H. Res. 352: H.R. 1145 - National Water Research and Development Initiative Act of 2009.

COMMITTEE ACTION: REPORTED BY A VOICE VOTE on April 22, 2009.
FLOOR ACTION: ADOPTED BY A VOICE VOTE on Thursday, April 23, 2009.

MANAGERS: Arcuri/Diaz-Balart

111th Congress 
1st Session

H.RES 352

[Report No. 111-82]

 

H.R. 1145 – National Water Research and Development Initiative Act of 2009

  1. Structured rule.
  2. Provides one hour of general debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Science and Technology.
  3. Waives all points of order against consideration of the bill except those arising under clause 9 or 10 of rule XXI.
  4. Provides that the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Science and Technology shall be considered as an original bill for the purpose of amendment and shall be considered as read.
  5. Waives all points of order against the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute except those arising under clause 10 of rule XXI.  This does not affect the point of order available under clause 9 of rule XXI (regarding earmark disclosure).
  6. Makes in order only those amendments printed in the Rules Committee report accompanying the resolution.
  7. Provides that the amendments made in order may be offered only in the order printed in the report, may be offered only by a Member designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question in the House or in the Committee of the Whole.
  8. Waives all points of order against the amendments printed in the report except for those arising under clause 9 or 10 of rule XXI.
  9. Provides one motion to recommit with or without instructions.

—————

RESOLUTION

            Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XVIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of the bill (H.R. 1145) to implement a National Water Research and Development Initiative, and for other purposes.  The first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with.  All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived except those arising under clause 9 or 10 of rule XXI.  General debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Science and Technology.  After general debate the bill shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule.  It shall be in order to consider as an original bill for the purpose of amendment under the five-minute rule the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Science and Technology now printed in the bill.  The committee amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be considered as read.  All points of order against the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute are waived except those arising under clause 10 of rule XXI.  Notwithstanding clause 11 of rule XVIII, no amendment to the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be in order except those printed in the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution.  Each such amendment may be offered only in the order printed in the report, may be offered only by a Member designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question in the House or in the Committee of the Whole.  All points of order against such amendments are waived except those arising under clause 9 or 10 of rule XXI.  At the conclusion of consideration of the bill for amendment the Committee shall rise and report the bill to the House with such amendments as may have been adopted.  Any Member may demand a separate vote in the House on any amendment adopted in the Committee of the Whole to the bill or to the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute.  The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or without instructions.

SUMMARY OF AMENDMENTS TO BE MADE IN ORDER

1. Gordon (TN)

Would require that the National Water Research Development Plan specified in the bill be revised and resubmitted to Congress every 4 years after its initial submission.  Also, it would authorize appropriations of $2 million for each of fiscal years 2013 and 2014.  It also would (1) require review of measures related to abating water quality impairment, (2) require the committee to work with institutions of higher education, (3) require cooperation with commercial end users, (4) require relevant information be posted on a public website, and (5) require research into watershed hydrology.  It would require that the plan include a focus on the (1) development of the effect of invasive species on water supplies, (2) development of technologies to treat eutrophic water bodies, (3) development of a program to assist state and local regions regarding land conservation, (4) improvement of understanding of chemical impairments to water supply and quality, and (5) identification of whether a need exists for additional water research facilities.  It requires the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy to write to Congress and evaluate the budget as it relates to water research.  It expresses the sense of Congress that the interagency committee should collaborate with public institutions of higher education.  It requires the EPA to establish a pilot program exploring the use of energy audits of water-related infrastructure to identify energy and water saving opportunities.

(40 minutes)

2. Kosmas (FL)/
Driehaus (OH)

Would direct agencies under the interagency committee to assess the impact of natural disasters, such as floods, hurricanes, and tornadoes on water resources.

(10 minutes)

3. Hastings , Doc (WA)

Would add to the water research and development plan an assessment of potential water storage projects that would enhance water supply, water planning, and other beneficial uses.

(10 minutes)

4. Cardoza (CA)

Would direct  the Secretary of the Interior and the National Academy of Science to study the impact of changes to snow pack, including snow pack in the Sierra Nevadas, on water resources and its relation to water supply, including the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta.

(10 minutes)

5. Brown-Waite (FL)

Would require agencies included in the interagency committee to work on improvement of understanding of water-intensive sectors of the economy and industrial needs for water.

(10 minutes)

6. Arcuri, Michael (NY)

Would require the plan to include improvement of understanding of competing water supply uses and how different uses interact with and impact each other.

(10 minutes)

7. Kirk (IL)/
Quigley, Mike (IL)

Would add to the plan a direction that agencies included in the interagency committee work to achieve projection of the long-term ice cover and water level outlook for major water bodies in the , including the Great Lakes , the potential impacts of the results of such projections on infrastructure, and resource management options based on such projections.

(10 minutes)

8. Teague, Harry (NM)

Would require that the plan's analysis of the energy required to provide reliable water supplies and the water required for the production of alternative and renewable energy resources.

(10 minutes)

9. Roskam (IL)

Would require GAO to study whether any of the requirements of the underlying legislation are duplicative of existing programs.  Prior to implementation of the bill, the President will, based upon the GAO report, determine whether the programs are duplicative or not.  If the President differs in his determination from the GAO conclusions, he must offer a justification for his determination.  The effective date is delayed until the President has made that determination.

(10 minutes)

10. Blumenauer (OR)

Would create a wastewater and stormwater reuse and recycling technology demonstration program within the Environmental Protection Agency.  Under the program, the Assistant Administrator for Research and Development would develop and fund projects to demonstrate, evaluate, and test the techniques and technologies to reuse and recycle stormwater and wastewater at the building, site, neighborhood, and watershed scales for urban, industrial, agricultural, environmental, and recreational uses as well as to augment potable water supplies.

(10 minutes)

11. Shadegg (AZ)

Would require the interagency committee to identify and recommend against duplication of Federal water-related research, development, and technological innovation activities by more than one agency or program.  It also would require the President to ensure that Federal agencies do not request appropriations for activities duplicated by state, local, and tribal governments.

(10 minutes)

12. Moore, Gwen (WI)

Would require the interagency committee to assess the role of Federal water research funding in helping to develop the next generation of scientists and engineers at institutions of higher education.

(10 minutes)