(3) make inquiries, and administer to, or take from, any person an oath, affirmation or affidavit, concerning any matter which is related to the enforcement of such provisions; and

(4) exercise any other authority which such officer or employee is permitted by law to exercise.

SECTION 20.-MISCELLANEOUS ENFORCEMENT PROVISIONS

(a) REGULATIONS.—Each agency that has responsibility or implementing and enforcing this Act may promulgate such regulations as may be appropriate to enforce the provisions of this Act and of any regulations promulgated or permits issued under this Act, and charge reasonable fees for the expenses of the United States incurred in carrying out inspections and in transferring, boarding, handling, or storing animals, plants, Antarctic mineral resources and any other property seized or forfeited under this Act.

(b) BURDEN OF PROOF.-In connection with any action alleging a violation of this Act, or implementing regulations, any person claiming the benefit of any exemption or permit shall have the burden of proving that the exemption applies or that the permit is applicable, has been granted, was valid and was in force at the time of the alleged violation.

(c) STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS.-The statute of limitations for initiating an administrative or judicial enforcement proceeding shall begin to run at the time a violation is discovered by any of the authorities listed in section 19 and shall run for a period of five years.

(d) ACTION AGAINST PERMIT.—If any person fails to pay a civil penalty or criminal fine, the implementing agency may suspend or deny any permit issued to or applied for by such person. The implementing agency shall reinstate such permit or permit application upon payment of the penalty or fine and interest thereon at the prevailing rate.

e) PAYMENTS OF STORAGE AND OTHER COSTS.-Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the implementing agency may retain sums it receives as fines, penalties, and forfeitures of property for violations of any provisions of this Act, and shall pay from such sums

(1) the reasonable and necessary costs it incurs in connection with the seizure and forfeiture of property under this Act, including in providing temporary storage, care, and maintenance of such property pending disposition of any civil or criminal proceeding alleging a violation of any provision of this Act; (2) to a qualifying person any reward offered under section 19;

(3) any expenses directly related to investigations bind civil and criminal enforcement proceedings1 including any necessary expenses for equipment, training, travel, witnesses, and contracting services directly related to such investigations or proceedings;

(4) any valid liens or mortgages against any property chat has been forfeited; (5) claims of parties in interest to property disposed of under section 612(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1612(b)) or under other provision of the customs laws, as made applicable by this Act to seizures under this Act, in amounts determined by the implementing agency to be applicable to such claims at the time of seizure; and

(6) reimbursement to any agency for services performed, or personnel, equipment, or facilities utilized, under any agreement entered into under section 19, or any similar agreement authorized by law.

(f) PROCEEDINGS UNDER OTHER LAWS.-Legal proceedings brought under any section of this Act with respect to any act shall not be deemed to preclude proceedings with respect to such act under any other provision of this Act or any other law.

(g) INFORMATION GATHERING AUTHORITY.-For the purposes of enforcing the provisions of this Act, or any permit issued or regulation promulgated under this Act(1) the implementing agency may require any person who has undertaken activities in Antarctica to

(A) furnish information relating to his or her activities in Antarctica; or (B) sample any wastes, emissions, discharges, or releases; and

(2) the implementing agency or its authorized representative may at reasonable times have access to and copy any records relating to activities in Antarctica, and sample any wastes, emissions, discharges, or releases that such person is required to sample under paragraph (1) of this subsection.

SECTION 21.-JUDICIAL ACTIONS

A district court of the United States which has jurisdiction over any case or controversy arising under the provisions of this Act may, at any time—

(a) enter restraining orders or prohibitions;

(b) issue warrants, process in rem, or other process;

(c) prescribe and accept satisfactory bonds or other security; and

(d) take such other actions as are in the interest of justice.

SECTION 22.-FEDERAL AGENCY COOPERATION

(a) Each federal department or agency whose activities affect Antarctica shall utilize, to the maximum extent practicable, its authorities in furtherance of the purposes of this Act, and shall cooperate with the Director in carrying out the purposes of this Act.

(b) The Director shall consult with the Administrator with respect to enforcement of regulations promulgated under section 6(e), and with respect to determining compliance with the terms and conditions of permits issued under section 5(g)(2).

SECTION 23.-RELATIONSHIP TO EXISTING INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS, STATUTES, REGULATIONS, AND PERMITS

(a) IN GENERAL.-Nothing in this Act shall be construed as contravening or superseding the provisions of any treaty or other international agreement, if such treaty or agreement is in force with respect to the United States on the date of enactment of this Act, or the provisions of any statute except as provided in subsections (b) and (c) of this section.

(b) STATUTE. For purposes of any Antarctic mineral resource, the provisions of this Act prevail over any inconsistent provision of the Deep Seabed Hard Mineral Resources Act (30 USC 1401-1471).

(c) REPEAL OF STATUTES.-The Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978 (16 USC 2401 et seq.) and the Antarctic Protection Act of 1990 (16 USC 2461 et seq.) are hereby repealed.

(d) SAVINGS PROVISIONS.

