[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 156 (2010), Part 11]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages 15833-15839]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




  FINDINGS SUBMITTED PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH (c)(2)(C) OF H. RES. 1493, 
         PROVIDING FOR BUDGET ENFORCEMENT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2011

                                 ______
                                 

                         HON. JAMES L. OBERSTAR

                              of minnesota

                    in the house of representatives

                     Wednesday, September 15, 2010

  Mr. OBERSTAR. Madam Speaker, pursuant to paragraph (c)(2)(C) of H. 
Res. 1493, Providing for Budget Enforcement for Fiscal Year 2011, I 
submit the following findings that identify changes in law that help 
achieve deficit reduction by reducing waste, fraud, abuse, and 
mismanagement, promoting efficiency and reform of government, and 
controlling spending within Government programs that the Committee on 
Transportation and Infrastructure may authorize.

                              Introduction

       The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure is 
     committed to improving efficiency in the Federal Government 
     and providing cost savings to accomplish the joint goals of 
     reducing expenditures and ensuring maximum value to the 
     taxpayer in Federal programs within the jurisdiction of the 
     Committee.
       Beginning in the 110th Congress, the Committee has 
     aggressively reviewed program implementation to ensure that 
     Federal agencies, and their state and local partners, were 
     appropriately implementing laws consistent with statutory 
     intent and the best needs of the public. The commitment is 
     not to programs, but to the goals and objectives that best 
     serve the needs of the American people in an efficient, 
     fiscally responsible way. To that end, the Committee has 
     developed and will continue to develop multiple proposals to 
     improve the operation of government, including opportunities 
     to reduce expenditures and the deficit. Because many of the 
     programs within the Committee's jurisdiction are implemented 
     in partnership with state and local governments, the 
     Committee continues to pursue improvements at all levels of 
     government.
       Today's report describes a list of activities and proposals 
     that include reductions in and elimination of mandatory 
     spending, reductions in and elimination of authorizations for 
     discretionary spending, investments that would be expected to 
     achieve quantifiable future savings, and revenues that more 
     equitably distribute the cost of government services among 
     the beneficiaries of those services and reduce demands on the 
     General Fund. These proposals will allow the Nation to 
     achieve its investment goals at less cost and allow Federal 
     investment to provide increased benefits.
       These proposals reflect the Committee's efforts to date. 
     The Committee will continue its efforts to find creative and 
     efficient ways to make government more responsive to the 
     needs of the Nation.

