[Congressional Record Volume 162, Number 99 (Tuesday, June 21, 2016)]
[House]
[Pages H3983-H3985]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




  AUTHORIZING USE OF PASSENGER FACILITY CHARGES FROM ONE AIRPORT AT A 
                     PREVIOUSLY ASSOCIATED AIRPORT

  Mrs. COMSTOCK. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the 
bill (H.R. 4369) to authorize the use of passenger facility charges at 
an airport previously associated with the airport at which the charges 
are collected.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The text of the bill is as follows:

                               H.R. 4369

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. USE OF PASSENGER FACILITY CHARGES FROM ONE AIRPORT 
                   AT A PREVIOUSLY ASSOCIATED AIRPORT.

       (a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
       (1) On December 22, 2015, the Los Angeles City Council, the 
     Los Angeles Board of Airport Commissioners, the Los Angeles 
     World Airports, the Ontario City Council, and the Ontario 
     International Airport Authority agreed to transfer ownership 
     and control of Ontario International Airport from the city of 
     Los Angeles and Los Angeles World Airports to the Ontario 
     International Airport Authority, a local joint powers 
     authority established by and between the county of San 
     Bernardino and the city of Ontario.
       (2) Pursuant to the agreement, the Ontario International 
     Airport Authority intends to use between $70,000,000 and 
     $120,000,000 in passenger facility charges collected at 
     Ontario International Airport to finance eligible projects at 
     Los Angeles International Airport, as compensation for 
     passenger facility charges collected, consistent with section 
     40117(b)(1) of title 49, United States Code, at Los Angeles 
     International Airport for use at Ontario International 
     Airport in the 1990s, when both airports were controlled by 
     Los Angeles World Airports.
       (3) The amendment made by subsection (b) applies 
     exclusively to Ontario International Airport, allowing 
     passenger facility charges to be used for eligible projects 
     at Los Angeles International Airport while making no other 
     changes to passenger facility charges eligibility 
     requirements.
       (4) No additional appropriations are required to implement 
     the agreement described in paragraph (1) or the amendment 
     made by subsection (b).
       (b) Passenger Facility Charges.--Section 40117(b) of title 
     49, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(8) Use of pfc revenues at previously associated 
     airport.--
       ``(A) In general.--Notwithstanding the requirements of 
     paragraph (1) and subject to subparagraph (B), the Secretary 
     may authorize use of a passenger facility charge to finance 
     an eligible airport-related project if--
       ``(i) the eligible agency seeking to impose the new charge 
     controls an airport where a $2 passenger facility charge 
     became effective on January 1, 2013; and
       ``(ii) the airport described in clause (i) and the airport 
     at which the project will be carried out were under the 
     control of the same eligible agency on October 1, 2015.
       ``(B) Limitation.--Not more than $120,000,000 in passenger 
     facility charges collected under subparagraph (A) may be used 
     to carry out an eligible airport-related project described in 
     that subparagraph.''.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from 
Virginia (Mrs. Comstock) and the gentlewoman from Nevada (Ms. Titus) 
each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Virginia.


                             General Leave

  Mrs. COMSTOCK. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks 
and include extraneous material on H.R. 4369.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman from Virginia?
  There was no objection.
  Mrs. COMSTOCK. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 4369, a bill that will 
provide regulatory relief to Los Angeles International Airport and 
Ontario International Airport and facilitate a transfer of Ontario 
International Airport to a new airport authority.
  I want to thank Mr. Calvert, the sponsor of the bill, for introducing 
this legislation and for his leadership on this issue.
  With that, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 4369.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. TITUS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, H.R. 4369, as you heard, is a bipartisan, narrowly 
tailored bill to address a time-sensitive issue in southern California 
that impacts the Ontario and Los Angeles International Airports, both 
of which serve my district in southern Nevada.
  This bill has the support of my colleagues from southern California, 
and I appreciate them coming to the floor today to speak about its 
importance to their districts.
  Mr. Speaker, when one airport authority takes ownership of an airport 
from another authority, there needs to be a process by which that new 
authority can repay the passenger facility charges that were collected 
up to that point. This bill would provide such a mechanism.
  There is urgency in addressing this issue, as the current transfer 
authority between these two airports is set to expire at the end of 
this year. I support that, but I would be remiss if I didn't 
acknowledge the fact that, while we stand on the floor today discussing 
this urgent matter affecting our aviation system, we are mere weeks 
away from