(1) All regulations promulgated under the Antarctic conservation Act of 1978 (16 USC 2401 et seq.) shall remain in effect until the Director, the Secretary, the Administrator, the Secretary of the Department in which the Coast Guard is operating, or the Secretary of State, as the case may be, promulgates superseding regulations under sections 6, 7, or 8.

(2) All permits issued under the Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978 (16 USC 2401 et seq.) shall remain in effect until they expire in accordance with the terms of those permits.

SECTION 24.—AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS

There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary for each of fiscal years 1994 and 1995 to carry out this Act.

Senator KERRY. Thank you very much. Dr. Sullivan, would you please present your testimony?

STATEMENT OF DR. CORNELIUS W. SULLIVAN, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF POLAR PROGRAMS, NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION; ACCOMPANIED BY LARRY RUDOLPH, ACTING GENERAL COUNSEL

Dr. SULLIVAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, for holding this hearing, and for inviting me to appear before your committee this afternoon. I am accompanied today by my colleague, Mr. Larry Rudolph, sitting on my left, who is Acting General Counsel of the National Science Foundation.

Mr. Chairman, we greatly appreciate your abiding interest in Antarctica, and your leadership on legislation to implement the protocol. This hearing represents my first opportunity to testify on Capitol Hill, since my appointment as Director of the Office of Polar Programs at the National Science Foundation.

I would like to very briefly introduce myself to you. I have come to Washington following 19 years as a professor of marine biology and oceanography at the University of Southern California in Los Angeles. My research during that period has focused on marine life

that ranges from, basically, bacteria to whales, in the ice-covered oceans of the Arctic and Antarctic; and I have had what I consider to be the very good fortune to have spent 13 seasons at Antarctica on the ice, performing ecological research.

Since my arrival at the National Science Foundation last May, I have worked to carry out the responsibilities of the U.S. Antarctic Program, and to conduct a world-class science program in Antarctica; and to do so in a way that protects the Antarctic environment. For many years, it has been well-known that NSF grantees perform excellent scientific research in Antarctica and its surrounding frozen ocean.

This month, scientists performing research in Antarctica discovered the largest and deepest ozone hole ever observed; and last year, several of my colleagues from the University of California at Santa Barbara reported on the effects of the reduced ozone, the subsequent increase in ultraviolet light, and the resulting inhibitory effects of radiation on the growth of phytoplankton, which are the tiny plants in the Antarctica seas that form the foundation of food webs, and upon which all life there depends.

This research will make important contributions, not just to understanding Antarctica, but it also addresses global environmental problems, and helps us to comprehend the Earth's system. Now, that Earth system allows us to understand how anthropogenically generated gases in the industrialized world end up in the Antarctica stratosphere to reduce ozone, and increase ultraviolet radiation at the Earth's surface that subsequently limits plant growth there. I think it is fair to say that it is less well-known, but equally deserving of notice, that NSF is wholeheartedly committed to protecting the Antarctic environment.

Early this week, on Monday in fact, I returned from 2 weeks in Antarctica, reviewing the Antarctic through the eyes of one who is now responsible for the overall program. And I want to tell you that I saw changes. I might also add that, during my research experiences in Antarctica, primarily at McMurdo Station, I observed very significant environmental improvements in Antarctica between about 1980 and 1989; but those changes, however, were not nearly as dramatic as the improvements that have been made over the past 3 years.

I can tell you that McMurdo Station is clean and orderly. Fortress Rocks are clean, and the waste there is neatly lined up and packaged in containers for shipment to waste disposal sites outside of the Antarctic continent.

But perhaps more importantly, I found that the behavior of all the people, whether they were grantees, NSF, Navy, or our contractor, had changed substantially, to one of great personal environmental awareness; and I would be willing to bet that one would be hard-pressed to find even a cigarette butt in the streets of McMurdo these days. I think that reflects much of the program's change in the last 3 to 5 years.

In my new position, I have met personally with representatives of many of the environmental groups, concerned with the Antarctic, and I have also convened several group meetings with the environmental community, and also congressional staffers, to discuss environmental and scientific activities in Antarctica.

I have also just hired three full-time employees with environmental compliance responsibility. One of those individuals, with 28 years' experience, is currently leading NSF's efforts to integrate NEPA into our program. And the other two individuals are already in Antarctica, monitoring compliance with the Antarctic Conservation Act, including waste management practices.

Since coming onboard, my office has worked hard as a member of the administration's team, to develop legislation to implement the Antarctic protocol that Mr. Scully just described so eloquently. We are pleased that, after several months of negotiation, the interagency group has reached full agreement on all provisions of this measure, save one; and work remains to be completed on this sec

tion.

Agencies, including State Department, EPA, NOAA, DOD, Coast Guard, Justice, Interior, and NSF have spent many hours on this cooperative effort, hammering out the details of this bill. We believe that our proposal achieves the appropriate balance between protecting the Antarctic environment and maintaining a sound scientific program.