                           Recent Highlights

       The Committee's oversight efforts recently resulted in 
     exposing unwarranted cost overruns in Federal construction. 
     At the Committee's request, the Government Accountability 
     Office (GAO) analyzed courthouse construction since 2000 and 
     determined that expenditures have been unnecessarily 
     increased by nearly $900 million. The Committee is responding 
     through general legislation and authorizations for specific 
     Federal courthouse construction projects to ensure that such 
     unnecessary costs are not repeated.
       Other positive results of the Committee's efforts have 
     resulted in improvements and corrections to the Coast Guard's 
     Integrated Deepwater Program, the Federal Aviation 
     Administration's regulatory responsibilities and air traffic 
     control modernization, mismanagement at the Federal Maritime 
     Commission, disaster response by the Federal Emergency 
     Management Agency, international water quality expenditures, 
     and the civil works program of the Corps of Engineers.
       The Committee's efforts associated with the Coast Guard's 
     Integrated Deepwater Program (Deepwater) continue to provide 
     benefits. Deepwater is a series of procurements being 
     undertaken by the Coast Guard to replace or upgrade its major 
     surface and aviation assets. The procurements are expected to 
     cost $25 billion by the time they are complete in 2026.
       The Committee conducted an investigation that probed deeply 
     into the contract management and decision-making processes 
     within the Coast Guard and its contract partner, Integrated 
     Coast Guard Systems (ICGS) (ICGS consisted of Lockheed Martin 
     Corporation and Northrop Grumman Corporation). The Committee 
     found that the Coast Guard was warned of flaws in the designs 
     for Coast Guard assets long before the designs were 
     finalized. The Committee also found that in some cases, 
     substandard information technology equipment was installed on 
     the patrol boats. Finally, records indicated that there were 
     irregularities in the process for testing and certifying the 
     ships for standards designed to prevent the release of 
     classified information.
       The Committee's investigation resulted in the Coast Guard 
     removing ICGS as the lead systems integrator for Deepwater, 
     and a reimbursement claim by the Federal government of $96 
     million from ICGS.
       The Committee continues to monitor the Deepwater Program, 
     guarding against waste, fraud, abuse, and mismanagement, and 
     ensuring that taxpayers receive the full value of their 
     investment.
       While the Committee continues to conduct oversight of 
     agency programs in all areas of its jurisdiction, in this 
     Congress, the Committee is being particularly aggressive in 
     overseeing the implementation of the American Recovery and 
     Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act) (P.L. 1115).
       The Recovery Act provided $64.1 billion for programs within 
     the jurisdiction of the Committee on Transportation and 
     Infrastructure, including $38 billion for highway, transit, 
     and wastewater infrastructure formula programs. Since 
     enactment of the Recovery Act, the Committee has performed 
     vigorous oversight, to ensure that the funds provided are 
     invested quickly, efficiently, and in harmony with the job-
     creating purposes of that Act.
       Just 10 days following enactment of the Recovery Act, the 
     Committee requested monthly reports from States, major public 
     transit agencies, and metropolitan planning organizations on 
     the use of highway, transit, and wastewater infrastructure 
     formula funds provided under the Recovery Act. The Committee 
     continues to receive those reports.
       The Committee's request goes beyond the transparency and 
     accountability requirements of the Recovery Act, expanding 
     the scope of programs covered by the reporting requirements, 
     and accelerating the deadline by which information is 
     reported. These reports include information on the number of 
     projects that have been put out to bid, are under contract 
     and underway, and have been completed. The information also 
     includes job hours created or saved and payroll figures. The 
     Committee receives monthly reports from Federal agencies 
     implementing Recovery Act programs under the Committee's 
     jurisdiction.
       Since April 2009, the Committee has published a monthly 
     report reflecting this information. All released information 
     can be found at the Recovery Act section of the Committee's 
     website: http://transportation.house.gov. The Committee 
     requested that these recipients continue to submit monthly 
     reports directly to the Committee for the remainder of 2010.
       Of the $38 billion available for highway, transit, and 
     wastewater infrastructure formula program projects under the 
     Recovery Act, as of June 30, 2010, $35 billion (92 percent) 
     has been put out to bid on 18,718 projects. Within this 
     total, 18,002 projects totaling $33.4 billion (88 percent) 
     are under contract. Across the Nation, work has begun on 
     17,024 projects totaling $32.7 billion (86 percent)--work 
     producing badly needed jobs today. Work has been completed on 
     6,920 projects totaling $5.3 billion. From these investments, 
     not only has the economy benefited from the jobs created, the 
     public benefits from the investment itself through improved 
     transportation and quality of the environment.
       In addition to the monthly reporting, the Committee has 
     held 18 oversight hearings on the Recovery Act since its 
     enactment, with seven of these hearings occurring during 
     2010. This total includes nine Full Committee hearings and 
     nine subcommittee hearings. These 18 hearings included a 
     total of 123 witnesses and spanned 64 hours. The breadth of 
     witnesses included Ray LaHood, Secretary of the Department of 
     Transportation and Lisa Jackson, Administrator of the 
     Environmental Protection Agency, as well as other Federal, 
     State, and local government officials, private industry 
     leaders, and workers actively engaged in implementing the 
     Recovery Act.
       The Committee held its most recent oversight hearing the 
     last week in July, and will continue to hold oversight 
     hearings on the Recovery Act throughout 2010.
       In addition to overseeing implementation of the Recovery 
     Act, as of the date of this report, the Committee and its 
     subcommittees

[[Page 15834]]

     have conducted 23 separate hearings in 2010 to review the 
     budgets and programs of agencies within the Committee's 
     jurisdiction. Additional hearings are planned.
       This report includes specific findings and recommendations 
     developed by the Committee related to Federal spending and 
     government operations. As the findings and recommendations 
     demonstrate, the Committee has made and continues to propose 
     many positive changes to improve the efficiency 'of 
     government and deliver the best possible outcomes to our 
     constituents.

