sat down with the--with people like--with
companies that do have proposals to put on the table an idea
about a type of crew capsule for crew safety. All of these
things are being talked of, thought about, dreamed of, worked
on, spent money on, yet when we ask NASA, they will not respond
to us, and I would truly like us to make a special effort to
get to a point where we can put this--put it down to them in
such a way that they will give us a response, and I am hoping
that this might be the vehicle now.
Chairman Boehlert. I would just say everything changed, or
so much changed on the morning of February 1. NASA now is
almost like the deer in the headlights. I mean, NASA is under
the very close scrutiny of a whole wide range of people, not
just in this Committee, but in the Congress, but all across
America, so when we demand--make legitimate demands on NASA,
they for darn sure are going to respond to them, or else they
are going to have some serious problems in going forward with
their program. I think they don't want serious problems going
forward with their programs. They are going to respond to our
legitimate demands, but this vehicle, this narrowly-crafted
bill, to deal with a specific need identified at NASA, should
go forward without being encumbered with amendments that are
not germane, no matter how well-intentioned, no matter how
thoughtful, no matter how real beneficial in the long run. If
this were the only vehicle going forward, I would say well,
gee--the train is leaving, this is our only choice, but that is
not the case at all. So unless someone else seeks recognition,
the vote is--Mr. Forbes.
Mr. Forbes. Mr. Chairman, despite the articulate and very
compelling appeal of the distinguished gentleman from Texas, I
must respectfully press my point of order that the amendment is
not germane to the bill.
Chairman Boehlert. The Chair is ready to rule. The
gentleman raising the point of order is correct. The amendment
is not germane and is out of order. That is the ruling of the
Chair.
Are there any further amendments? Hearing none, the
question is on the bill, H.R. 1085, the NASA Flexibility Act of
2003 is amended. All those in favor will say aye. Aye. All
those opposed will say no. In the opinion of the Chair, the
ayes have it.
Mr. Hall. Chair.
Chairman Boehlert. I will now recognize Mr. Hall. The Clerk
will call the roll. A recorded vote has been requested--suspend
for one second. The Chair recognizes Mr. Hall.
Mr. Hall. Mr. Chairman, I want a recorded vote on the
motion to report.
Chairman Boehlert. The chair recognizes Mr. Rohrabacher.
Mr. Rohrabacher. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee
report the bill H.R. 1085 as amended with the recommendation
that the bill as amended do pass. Furthermore, I move to
instruct the staff to prepare the legislative report to make
technical and conforming amendments, and that the Chairman take
all necessary steps to bring the bill before the House for
consideration.
Chairman Boehlert. The Chair notes the presence of a
reported quorum. The question is on the motion to report the
bill favorably. Those in favor of the motion will signify by
saying aye. Those opposed no. The ayes have it.
Mr. Hall. Mr. Chairman, I request a recorded vote.
Chairman Boehlert. The gentleman has requested a recorded
vote. The Clerk will call the roll.
The Clerk. Mr. Boehlert.
Chairman Boehlert. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Boehlert votes yes. Mr. Lamar Smith. Mr.
Weldon.
Mr. Weldon. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Weldon votes yes. Mr. Rohrabacher.
Mr. Rohrabacher. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Rohrabacher votes yes. Mr. Barton. Mr.
Calvert. Mr. Nick Smith.
Mr. Smith. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Smith votes yes. Mr. Bartlett. Mr. Bartlett
votes yes. Mr. Ehlers.
Mr. Ehlers. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Ehlers votes yes. Mr. Gutknecht. Mr.
Gutknecht votes yes. Mr. Nethercutt.
Mr. Nethercutt. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Nethercutt votes yes. Mr. Lucas.
Mr. Lucas.
The Clerk. Mr. Lucas votes yes. Mrs. Biggert.
Ms. Biggert. Aye.
The Clerk. Mrs. Biggert votes yes. Mr. Gilchrest. Mr. Akin.
Mr. Akin. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Akin votes yes. Mr. Johnson.
Mr. Johnson. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Johnson votes yes. Ms. Hart. Mr. Sullivan.
Mr. Forbes.
Mr. Forbes. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Forbes votes yes. Mr. Gingrey.
Mr. Gingrey. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Gingrey votes yes. Mr. Bishop. Mr. Bishop
votes yes. Mr. Burgess.
Mr. Burgess. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Burgess votes yes. Mr. Bonner. Mr. Feeney.
Mr. Feeney. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Feeney votes yes. Mr. Neugebauer.
Mr. Neugebauer. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Neugebauer votes yes.
Chairman Boehlert. How is Mr. Calvert recorded?
The Clerk. Mr. Calvert is not recorded. Mr. Calvert votes
yes.
Chairman Boehlert. How is Mr. Smith of Texas recorded?
The Clerk. Mr. Smith is not recorded. Mr. Smith votes yes.
Mr. Hall.
Mr. Hall. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Hall votes no. Mr. Gordon.
Mr. Gordon. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Gordon votes no. Mr. Costello.
Mr. Costello. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Costello votes no. Ms. Johnson. Ms. Johnson
votes no. Ms. Woolsey. Mr. Lampson.
Mr. Lampson. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Lampson votes no. Mr. Larson. Mr. Udall.
Mr. Udall. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Udall votes no. Mr. Wu. Mr. Honda.
Mr. Honda. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Honda votes no. Mr. Bell.
Mr. Bell. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Bell votes no. Mr. Miller.
Mr. Miller. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Miller votes no. Mr. Davis. Ms. Jackson Lee.
Ms. Jackson Lee. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Jackson Lee votes no. Ms. Lofgren.
Ms. Lofgren. Aye.
The Clerk. Ms. Lofgren votes yes. Mr. Sherman. Mr. Baird.
Mr. Baird. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Baird votes no. Mr. Moore.
Mr. Moore. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Moore votes no. Mr. Weiner. Mr. Mathison.
Mr. Mathison. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Mathison votes no. Mr. Cardoza.
Chairman Boehlert. The Clerk will report.
The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, yes 21, no 14.
Chairman Boehlert. The ayes appear to have it and the bill
is favorably reported. Without objection, the motion to
reconsider is laid upon the table. I move that members have two
subsequent calendar days in which to submit supplemental
minority or additional views on the measure. I move pursuant to
Clause 1 of Rule 22 of the Rules of the House of
Representatives that the Committee authorized the Chairman to
offer such motions as may be necessary in the House to go to
conference with the Senate on the bill H.R. 1085, or a similar
Senate bill. Without objection, so ordered. [Whereupon, the
Committee proceeded to other business.]