Senate appropriators voted yesterday to approve spending legislation that aims to shore up a beleaguered satellite program at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration even as it cuts spending on the agency's oceans and fisheries programs.

The fiscal 2012 spending bill, which the Senate Appropriations Committee approved on a party-line vote, would set aside $5 billion for NOAA -- $434 million more than the agency received last year but $463 million below the White House request.

But the increase is deceiving, lawmakers said. Most of the new cash would be funneled to NOAA's Joint Polar Satellite System in an effort to limit the damage of steep funding cuts pushed through in fiscal 2011.

However, the move to boost JPSS could put the agency's overall mission at risk, Senate appropriators said in a report accompanying their legislation.

"For fiscal year 2012, the committee has made great sacrifices throughout this bill to support increased funding needed for JPSS," reads the Appropriations Committee report on the spending bill. "The committee cannot deny that these satellites are a national asset crucial to predicting weather. As a result, more than one-third of NOAA's 2012 appropriation is provided for satellite acquisitions in this bill."

Lawmakers said they are concerned JPSS could become a "long-term drain" on NOAA's weather forecasting and ocean and coastal programs. With that in mind, their proposed increase for 2012 comes with strings attached. The Senate bill would require NOAA to slash JPSS's life-cycle budget.

The agency originally estimated the satellite effort would cost $11.9 billion to build and operate through 2024, a cost the Senate panel said is too steep when austerity is the watchword on Capitol Hill.

"The committee does not believe the current fiscal climate can achieve this funding level, nor will the committee continue to allow a single satellite program to jeopardize the base funding for every other agency in this bill, including the erosion of NOAA's non-satellite operations," reads the Senate Appropriations report.

The Senate bill would require NOAA to cut the satellite program's total cost, minus the price of climate sensors, to $9.4 billion through 2024. That would leave NOAA $6.06 billion to spend on the program from 2012 to 2024 -- including the $920 million the Senate bill would set aside for the next budget cycle.

In addition to requiring NOAA to update its long-term budget for JPSS, the Senate bill would also direct the agency to provide appropriators a report "quantifying the value of JPSS data to other federal agencies" with an eye on requiring those agencies to pay NOAA for the use of data collected by JPSS satellites.

The legislation would also require NOAA to minimize risk and make collecting weather data the satellite program's main mission, even at the expense of collecting data on climate change.

"Any associated climate sensors that become the critical path for JPSS will be cancelled," the Senate report says. It would direct NOAA to investigate whether climate sensors originally meant for JPSS probes can be carried into orbit by other, smaller satellites.

NOAA's controversial climate service

The Senate bill also weighs in on NOAA's controversial plan to create a new "climate service."

The agency proposed creating the new office last year to handle what officials said was an overwhelming increase in requests for data and forecasts to help communities and businesses adapt to climate change.

NOAA is seeking to consolidate most of its existing climate activities without increasing its overall budget, a plan the National Academy of Public Administration endorsed last fall in a congressionally requested report.

The idea has drawn strong opposition from House Republicans, who managed to insert language into fiscal 2011 spending legislation that prevents NOAA from creating the climate service during the current budget year. Similar language is included in the House's fiscal 2012 spending bill for NOAA, which was approved in July by the full House Appropriations Committee.

The Senate bill approved by the committee yesterday would set aside money for the climate service but would sharply reduce the new office's size and reach. Lawmakers criticized the Obama administration's plan to remove climate programs from NOAA's Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research, cutting that office's budget in half.

The Senate bill would set aside $182 million for the proposed climate service, well below the $346 million sought by the White House. The legislation would award $363 million to the Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research, well above the president's proposal of $212 million.

Other cuts

The Senate bill would cut the National Marine Fisheries Service's purse from $1 billion in 2011 to $811 million in 2012 and slash the National Ocean Service's budget from $560 million in 2011 to $491 million in 2012.

The National Weather Service would see a smaller cut, from $988 million this year to $977 million next year. The National Environmental Satellite Service's budget would drop from $2 billion in 2011 to $1.8 billion in 2012. And NOAA's Program Support office account would drop from $525 million in 2011 to $444 million in 2012.

Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-Md.), chairwoman of the Senate spending subcommittee that controls NOAA's purse strings, said Congress' push to cut spending required appropriators to make hard choices.

"Nearly every activity funded by [the bill] is reduced below current amounts," she said yesterday. "Faced with shrinking budget levels, we had to make some tough decisions. We faced two very pressing funding challenges that are critical to lives and safety -- funding for the next generation of weather satellites and funding to safely guard the nation's growing prison population."

Meanwhile, Alaska Republican Lisa Murkowski said she was happy that the Senate bill does not include $6.8 million the Obama administration sought for coastal and marine spatial planning.

"This would have been a new program the administration was proposing," Murkowski said. "It would have been expensive. It would have taken away from some very significant federal funding that goes to fisheries research and creates jobs in our communities."

Mikulski said she shared those concerns. "Like you, I worry about NOAA becoming the fisheries zoning commission," she said.