[[Page H3984]]

the expiration of the third extension of the current FAA authorization 
bill.
  Months ago, the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee passed 
legislation which includes numerous time-sensitive and important 
provisions. Yet, because of a proposal to privatize our air traffic 
control system, I, along with my fellow Democrats on the committee, 
were forced to oppose the bill. Meanwhile, our Senate colleagues have 
passed a bipartisan FAA bill with overwhelming support.
  Mr. Speaker, again, I am in favor of this legislation that we are 
considering today, but it is my sincere hope that we will see a similar 
urgency in addressing other aviation needs, like the needs of large 
airports like McCarran International Airport, in my district; the need 
to extend the authorization for the unmanned aerial test ranges; the 
need to develop a low-altitude air traffic management system for UAS 
operations; and the need to address a number of the important issues 
that are facing our Nation's airspace that are in the FAA 
reauthorization bill.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mrs. COMSTOCK. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Calvert) the sponsor of this bill.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Speaker, today is a good day for the Inland Empire 
region in southern California. For many years now, our region has 
advocated for restoring local control of Ontario International Airport 
and putting the future growth of air travel in our own hands.
  My legislation that the House is considering today, H.R. 4369, is one 
of the final necessary steps that will facilitate the transfer of 
Ontario International Airport from the city of Los Angeles to the 
Ontario International Airport Authority.
  Both the cities of Ontario and Los Angeles, as well as FAA staff, 
have put in hundreds of hours of effort to approve and prepare for the 
management transfer of this hub airport.
  When both Ontario International Airport and Los Angeles International 
Airport were operated by the same agencies, passenger facility charges, 
or PFCs, collected at one airport could be used for the projects at the 
other one.

                              {time}  1445

  Going forward, H.R. 4369 will enable a certain amount of passenger 
facility charges collected at the now independent Ontario International 
Airport to be used for projects at Los Angeles International Airport as 
a way to pay back LAX for sharing its passenger facility charges in the 
past years. Since it is not possible under existing law today, we are 
fixing this glitch.
  This legislation has broad bipartisan support and will not cost the 
taxpayers a penny. Furthermore, the bill does nothing to increase 
passenger facility charges or any other fees for airport passengers.
  H.R. 4369 is supported by all stakeholders, including the FAA, the 
City of Los Angeles, Los Angeles World Airports, the City of Ontario, 
and the Ontario International Airport Authority. The bill is supported 
by the entire bipartisan Inland Empire delegation, including 
Representative Torres, Representative Aguilar, Representative Cook, 
Representative Royce, Representative Ruiz, and Representative Takano.
  Over in the Senate, Senator Feinstein has introduced identical 
legislation, and I am hopeful the Senate can quickly approve this bill 
after we pass it here today.
  There have been many people involved in this effort over the past few 
years. I want to specifically thank FAA Administrator Michael Huerta, 
Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti, Ontario Councilmen Alan Wapner and Jim 
Bowman, as well as the rest of the Ontario City Council and other 
elected officials from throughout the Inland Empire who have supported 
restoring local control of Ontario Airport.
  I also want to thank Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy and 
Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman Bill Shuster for 
helping us move this important legislation to the House floor today.
  The Inland Empire has and continues to be one of the fastest growing 
regions in California and in the Nation, and it is far past time that 