                 Specific Findings and Recommendations


         Reduce Excess Expenditures on New Courthouse Projects

       This proposal achieves deficit reduction by promoting 
     efficiency and reform of government and reducing waste by 
     ensuring that the number of courtrooms in proposed new 
     courthouse projects constructed by the General Services 
     Administration (GSA) more accurately reflects needs and 
     budgetary realities by aligning the number of courtrooms to 
     reflect courtroom sharing by judges, and realistic 
     projections of additional, future judgeships. Where 
     practicable, the Committee seeks to ensure authorizations 
     directing that courthouses be redesigned to eliminate not 
     only excess courtrooms, but also the additional building 
     volume that would have accommodated those excess courtrooms.
       In accordance with 40 U.S.C. 3307, appropriations for 
     specific GSA construction projects may only be made if 
     authorized by resolutions adopted by the Committee on 
     Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of 
     Representatives and the Committee on Environment and Public 
     Works of the Senate.
       The Government Accountability Office reported (GAO-10-417) 
     that courtroom overbuilding, as a consequence of both 
     inordinately high judgeship projections by the Judiciary and 
     the Judiciary's failure to share courtrooms in a fashion 
     supported by empiric courtroom usage data, resulted in 
     construction of 1.8 million square feet of unnecessary space 
     for 33 courthouses completed since 2000.
       This excess construction translates into a one-time 
     construction cost waste of $422 million, and an annual waste 
     of $26 million in additional operation and maintenance costs 
     for the unneeded space.
       The budgetary impact of downsizing proposed courthouses is 
     being realized today. Since June 2009, the Committee has 
     authorized five courthouses with curtailed numbers of 
     courtrooms. According to budget estimates provided by GSA, or 
     derived from information provided by GSA, the Committee has 
     saved more than $87 million to date by limiting the number of 
     courtrooms in new courthouses. The savings are a consequence 
     of lower initial capital costs to build, and less money spent 
     by GSA to lease space because the proposed courtroom space 
     can now be used by Federal agencies that do not need to be 
     located in leased facilities.
                                                          [In millions]
San Diego, California Courthouse:.................................$50.8
Greenbelt, Maryland Courthouse Annex:..............................$5.2
Mobile, Alabama Courthouse:........................................$7.8
Savannah, Georgia Courthouse:......................................$7.8
San Antonio, Texas Courthouse:....................................$15.5
                                                               ________
                                                               
  Total savings (to date):........................................$87.1

       Additional savings will be realized as the limitations are 
     applied to other courthouse projects not yet authorized or 
     constructed.


       Eliminate Funding for Low-Priority Transportation Projects

       This proposal achieves deficit reduction by eliminating 
     more than $713 million in currently available funding for 
     low-priority transportation projects. It will be accomplished 
     by enacting H.R. 5730, the ``Surface Transportation Earmark 
     Rescission, Savings, and Accountability Act'', a bill 
     introduced by Representative Betsy Markey of Colorado. On 
     July 27, 2010, the House passed H.R. 5730 by a vote of 394-
     23.
       H.R. 5730 rescinds $713.2 million of Federal-aid highway 
     contract authority that was provided in four prior surface 
     transportation authorization bills and that is currently 
     available for 309 Member-designated projects. Rescinding this 
     $713.2 million means that it cannot be spent or used to 
     offset increased spending in the future. Any savings from 
     this bill would reduce the deficit.
       In addition, the bill establishes a process for the 
     Secretary of Transportation to track unspent project funds 
     going forward, enabling Congress to identify projects that 
     have inactive funds or that have been completed in the 
     previous year. This tracking process will create 
     opportunities for future, additional savings.
       Member-designated projects play an important role in the 
     Federal-aid highway program. They provide constituents with a 
     chance to interact directly with their elected officials on 
     community priorities, and allow Members an opportunity to 
     support transportation safety and mobility improvements that 
     may be overlooked by a State department of transportation.
       Yet, it is also necessary to use a common-sense approach to 
     funding for projects that are complete or no longer viable. 
     Many of the funds rescinded under this bill are from projects 
     that are complete, but have excess remaining funds. There is 
     no reason for these funds to remain available such that they 
     could be used for future spending.
       Other projects affected by H.R. 5730 are those that show no 
     likelihood of going forward due to changing community 
     priorities or other transportation needs. Rescinding funds 
     from projects that are no longer viable is a practical 
     approach to saving taxpayers' dollars.
       Rescinding this $713.2 million prevents it from being spent 
     or used as an offset to increased spending in the future.
       It has, unfortunately, become somewhat routine for 
     appropriations bills to rescind existing contract authority 
     to offset other spending. Under budgetary rules, even if a 
     contract authority rescission is ``scored'' as only reducing 
     budget authority, not outlays, a budget authority offset is 
     often all that is needed to facilitate additional spending in 
     an appropriations bill.
       In fact, the Senate Committee on Appropriations has 
     proposed to use a portion of the funds rescinded in this 
     proposal to offset spending in its version of the FY 2011 
     Transportation, Housing and Urban Development appropriations 
     bill.
       Rescinding the $713.2 million outside the appropriations 
     process makes that amount unavailable for use in some future 
     appropriations bill, and it will indeed result in real 
     savings.
       The proposal is in line with the High Priority Project 
     reform principles issued by the bipartisan leadership of the 
     Committee in April 2009, which established an unprecedented 
     level of transparency, accountability, and reform for surface 
     transportation projects going forward.
       These principles called for the repeal of funds from older 
     projects that have not been spent. The proposal is an 
     effective and thoughtful means of achieving this policy 
     objective and will save the government money.


