PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 93.
Congressional Research Service
Version 18 · Reported to House amended, Part I · May 16, 1997
Environmental Research, Development, and Demonstration Authorization Act of 1997 - Authorizes appropriations to the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for FY 1998 and 1999 for specified science and technology activities. Prohibits authorization of funds under this Act, other than amounts awarded through a competitive process, for the following activities: (1) the North Dakota Center for Air Toxic Metals Research; (2) Oil Spill Restoration at the Louisiana Environmental Research Center; (3) the Mine Waste Technology Program; (4) Livestock and Agriculture Pollution Abatement; (5) Resource and Agriculture Policy Development; (6) the San Joaquin Valley PM-10 Study; (7) the Clean Air Status and Trends Network monitoring station in New England; (8) the National Decentralized Water Resources Capacity Project; (9) the Lung Disease Study by the National Jewish Center; (10) the Lower Mississippi River Cancer Study; or (11) the Northern Iowa Small Business Pollution Prevention Center. Authorizes appropriations, from funds appropriated pursuant to this Act, to support research of the United States-Mexico Foundation for Science regarding environmental issues in the U.S.-Mexico transboundary region, including the Salton Sea. (Sec. 4) Requires the Administrator to assign to the Assistant Administrator for Research and Development the duties of: (1) developing and integrating a strategic plan for scientific and technical research activities; and (2) reviewing all EPA research to ensure that it is of high quality and not duplicative of other EPA research. (Sec. 5) Requires the Administrator to ensure that any fellowship award funded under this Act is used only to support research that would further missions of the Office of Research and Development . (Sec. 6) Provides procedures for Science Advisory Board reports to the Congress regarding research programs proposed in the President's budget for EPA and for periodic evaluation of selected areas of current and planned research, development, and demonstration activities. Requires Board reports required to be submitted to the Administrator to be submitted also to the Congress. Authorizes appropriations for activities of the Board. (Sec. 7) Imposes restrictions on lobbying activities, funding of activities other than those for which funds are specifically authorized under this Act, and grants after FY 1997 for a project not subjected to a competitive, merit-based award process. (Sec. 8) Sets forth congressional committee notice requirements applicable to funds reprogramming actions and any major reorganization of an EPA program, project, or activity. (Sec. 9) Expresses the sense of the Congress with respect to EPA planning for the year 2000 computer problem. (Sec. 10) Prohibits an entity from expending funds appropriated pursuant to this Act unless it agrees to comply with the Buy American Act. Expresses the sense of the Congress that in the case of equipment or products authorized to be purchased with financial assistance provided under this Act, recipients should purchase only American-made equipment and products.
People & committees
Rep. Calvert, Ken [R-CA-43] · R–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 93.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Commerce. H. Rept. 105-99, Part II.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Commerce. H. Rept. 105-99, Part II.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
House Committee on Commerce Granted an extension for further consideration ending not later than June 26, 1997.
Referred sequentially to the House Committee on Commerce for a period ending not later than June 20, 1997 for consideration of such provisions of the bill and amendment as fall within the jurisdiction of that committee pursuant to clause 1(e), rule X.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Science. H. Rept. 105-99, Part I.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Science. H. Rept. 105-99, Part I.
Mr. Sensenbrenner asked unanimous consent that the Committee on Science, Space and Technology have until 6:00 p.m. on April 22 to file a report on H.R. 1276. Agreed to without objection.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the House Committee on Science.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Apr 7, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.1276 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.1276 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.1276 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.1276 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.