S. 786 National Weather Services Duties Act of 2005 (Introduced in Senate)

Thomas ^ | 4/14/05 | Rick Santorum

[WFTR]

---

National Weather Services Duties Act of 2005 (Introduced in Senate)

S 786 IS1S

(Star Print)

109th CONGRESS

1st Session

S. 786

To clarify the duties and responsibilities of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the National Weather Service, and for other purposes.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

April 14, 2005

Mr. SANTORUM introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation

---

A BILL

To clarify the duties and responsibilities of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the National Weather Service, 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 `National Weather Services Duties Act of 2005'.

SEC. 2. DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION AND NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE.

(a) NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE- To protect life and property, the Secretary of Commerce shall, through the National Weather Service, be responsible for the following:

(1) The preparation and issuance of severe weather forecasts and warnings designed for the protection of life and property of the general public.

(2) The preparation and issuance of hydrometeorological guidance and core forecast information.

(3) The collection and exchange of meteorological, hydrological, climatic, and oceanographic data and information.

(4) The provision of reports, forecasts, warnings, and other advice to the Secretary of Transportation and other persons pursuant to section 44720 of title 49, United States Code.

(5) Such other duties and responsibilities as the Secretary shall specify.

(b) COMPETITION WITH PRIVATE SECTOR- The Secretary of Commerce shall not provide, or assist other entities in providing, a product or service (other than a product or service described in subsection (a)(1)) that is or could be provided by the private sector unless--

(1) the Secretary determines that the private sector is unwilling or unable to provide such product or service; or

(2) the United States Government is obligated to provide such product or service under international aviation agreements to provide meteorological services and exchange meteorological information.

(c) ISSUANCE OF DATA, FORECASTS, AND WARNINGS-

(1) IN GENERAL- All data, information, guidance, forecasts, and warnings received, collected, created, or prepared by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration or the National Weather Service shall, to the maximum extent practicable, be issued in real time, and without delay for internal use, in a manner that ensures that all members of the public have the opportunity for simultaneous and equal access to such data, information, guidance, forecasts, and warnings.

(2) MODE OF ISSUANCE- Data, information, guidance, forecasts, and warnings shall be issued under paragraph (1) through a set of data portals designed for volume access by commercial providers of products or services and by such other mechanisms as the Secretary of Commerce considers appropriate for purposes of that paragraph.

(d) PROHIBITION ON CERTAIN DISCLOSURES- An officer, employee, or agent of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the National Weather Service, or any other department or agency of the United States who by reason of that status comes into possession of any weather data, information, guidance, forecast, or warning that might influence or affect the market value of any product, service, commodity, tradable, or business may not--

(1) willfully impart, whether directly or indirectly, such weather data, information, guidance, forecast, or warning, or any part thereof, before the issuance of such weather data, information, guidance, forecast, or warning to the public under subsection (c); or

(2) after the issuance of such weather data, information, guidance, forecast, or warning to the public under subsection (c), willfully impart comments or qualifications on such weather data, information, guidance, forecast, or warning, or any part thereof, to the public, except pursuant to an issuance that complies with that subsection.

(e) REGULATIONS- Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Commerce shall prescribe regulations to implement the provisions of this section.

(f) PRODUCT OR SERVICE DEFINED- In this section, the term `product or service' means a product, service, device, or system that provides, senses, or communicates meteorological, hydrological, climatic, solar, or oceanographic data, forecasts, or other similar information.

(g) EFFECTIVE DATE- The provisions of this section (other than subsection (e)) shall take effect 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.

(h) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS- The Act of October 1, 1890 (26 Stat. 653) is amended as follows:

(1) Section 3 (15 U.S.C. 313) is repealed.

(2) Section 9 (15 U.S.C. 317) is amended by striking `, and it shall be' and all that follows and inserting a period.

SEC. 3. REPORT ON MODIFICATION OF NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION AND NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE ACTIVITIES.

(a) REPORT- Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Commerce shall submit to the appropriate committees of Congress a report that sets forth--

(1) a detailed statement of the activities, if any, of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the National Weather Service that are inconsistent with the provisions of section 2;

(2) a schedule for the modification of the activities referred to in paragraph (1) in order to conform such activities to the provisions of section 2; and

(3) the regulations prescribed under section 2(e).

(b) APPROPRIATE COMMITTEES OF CONGRESS DEFINED- In this section, the term `appropriate committees of Congress' means--

(1) the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate; and

(2) the Committee on Science of the House of Representatives.

[WFTR]

I like to check weather forcasts online, and I ran across a link today at one of my favorite websites asking that I call my senators to oppose this bill. To read some of the discussion at the website, you'd think that the sky was falling around the National Weather Service. When I arrived home, a non-political e-mail list to which I belong had an e-mail urging us to act to stop the bill. I went to Thomas and read the bill. From everything I can see, the whole thing is a tempest in a teapot. I don't see anything in the bill that changes how the weather service will do its work.

A part of me suspects that some of the people screaming about this bill are just liberals who want to take a shot at Rick Santorum. They want to portray the senator as trying to make citizens less safe and less informed about the weather and more under the power of the senator's evil corporate friends at private weather services. Personally, I think the bill's language would keep the government from showing favoritism to any private companies.

Admittedly, the bill says that the weather service doesn't exist to compete with the private sector, and liberals always get the vapors when someone suggests the government not dominating the private sector. I guess I just have a hard time thinking that people would really make this big a deal over that semantic issue.