we control our own aviation future. I am confident, with local control 
restored, Ontario International Airport will be a significant 
contributor to future economic growth in our region.
  I urge all my colleagues to support this important legislation.
  Ms. TITUS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
California (Mrs. Torres), who is a cosponsor of this bill.
  Mrs. TORRES. Mr. Speaker, the bill we are considering today is a key 
step to finalizing the transfer of local control of the Ontario 
International Airport, a transfer which, after lengthy negotiations, 
was finally agreed to by all parties last year.
  This transfer, Mr. Speaker, is long overdue. Ontario Airport, located 
in my congressional district, is a major economic driver for the Inland 
Empire region.
  When Los Angeles World Airports began operating Ontario back in 1967, 
it was with the intention of attracting more airlines and service 
options to the Inland Empire. Well, circumstances have changed quite a 
bit since that time.
  The Inland Empire isn't just the outskirts of Los Angeles anymore. It 
is a rapidly growing region, attracting more and more new residents and 
businesses with a strategic location along a major freight corridor 
that makes it a hub for manufactured and agricultural goods.
  It also provides more convenient air travel options to residents of 
San Bernardino and Riverside Counties who, otherwise, would have to 
travel up to 2 or 3 hours to fly out of LAX.
  Transferring control of the airport back to Ontario means that the 
people who are most affected and who most closely understand the needs 
of the region are the ones who are going to be shaping the airport's 
future. This transfer is not possible without the legislation we are 
considering today.
  As part of the settlement agreement, $120 million of passenger 
facility revenue collected at Ontario will be used for FAA-qualified 
capital projects at LAX. $50 million of that will come from existing 
passenger facilities fees that are controlled by LAWA, but were 
collected at Ontario. The remaining $70 million will come from future 
passenger facility charges collected at Ontario within the next 10 
years. These are funds that have always been intended to go to LAWA for 
projects at LAX.
  Congress must now pass this one-time fix that will allow the transfer 
of funds from one airport authority to another. Otherwise, once control 
of Ontario Airport shifts to the Ontario International Airport 
Authority, there will be no mechanism to transfer the funds to LAWA as 
they have agreed. Without this bill, the agreement cannot move forward, 
and the FAA cannot approve the agreement and grant the Ontario 
International Airport Authority a certificate to operate.
  Many of us have been calling for local control of Ontario Airport for 
quite a long time, and this agreement has been years in the making. All 
parties have agreed to the terms and are ready to move forward. As a 
frequent flier out of Ontario, I hope Congress does not stand in its 
way.
  I would like to thank my colleague, Congressman Calvert, for helping 
to bring this important bill to the floor, and the rest of the Inland 
Empire delegation for their support.
  I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.
  Mrs. COMSTOCK. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. TITUS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Takano), another cosponsor of the bill.
  Mr. TAKANO. I thank the gentlewoman from Nevada for the time.
  Mr. Speaker, the Inland Empire should have control of its regional 
airport, and local residents should have access to affordable domestic 
and international flights.
  With that in mind, I rise in support of H.R. 4369, which would 
facilitate the transfer of Ontario International Airport from the City 
of Los Angeles.
  While the number of flights offered at Ontario Airport has decreased, 
the demand for those flights has not. Industry experts estimate that 2 
million passengers a year are forced to drive to Los Angeles or other 
regional airports due to the lack of flights and connections offered at 
Ontario. The region is