We believe that the draft administration bill, as provided to you by the State Department, will best achieve the objectives of the protocol. It is our opinion that the administration's bill takes advantage of the expertise lodged in various Federal agencies, and provides for comprehensive protection of the Antarctic environment, without unreasonably limiting the flexibility of regulatory agencies.

Mr. Chairman, it was 2 years ago this month that the protocol was signed by the United States in Madrid. It was 1 year ago this month that this body, the U.S. Senate, gave its advice and consent to the ratification of the protocol.

Enacting implementing legislation that balances support for Antarctic science, and protection of the Antarctic environment, will enable the United States to serve as a model to other countries to do the same. On that, I can see, we agree.

Mr. Chairman, NSF shares your goal of implementing the protocol as quickly as possible; and we look forward to working closely with you and the rest of the committee, to enact the implementing legislation proposed by the administration.

I thank you, Mr. Chairman.

[The prepared statement of Dr. Sullivan follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF DR. CORNELIUS SULLIVAN

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for this opportunity to discuss implementing legislation for the protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty. We sincerely appreciate your abiding interest in Antarctica and your leadership on legislation to implement the Protocol, and are reviewing S. 1427, the bill that you have introduced.

The Protocol, signed by the United States at Madrid on October 4, 1991, and given the advice and consent of the Senate on October 7, 1992, designates Antarctica as a natural reserve, devoted to peace and science, and establishes a comprehensive environmental_protection regime governing activities undertaken there. The National Science Foundation (NSF) whole-heartedly supports its basic goal of requiring that activities be undertaken in a manner that preserves the Antarctic environment, while according priority to scientific research.

ANTARCTIC SCIENCE

Antarctic science continues to make invaluable contributions to our understanding of the Earth, the evolution of the universe, and global ecological and environmental processes. For example:

• In October of 1993, Antarctic researchers observed the lowest ozone levels and the largest ozone "hole" ever. Antarctic researchers in this area are focusing their efforts on ground-based stratospheric chemistry to supplement satellite observations; measurements of increases in ultraviolet radiation coming through the ozone. hole; and experiments aimed at understanding the effects of increased UV on antarctic life.

• A four-station Antarctic UV monitoring system is providing a continent-wide perspective on the scope of increased levels of ultraviolet radiation associated with the antarctic ozone hole. Recent results suggest that the ozone hole reduced annual biotic productivity in the antarctic marginal sea ice zone by 7 million metric tons. South Pole measurements of microwave background radiation are helping astrophysicists understand the evolution of the universe. Because of extremely clear atmospheric conditions at the South Pole, the quality of data collected there is unsurpassed.

Bird fossils found on a small island near the antarctic Peninsula are helping us understand how birds were evolving 65 to 70 million years ago. Because there are no other land bird fossils of that age in Antarctica, the discovery also raises questions about why this bird species survived massive, worldwide extinctions at the end of the Cretaceous period.

• An active volcano discovered beneath the west antarctic ice sheet may shed light on how Antarctica's ice contributes to rising sea levels. Investigators who discovered the volcano believe heat from subglacial volcanoes strongly shape the character of today's ice by melting it from beneath and setting the ice aflow in rapid

streams.

Antarctica offers unique opportunities for scientific research, in large part because the environment is relatively unaffected by human activity there. The Administration, and NSF in particular, is committed to protecting this unique natural laboratory.

For the past several months, an interagency group, including the Department of State, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the Department of Defense, the Coast Guard, the Department of the Interior, and NSF, has been working to develop legislation that will do just that in implementing the requirements of the Protocol. The draft Administration bill, as transmitted to you, reflects the full agreement of all agencies. Work remains to be completed on one section-that dealing with judicial review and citizen suits.

The Administration believes that its draft legislation will best achieve the objectives of the Protocol. It will take advantage of the expertise lodged in various Federal agencies, and provide for comprehensive protection of the Antarctic environment without unreasonably limiting the flexibility of regulating agencies.

ADMINISTRATION DRAFT BILL

The legislative scheme developed by the interagency group has the following basic components:

• Regulatory Responsibilities.-The Coast Guard would issue regulations governing marine pollution; NOAA, Antarctic mineral resource activities; EPA, environmental assessment of nongovernmental activities; and NSF, conservation of flora and fauna, protected areas, and waste disposal and waste management. EPA's concurrence would be required for waste disposal and waste management regulations, and NOAA's concurrence would be required for permits authorizing the taking of flora and fauna incidental to the operation or construction of U.S. facilities.

• Specific Provisions.—In addition to the Protocol's specific requirements, implementing legislation would require the development of regulations governing incineration and sewage discharges in Antarctica, and would require that the environmental principles set forth in Article 3 of the Protocol be taken fully into account in doing so. Incineration regulations would be promulgated only in the event NSF, in consultation with EPA, and based on sound waste management planning, determines to use incineration as a means of waste disposal.

• Oversight of U.S. Activities in Antarctica.-An inspection/review team designated by the Secretary of State, the Administrator of EPA, and the Secretary of Commerce, would periodically inspect U.S. facilities in Antarctica, review USAP environmental practices for compliance with the implementing legislation and the Protocol, and make recommendations to the program.