     Eliminate FY 2010 Funding for Certain Transportation Programs

       This proposal achieves deficit reduction by eliminating 
     funding for certain Department of Transportation programs 
     that will not be used in 2010. It will be accomplished by 
     enacting H.R. 5604, the ``Surface Transportation Savings Act 
     of 2010'', a bill introduced by Representative Thomas S. P. 
     Perriello of Virginia. On July 20, 2010, the House passed 
     H.R. 5604 by a vote of 402-0.
       H.R. 5604 rescinds $82 million in excess contract authority 
     that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 
     (NHTSA) and the Federal Transit Administration cannot use in 
     fiscal year 2010. In doing so, the bill makes these funds 
     unavailable for expenditure or as an offset against other 
     spending in the future.
       The largest rescission occurs in NHTSA's safety belt 
     performance grants program. This program received $124.5 
     million in FY 2010 to carry out an incentive grant program to 
     encourage States to enact and enforce laws requiring the use 
     of safety belts. This funding level equals the amount 
     authorized for this program in FY 2009 under the Safe, 
     Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: a 
     Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) (P.L. 109-59).
       According to NHTSA, only three States are expected to 
     qualify to receive an incentive grant under this program in 
     FY 2010, requiring no more than $28.5 million to carry out 
     the authorized activities of the program.
       NHTSA does not have authority to redistribute the unused 
     program funds this fiscal year, and the funds will remain 
     unallocated in FY 2010. The bill rescinds $56.0 million in 
     existing but unusable contract authority from this program.
       H.R. 5604 also rescinds $8.5 million in contract authority 
     from NHTSA's administrative expenses, the National Driver 
     Register, and NHTSA's research and development programs.
       This excess contract authority was made available under the 
     extension of current surface transportation programs passed 
     as part of the Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment Act 
     (HIRE Act) (P.L. 111-147).
       Because the amounts of contract authority provided for 
     these programs under the HIRE Act exceeds the funding levels 
     provided by the Transportation, Housing and Urban 
     Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010 
     (division A of P.L. 111-117), NHTSA. cannot use these funds 
     this year. However, the unavailability of the funding this 
     year does not preclude the opportunity for the funds to be 
     transferred or used as an offset in future years.
       Finally, the bill rescinds $17.4 million of contract 
     authority from the Federal Transit Administration's (FTA) 
     formula and bus grant programs. The HIRE Act provides $8.361 
     billion in FY 2010 to carry out FTA's formula and bus grant 
     programs, $17.4 million more than the funding level provided 
     in the Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and 
     Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010. FTA does not have 
     the ability to utilize these funds this year.
       Although the $82 million rescinded by the proposal cannot 
     be used at the present time, there are two ways this $82 
     million could be used to increase spending in the future if 
     it

[[Page 15835]]

     is not rescinded now. First, a future appropriations or other 
     legislative act could increase the obligation limitations 
     that control spending for these highway safety and transit 
     programs, thereby allowing this $82 million to be spent. 
     Second, a future appropriations act could rescind this $82 
     million and use that rescission to offset increased spending 
     on other programs.
       Unfortunately, it has become somewhat routine for 
     appropriations bills to rescind surface transportation 
     contract authority to offset increased spending elsewhere. In 
     fact, the Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2010 (P.L. 111-
     212), rescinds $25 million in highway safety contract 
     authority as an offset for spending in that law. Had this 
     proposal been enacted earlier, it would have preserved the 
     additional $25 million in spending reduction, for a total 
     savings of $107 million.
       The Committee on Appropriations includes such rescissions 
     in appropriations bills because the rescissions offset other 
     spending. Under budgetary rules, even if a contract authority 
     rescission is ``scored'' as only reducing budget authority, 
     not outlays, a budget authority offset is often all that is 
     needed to facilitate additional spending in an appropriations 
     bill.
       Rescinding $82 million outside the appropriations process 
     makes that amount unavailable for use in some future 
     appropriations bill, and it will indeed result in ``real'' 
     savings.
       This proposal is a common sense step toward improving the 
     Nation's fiscal foundation and ensuring that the Federal 
     surface transportation funds are invested as efficiently as 
     possible.


