By Christine Ray, GSA Science Policy Fellow

Blue NOAA logo with bird soaring

On Friday, 9 June, Rep. Frank Lucas (R-OK), the Chairman of the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee, introduced the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Act of 2023. Created within the Department of Commerce under President Richard Nixon’s Reorganization Plan No. 4 of 1970, NOAA has never been formally established into law via an organic act (a type of law that creates and authorizes government agencies). If enacted, Rep. Lucas’s legislation would serve as a NOAA organic act. It would pull NOAA out of the Department of Commerce and establish it as an independent federal agency with full statutory authority (the power to legally issue rules and regulations).

This legislation came about two months after the House Science Committee brought three former NOAA Administrators into the committee chamber for a hearing on establishing an independent NOAA. “NOAA is one of the most important agencies within our committee’s jurisdiction,” said Chairman Lucas while discussing his draft legislation  during the hearing. “Its role in forecasting weather, which protects lives and property, cannot be understated, and its cutting edge research helps us better understand our planet and our climate, allowing us to make sustainable use of our country’s tremendous natural resources. However, despite the importance of this work, NOAA has a curious origin that has prevented the agency from reaching its full potential.”

“The idea of a NOAA organic act has long had bipartisan support, however differences over the scope and details of what such an act would include derailed previous efforts to pass legislation,” added Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), the Ranking Member of the committee, while discussing Congress’s past attempts to pass a NOAA organic act. “Now, we have a fractious political environment, but I am eager to work with the Chairman and my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to elevate NOAA in the public discourse and see what we can achieve, and I am mindful that this committee’s long history of bipartisanship may help us avoid the pitfalls of the prior years.”

During the hearing, the three former NOAA Administrators testified to the benefits of making the agency independent, including better enabling its scientific capabilities, streamlining its operations, and protecting its budget. “Everything we did, from a potential all-hands email, to a spin plan, to budget approval, had to go through several different layers in the Department of Commerce, and it’s usually being reviewed by people that don’t really understand NOAA’s mission, and they don’t really have the scientific expertise,” recalled Dr. Neil Jacobs, the Acting NOAA Administrator between 2019 and 2021, while addressing a question from Rep. Jay Obernolte (R-CA). “We’d have to spend a lot of time rewriting and explaining stuff that was honestly kind of a waste of resources.”

Dr. Tim Gallaudet, the Acting NOAA Administrator from 2017 to 2019, explained how NOAA’s position within the Department of Commerce had historically resulted in budget cuts to the agency. “Commerce’s egregious extraction of NOAA funding is most evident when the department falls short on the funding for the decennial census,” testified Dr. Gallaudet. “In these instances, the Commerce Department reallocated NOAA funding to the Census Bureau, and the only way NOAA could cope with such high budget cuts was by delaying critical upgrades to environmental satellites and other major programs.”

The witnesses also discussed how NOAA’s independence would allow for more branding opportunities, making the public more aware of the agency’s mission and importance, and helping with staff recruiting and retention. “NOAA is often compared to NASA during interagency coordinations, but the public does not see it that way; most everyone has heard of the National Weather Service, yet not many people know it’s part of NOAA, and they’re even more surprised to learn that NOAA is part of the Department of Commerce,” testified Dr. Jacobs during his opening remarks. “NASA’s space mission is important, but NOAA is affecting every American life every day, so putting NOAA on par with NASA would recognize all that it does and give it more positive exposure,” agreed Dr. Gallaudet after Rep. Scott Franklin (R-FL) asked the witnesses about NOAA’s branding potential.

Besides formally authorizing the agency, allowing NOAA to realize the benefits discussed in the committee hearing, the NOAA Act of 2023 would:

  • Require the agency’s Science Advisory Board to develop, with consultation from the NOAA Administrator and review by the National Academy of Sciences, a strategic plan for research and development at NOAA that would be revised every five years
  • Direct the NOAA Administrator to submit a reorganization plan for the agency after the bill is enacted that would aid the agency in carrying out its core mission, both improving collaboration and reducing overlap across different mission areas
  • Continue National Weather Service operations within the independent NOAA
  • Keep the Office of Commercial Space within the Department of Commerce, rather than moving with NOAA
  • Contract the National Academy of Public Administration to study the feasibility and benefits of moving the functions of the Endangered Species Act and Marine Mammal Protection Act to a single federal agency or department

The bill has been referred to both the House Science, Space and Technology Committee and the Natural Resources Committee.

###