[[Page H3985]]

losing up to 8,000 jobs and $400 million in yearly business activity.
  As the Inland Empire continues to grow in population, it needs the 
Ontario International Airport to be under local control. It is a vital 
economic resource to our region, with the potential to serve 30 million 
passengers annually, and it is a conflict of interest for Los Angeles 
World Airports to control Ontario, a direct competitor.
  On a personal note, I am ready to give up the long commute from 
Riverside to LAX. And in that spirit, 3 years ago I wrote a letter to 
Mayor Garcetti of Los Angeles outlining the need to transfer control of 
Ontario Airport to our region. I am happy that we are finally moving 
forward with this legislation to ensure an arrangement that is best for 
the Inland Empire.
  I would like to thank my colleagues, Congressman Ken Calvert and 
Congresswoman Norma Torres, and all the rest of our delegation from the 
Inland Empire of southern California, for their hard work on this 
issue. I am proud to be an original cosponsor of this legislation. I 
also extend my thanks to the gentlewoman from Nevada for her support.
  I strongly urge a ``yes'' vote on this bill.
  Mrs. COMSTOCK. Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers. I am prepared 
to close.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. TITUS. Mr. Speaker, I, too, have no further speakers. I just want 
to say that I support this legislation. I urge my colleagues to do the 
same, and I also admonish them to show the same degree of urgency when 
it comes to reauthorizing the FAA.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mrs. COMSTOCK. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge all Members to support this bill of my colleague, 
Mr. Calvert.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R 4369, ``A bill 
that authorizes the use of passenger facility charges at an airport 
previously associated with the airport at which the charges are 
collected.''
  As a senior member of the House Committee on Homeland Security and 
the Ranking Member of the Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on Crime, 
Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations, I strongly support 
this commonsense measure to improve and sustain airport security.
  Since its inception, Passenger Facility Charges (PFCs) have been used 
to improve safety, enhance security, and increase the capacity of 
airports to serve the traveling public.
  A Passenger Facility Charge is a service fee and is also an 
additional fee charged to departing and connecting passengers at an 
airport.
  H.R. 4369 clarifies and streamlines opportunities that will help ease 
travel through our nation's airports while improving our national 
security.
  For example this bill will enable:
  The preservation and protection of the nation's air transportation 
system;
  Enhanced competition between and among air carriers;
  Funding projects that benefit local communities; and
  Meeting airline and passenger demands to accommodate future growth 
for our nation's economy.
  In 2015, more than 700 million passengers and 400 million checked 
bags were screened by the Transportation Security Administration (TSA).
  Each day, TSA processes an average of 1.7 million passengers at more 
than 450 airports across the nation.
  In 2012, TSA screened 637,582,122 passengers.
  The Bush International and the William P. Hobby Airports are 
essential hubs for domestic and international air travel for Houston 
and the region.
  Nearly 40 million passengers traveled through Bush International 
Airport (IAH) and an additional 10 million traveled through William P. 
Hobby (HOU).
  More than 650 daily departures occur at IAH.
  IAH is the 11th busiest airport in the U.S. for total passenger 
traffic.
  IAH has 12 all-cargo airlines and handled more than 419,205 metric 
tons of cargo in 2012.
  Airlines and airports are expected to experience a significant 
increase in passenger traffic coming into the 2016 summer peak travel 
months across the nation's largest airports.
  As a result of the Passenger Facility Charges airports will continue 
to receive the needed funds to modernize and keep up with the growing 
traffic demands and safety and security challenges of our nation's 
airports.
  For this reason, I urge my colleagues to support this important 
legislation.
  Mrs. NAPOLITANO. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 4369, 
which would allow for a local settlement agreement in Southern 
California between the City of Los Angeles and the new Ontario Airport 
Authority.
  I thank Chairman Shuster and Ranking Member DeFazio for bringing this 
bill to the House floor today, and I thank Congresswoman Titus for 
managing the floor debate.
  I would also like to thank my bipartisan colleagues from California, 
Rep. Calvert and Rep. Torres, for their leadership on this bill.
  Mr. Speaker, after 5 years of negotiations the City of Los Angeles 
has agreed to transfer its ownership of the Ontario Airport to a new 
airport authority created by the City of Ontario and San Bernardino 
County.
  This deal has been supported by all stakeholders in order to give the 
people of the Inland Empire in Southern California control over their 
own airport.
  The residents, businesses, and cities in my district in the San 
Gabriel Valley are also very supportive of this agreement. The Ontario 
Airport is only 15 miles from the center of my district, whereas Los 
Angeles International Airport (LAX) is 40 miles from the center of my 
district, and there is constant traffic. San Gabriel Valley residents 
and businesses would much rather use Ontario Airport than LAX if it had 
better flight options to more locations, which this bill will help 
accomplish. Allowing for local control of the airport puts the best 
interest of our region first in improving and managing the airport. I 
am also appreciative that this agreement makes sure that airport 
workers will not lose their jobs during and after the transition.
  The major point in this local agreement was providing for the 
repayment of passenger facility charge fees (PFCs) that Los Angeles had 
collected at LAX in the 1990s and used to construct a new terminal at 
Ontario Airport.
  The settlement agreement requires Ontario Airport to pay back LAX 
with future PFCs collected at Ontario. The problem is that federal law 
only allows the transfer of PFCs from one airport to another airport if 
they are owned by the same airport authority. This is the current law 
that allowed LAX to transfer PFCs to Ontario.
  Since the new agreement transfers control of Ontario Airport to a new 
airport authority, without our legislation the new Ontario Airport 
authority is prohibited from paying back the PFCs to LAX.
  Mr. Speaker, our bill today is a narrow change in the use of PFCs to 
allow those collected at Ontario International Airport to be used for 
projects at LAX. This amendment was carefully written as to only apply 
to Ontario Airport and LAX. There are no federal funds used in this 
amendment, and it does not change any of the policy requirements of the 
use of PFCs.
  Mr. Speaker, I ask for the support of my colleagues for H.R. 4369.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentlewoman from Virginia (Mrs. Comstock) that the House suspend the 
rules and pass the bill, H.R. 4369.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the 
rules were suspended and the bill was passed.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________