     Consolidate Administrative Functions of Regional Development 
                              Commissions

       This proposal achieves deficit reduction by promoting 
     efficiency and reform of government through consolidating 
     administrative functions across several regional development 
     commissions. These commissions include the Denali Commission, 
     the Northern Border Regional Commission, the Southeast 
     Crescent Regional Commission, the Northern Great Plains 
     Regional Authority, and the Southwest Border Regional 
     Commission.
       The Denali Commission (established in 1998), the Northern 
     Border Regional Commission (established in 2008), the 
     Southeast Crescent Regional Commission (established in 2008), 
     the Northern Great Plains Regional Authority (established in 
     2002), and the Southwest Border Regional Commission 
     (established in 2008) have similar purposes while serving 
     different areas of the country. Each is designed to enhance 
     and promote wealth generation and economic growth strategies 
     and projects. Their efforts focus on leveraging public, 
     private, and philanthropic resources in areas such as 
     transportation and basic infrastructure, job skills training 
     and entrepreneurial development, comprehensive strategy 
     development, advanced technologies and telecommunications, 
     and sustainable energy solutions.
       Opportunities exist to reauthorize and rationalize the 
     structures of these several regional commissions and 
     authorities. The proposal includes a consolidation of 
     Inspectors General Offices, accounting and contracting 
     functions, and certain other administrative functions. A 
     possible location for consolidation is within the Department 
     of Commerce since the Secretary of Commerce currently has 
     responsibility for appointing several of the Federal Co-
     chairs associated with the commissions and authorities.
       The budgetary savings associated with this proposal are 
     estimated at $1 million.


  Create an Equitable Method for Beneficiaries of Hazardous Material 
  Transportation Permits and Approvals to Participate in the Cost of 
                                Service

       This proposal achieves deficit reduction by promoting 
     efficiency and reform of government and reducing expenditures 
     from the General Fund by requiring the Secretary of 
     Transportation to establish a reasonable fee for processing 
     applications for, and ensuring compliance with the terms of, 
     special permits and approvals. The fee would be an offsetting 
     collection for administering the special permits and 
     approvals program. This proposal is contained in H.R. 4016, 
     the ``Hazardous Material Transportation Safety Act of 2009'', 
     as ordered reported favorably by the Committee on November 
     19, 2009.
       The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration 
     processes about 5,000 special permits and 10,000 approvals 
     annually. Currently, the expenses associated with special 
     permits and approvals are paid from the General Fund. 
     Charging a fee commensurate with the costs of providing the 
     permits would reduce the deficit by reducing demands on the 
     General Fund. Such fees are appropriate because the benefits 
     are specific or localized and costs should more appropriately 
     be the responsibility of the beneficiaries of the service.
       The budgetary impact of this proposal would be to reduce 
     demands on the General Fund for all or some of the costs of 
     processing the permits and approvals, currently estimated in 
     excess of $20 million annually.


       Deauthorize Antiquated Projects of the Corps of Engineers

       The proposal achieves deficit reduction by promoting 
     efficiency and reform of government and reducing waste by 
     using both legislative and administrative means to 
     deauthorize projects authorized to be carried out by the 
     Corps of Engineers (Corps), thereby ensuring that no future 
     appropriations will be made for them and they will not be 
     built.
       The Corps currently has in excess of $60 billion in 
     authorized but unconstructed projects or elements of 
     projects. Deauthorizing some of those projects will eliminate 
     future expenditures. H.R. 5892, the ``Water Resources 
     Development Act of 2010'', as ordered reported favorably by 
     the Committee on July 29, 2010, deauthorizes 12 specific, 
     currently authorized water resources projects. Under the 
     bill, on the date of enactment of H.R. 5892, these projects 
     would no longer be authorized for construction by the Corps.
       Section 1001 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 
     directs the Corps to provide Congress with a list of 
     unconstructed projects, or unconstructed separable elements 
     of projects, which have been authorized, but have not 
     received obligation of Federal funding for the full five 
     fiscal years preceding the transmittal of the list. All 12 
     projects identified in H.R. 5892, the ``Water Resources 
     Development Act of 2010'', meet these criteria, and were 
     identified as eligible for deauthorization by the Corps.
       The budgetary impact, according to the Corps, of 
     deauthorizing and not constructing the 12 projects in H.R. 
     5892 is a reduction of future Federal spending of $871.8 
     million.