Much of my reason for making this post is the hope that others can educate me about anything else behind the issue. I know that we have some Freepers with training in meteorology. I've also found in general that one or two Freepers somewhere will know something about any subject that arises. I'm hoping those Freepers will post some good background.

Thanks,

Bill

[FreedomCalls]

I don't see anything in the bill that changes how the weather service will do its work.

It would shut down NWS web sites for one. Do you want to go back to getting all your info from NOAA weather radio only unless you subscribe to a pay site?

[jwalburg]

SEC. 4 The Weather Service shall prepare all forecasts to be relayed in automated voices that will make it difficult for ordinary people to dicipher.

[Agog]

It looks like this bill provides free access to weather information for commercial resellers of such information but prohibits dissemination to the public that would compete with such resellers. It does not appear that commercial resellers would be required to pay for such information. Currently, such information is disseminated to the public by the government. Remember, our taxes pay for this information. Sounds like someone bought this legislation.

[Kretek]

It would shut down NWS web sites for one.

Where does it say that?

[Teplukin]

This is the question - should the taxpayer be forced to pay twice for weather information? First via his taxes that support the Weather Service. And second, via a subscription to the Weather Channel, which seeks to become the sole provider of information generated by the Weather Service.

Some folks might object to such an arrangement. I can't say I blame them.

[general_re]

Lots of good info and commentary on this thread.

[Izzy Dunne]

Here's my beef with this: The Secretary of Commerce shall not provide, or assist other entities in providing, a product or service (other than a product or service described in subsection (a)(1)) that is or could be provided by the private sector

... and then you say:
and liberals always get the vapors when someone suggests the government not dominating the private sector.

Well, maybe you think I'm a liberal, but consider this:
This comes about because weather sites and Weather channel, etc. complained about the new way that NOAA now gives out data to the public.
Check out this link for details on that.
That's what Santorum wants to shut down.

The bottom line is that we taxpayers have already paid for every bit of the cost of collecting and interpreting that data. It's public information, or aleast it ought to be..
TWC, et al, have been using it to make money for years. I don't begrudge them that, but why should they have the only outlet?

Why should they have the use of my tax dollars to make profit for them, and disallow me from using that data?

[BigSkyFreeper]

This sets back all the progress that has been made in making the NWS consumer and user-friendly. You can bet the goobers at The Weather Channel are just salivating at the chance to make a profit if this falls through and becomes law. If this indeed falls through, I am going to stop contributing weather spotting reports to the Skywarn system.

[muawiyah]

Did you ever wonder why it was for so many years that you couldn't buy a pen or paper, or a large envelope at the local post office?

The reason was a small group in the Senate and House who used this argument of "unfair competition" to prohibit the USPS (and before it the POD) from handling stationary, or anything but post cards and small envelopes.

It didn't matter that you lived 20 miles from any kind of commercial center, didn't own a car, and were otherwise unable to find, to say nothing of purchase those goods.

Well, they're back ~ only this time they want to reserve Weather Service information for commercial vendors.

Are they getting anything out of it? Probably not, but someone has convinced them that private competition is damaged when a federal agency does the job for which it was formed.

[Izzy Dunne]

"It would shut down NWS web sites for one."

Where does it say that?

Right here:

The Secretary of Commerce shall not provide, or assist other entities in providing, a product or service (other than a product or service described in subsection (a)(1)) that is or could be provided by the private sector

[BigSkyFreeper]

This comes about because weather sites and Weather channel, etc. complained about the new way that NOAA now gives out data to the public. Check out this link for details on that. That's what Santorum wants to shut down.

Right. The Weather Channel is charging for their service, called Notify. You have to have a text enabled cellphone to use the damn thing. Around here where I live, that won't work. That's fine by me.

[Strategerist]

Sounds like someone bought this legislation.

Joel Myers, the dispicable, evil, lying head of AccuWeather, did so with contributions to Santorum.

[Izzy Dunne]

The Weather Channel is charging for their service, called Notify. You have to have a text enabled cellphone to use the damn thing.

And I don't have a problem with that. Presumably, TWC adds some value to it.

But they're using data that I paid for already, and then want to tell me that I can't use it anymore.

[BigSkyFreeper]

Joel Myers, the dispicable, evil, lying head of AccuWeather, did so with contributions to Santorum.

That's unfortunate because I've found AccuWeather's storm track Nexrad to be very valuable. I'd hate to have to pay for it in the future.

[xcamel]

The real scandal is not the NWS and "free data", but monopolies like NLDN which was 100% taxpayer funded research and implementation (Thanks NASA), turned over to a company that patented the technology, that now charges horrendous fees for the data, and is now owned by a foreign corporation.

Hows that for a "Bend over Mr. Taxpayer" ???

**NLDN is the National Lightning Detection Network

[BigSkyFreeper]

They're charging for same information you could get free elsewhere. Yeah, they're adding a value to it. They're the only ones making a quick buck.

[simon says what]

Bill,

Here is 2 other threads that have discussed the topic recently:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1388509/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1389800/posts

The way I read the bill the NWS and NOAA will continue to fund equipment and gather data but will be prohibited from publishing it to the public in a manner that competes with a product a commercial service offers.

Say by by to radar, satellite photos, and other weather information on NOAA and NWS websites if this bill passes.

[edweena]

The very informative posts here make me think it would be well worth while to make those calls to our senators. It's a tax-payer rip-off.

[simon says what]

Contributions from individuals whose employer/occupation is ACCUWEATHER to Santorum.

http://www.tray.com/cgi-win/x_candempoccdet.exe?DoFn=&sEmployer=ACCU%20WEATHER&rb=04&CandID=S4PA00063