    Use Federal Highway Funding More Effectively to Improve Bridge 
                               Conditions

       This proposal achieves deficit reduction by promoting 
     efficiency and reform of government by (1) focusing more 
     Federal highway funding on the Nation's core highway and 
     bridge network, (2) requiring increased State reporting on 
     the use of this funding, and (3) prohibiting transfers of 
     funding between different highway programs. In combination, 
     these provisions will increase the effectiveness of Federal 
     highway funding in improving bridge deficiencies.
       H.R.   , the ``Surface Transportation Authorization Act of 
     2009'', as recommended favorably by the Subcommittee on 
     Highways and Transit on June 24, 2009, includes such 
     provisions.
       On July 21, 2010, the Department of Transportation's 
     Inspector General testified before the Subcommittee on 
     Highways and Transit that the Federal Highway 
     Administration's accounting system is unable to link 
     expenditure of Highway Bridge Program funding to improvements 
     made to deficient bridges. Furthermore, States are currently 
     allowed to transfer Bridge Program funds to other Federal-aid 
     highway programs, and the agency has no ability to determine 
     the extent to which these transferred funds are used on 
     bridge projects.
       The budgetary impact of more efficient use of Federal 
     highway funding to reduce bridge deficiencies (and increased 
     accountability for the use of that funding) will reduce the 
     Nation's backlog of deficient bridges--and consequently 
     reduce the amount of Federal bridge funding needed in future 
     surface transportation authorization acts.


Reduce Energy Consumption in Federal Buildings Through Energy Efficient 
                    Building Systems and Components

       This proposal achieves deficit reduction by promoting 
     efficiency and reform of government and reducing waste by 
     creating highly efficient operating systems and energy 
     conservation measures as key attributes of High-Performance 
     Green Buildings. The term ``High-Performance Green 
     Buildings'' also encompasses sustainability, safety, 
     security, durability, and functionality. Savings in reduced 
     Federal building energy consumption will occur as a 
     consequence of investments made under the Recovery Act for 
     retrofitting GSA facilities with energy efficient building 
     systems and components. GSA's expenditures under the Recovery 
     Act may address all aspects of High-Performance Green 
     Buildings, but savings estimates are only readily made with 
     regard to energy efficient systems and components.
       The Recovery Act made available $4.5 billion to be used to 
     convert GSA facilities to ``High-Performance Green 
     Buildings''. Recovery Act expenditures were justified 
     predominantly in terms of creating employment opportunities 
     for Americans and, in the case of Federal infrastructure 
     spending, improving infrastructure conditions, performance, 
     and efficiency.
       The budgetary impact based upon GSA's estimates and 
     calculations for 66 of 252 building modernization projects is 
     energy savings achieved due to reinvestment funded under the 
     Recovery Act of 13 percent to 20 percent of the buildings' 
     total energy footprint, with most savings averaging closer to 
     20 percent. This is equivalent to $41 million per year, or 
     $698 million over the 30-year useful life of the 
     infrastructure improvements (calculated on a present value 
     basis).


 Apply Realistic, Site-appropriate Security Standards That Fully Meet 
                  Security Needs at an Affordable Cost

       This proposal achieves deficit reduction by promoting 
     efficiency and reform of government and reducing waste by 
     having the Committee expand its practice of directing GSA to 
     apply the Interagency Security Committee (ISC) Standards to 
     Department of Defense (DOD) space procurements rather than

[[Page 15836]]

     DOD's more stringent and more costly Anti-Terrorism Force 
     Protection Standards for non-military office (i.e., civilian 
     and support elements within DOD, as opposed to combat or 
     special forces) functions that will be housed in commercial 
     leased space.
       In accordance with 40 U.S.C. 3307, GSA can only enter into 
     a commercial space lease where the annual cost is greater 
     than $2.7 million if the Committee on Transportation and 
     Infrastructure of the House of Representatives and the 
     Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate adopt 
     resolutions authorizing the lease.
       Through testimony of both Federal officials and private 
     sector security experts given at a hearing before the 
     Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings and 
     Emergency Management on May 20, 2010, the Committee 
     determined that there is no public policy justification, and 
     no technical security justification, for the routine use of 
     the DOD Anti-terrorism Force Protection Standards in GSA 
     lease procurements for civilian agencies within the Defense 
     establishment.
       The budgetary impact of the proposal would be substantial 
     whether the space is new construction or retrofitted existing 
     space.
       For example, a recent review of a lease proposal to 
     accommodate the DOD Medical Command Headquarters indicated 
     that the cost differential in retrofitting buildings to meet 
     the DOD security standard, relative to the ISC standard, is 
     approximately $65 per square foot. This translates into an 
     annual rental premium of approximately $9 per rentable square 
     foot per year. For the DOD Medical Command Headquarters, at 
     750,000 rentable square feet, this cost premium equates to 
     $6.75 million per year, or $101.25 million in nominal dollars 
     over the 15-year lease term. If the DOD needs were met by new 
     construction built expressly to the requirements of the DOD 
     security standards (as opposed to retrofitting an existing 
     building), the overall construction cost premium would 
     average between 8 percent and 10 percent (exclusive of the 
     additional land cost needed for the larger building set-back 
     requirements). This would translate into a $2 per rentable 
     square foot premium. It is hard to estimate what the 
     additional land cost would contribute in terms of a higher 
     rent. For the DOD Medical Command Headquarters procurement, 
     the cost premium for the construction alone (excluding land) 
     equates to $1.5 million per year or $22.5 million over the 
     lease term.
       Therefore, using the DOD procurement as an example, the 
     potential savings associated with this reform proposal for 
     just this one procurement ranges between $22.5 million for 
     new construction and $101.35 million for retrofitted space.
       Because of a BRAC-imposed deadline, the Committee 
     authorizing resolution for the DOD Medical Command 
     Headquarters procurement allowed GSA to proceed with the most 
     expeditious procurement solution, and so savings associated 
     with the use of the ISC standard in lieu of the DOD standard 
     were not realized in this transaction. Nonetheless, the 
     Committee confirmed the opportunity for significant future 
     savings.
       For future large space lease procurements implemented by 
     GSA on behalf of DOD, which will total well over 2 million 
     square feet over just the next few years, the savings 
     potential through reliance upon the ISC standard rather than 
     the DOD standard is approximately $180 million.


   Develop and Implement Performance Measures and Accountability In 
                    Surface Transportation Programs

       This proposal achieves deficit reduction by promoting 
     efficiency and reform of government by requiring new 
     transportation performance measures designed to achieve 
     specific national objectives. Recipients of Federal 
     transportation funds will be required to meet a variety of 
     performance targets, and their progress will be monitored and 
     publicly reported by the Department of Transportation (DOT).
       H.R.   , the ``Surface Transportation Authorization Act of 
     2009'', as recommended favorably by the Subcommittee on 
     Highways and Transit on June 24, 2009, includes such 
     provisions.
       The Department of Transportation has few tools for 
     monitoring and holding grant recipients responsible for 
     successful and efficient use of surface transportation funds. 
     Currently, DOT does not measure how Federal transportation 
     funding achieves national goals, nor does the Department 
     distribute funding based on performance criteria.
       The budgetary impact of specific performance measures will 
     result in much more efficient use of taxpayer dollars, and 
     provide taxpayers with tangible and measurable results for 
     their investments in improving mobility, increasing safety, 
     and expanding mode choice.


   Increase Accountability for the Federal Aviation Administration's 
                  NextGen Planning and Implementation

       This proposal achieves deficit reduction by promoting 
     efficiency and reform of government and guarding against 
     waste, fraud, and abuse by increasing accountability within 
     the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to ensure timely 
     and efficient implementation of the Next Generation Air 
     Transportation System (NextGen). The proposal would establish 
     a Chief NextGen Officer as the primary point of 
     accountability for NextGen implementation at the FAA, elevate 
     the Director of the Joint Planning and Development Office to 
     the position of Associate Administrator for NextGen Planning, 
     Development, and Interagency Coordination, and create 
     reporting and other requirements to ensure accountability for 
     NextGen-related deliverables.
       The various offices responsible for different aspects of 
     the FAA's NextGen program have encountered difficulties in 
     coordination. The air traffic control modernization program 
     was on the High-Risk List of the Government Accountability 
     Office (GAO) from 1995 to 2009. Although GAO removed the air 
     traffic control modernization program from the High-Risk 
     List, GAO and the Committee remain concerned that NextGen is 
     a high-risk effort because of its cost and complexity.
       The positive budgetary impact of this proposal will accrue 
     from ensuring that a single person within the FAA is equipped 
     with the stature and authority necessary to coordinate 
     NextGen implementation across numerous FAA offices, 
     eliminating duplicative efforts and ensuring accountability.


              Adjust Federal Aviation Administration Fees

       This proposal achieves deficit reduction by promoting 
     efficiency and reform of government, and reducing 
     expenditures from the General Fund, by requiring the FAA to 
     establish fees for aircraft registration, certification, and 
     related services, and to update the amounts charged for 
     overflight fees (fees assessed to the operators of aircraft 
     that fly in U.S.-controlled airspace but do not take off or 
     land in the United States). Fees will be an offsetting 
     collection and subject to appropriations. Permit fees will be 
     adjusted periodically as necessary to cover the FAA's cost of 
     providing the services for which the fees are charged.
       Revising the FAA's registration fees will equitably assign 
     the costs of providing services to the beneficiaries of those 
     services. These revised fees will allow the FAA to recover 
     much of its costs, lessening the demand on the General Fund.
       The proposal is contained in H.R. 915, the ``FAA 
     Reauthorization Act of 2009'', which passed the House on May 
     21, 2009, by a vote of 277-136. The initial fee rates would 
     reflect the FAA's current costs of providing each service. 
     The FAA would periodically adjust the fees established under 
     this proposal when cost data reveal that the cost of 
     providing the service is higher or lower than the cost data 
     that were used to establish the fee then in effect.
       The proposal also directs the FAA Administrator to update 
     the amounts of overflight fees that are currently charged to 
     operators of aircraft that fly in U.S.-controlled airspace 
     but neither take off nor land in the United States, to ensure 
     that the fees reflect the FAA's current cost of providing 
     services to such flights. These fees were initially 
     authorized by the Federal Aviation Reauthorization Act of 
     1996 (P.L. 104-264), and the rates currently in effect are 
     identical to those originally established by the FAA's final 
     rule on overflight fees in 2001 (14 C.F.R. 187 Appx. B 
     (2008)). The Administrator should set overflight fees in 
     amounts that bear reasonable relationships to costs.
       The budgetary impact of this proposal would be savings 
     through improved efficiency by permitting the FAA to assess 
     fees for services in amounts that are realistically 
     commensurate with the costs of providing those services. The 
     proposal assists the FAA in recouping substantial costs, 
     lessening demand on the General Fund and reducing the 
     deficit.


   Increase Oversight of the Federal Aviation Administration's ADS-B 
                                Contract

       This proposal achieves deficit reduction by promoting 
     efficiency and reform of government by enhanced oversight of 
     performance of the FAA's automatic dependent surveillance-
     broadcast (ADS-B) contract.
       This proposal requires the FAA to submit a report detailing 
     the Administration's plans and schedule for integrating ADS-B 
     technology into the National Airspace System (NAS). In 
     addition, this proposal requires the FAA to insert provisions 
     into the contract that protect the Federal Government's 
     interest, such as: requiring FAA's approval before the 
     contract is assigned to or assumed by another entity, 
     including any successor entity, subsidiary of the contractor, 
     or other corporate entity; designating the assets, equipment, 
     hardware, and software used in the performance of the 
     contract as critical to national infrastructure for national 
     security; requiring the contractor to provide continued 
     broadcast services for a reasonable period until the 
     provision of such services can be transferred to another 
     vendor or to the Government in the event of termination or 
     material nonperformance of the contract; and permitting the 
     Government to acquire or utilize the assets, equipment, 
     hardware and software necessary to assure the continued and 
     uninterrupted provision of ADS-B services for reasonable 
     compensation.
       This proposal is contained in section 204 of H.R. 915, the 
     ``FAA Reauthorization Act of

[[Page 15837]]

     2009'', which passed the House on May 21, 2009 by a vote of 
     277-136.
       On August 30, 2007, the FAA awarded a performance-based 
     service contract for ADS-B services to a consortium led by 
     ITT Corporation. Instead of adopting a more traditional 
     acquisition strategy for ADS-B, whereby the FAA would own, 
     operate, and maintain the system, the FAA chose a service 
     contract approach, whereby the ITT team will build the ADS-B 
     ground stations and own and operate the equipment. The FAA's 
     use of this approach to ADS-B implementation justifies 
     continuing oversight of the implementation process.
       The budgetary impact will be reflected in the subscription 
     charges relating to ADS-B use by properly equipped aircraft 
     and air traffic control (ATC) facilities. The total value of 
     the contract, which has a number of options extending through 
     2025, is $1.86 billion. Because it is a nontraditional 
     acquisition, vigorous oversight of its implementation will 
     promote efficiency and ensure against mismanagement or waste. 
     The taxpayer benefits in the long-run through dramatic 
     improvements in the safety and efficiency of the Nation's air 
     traffic control system. FAA air traffic controllers will be 
     equipped to handle an increasing volume of air traffic and 
     will process that traffic much more efficiently than before, 
     while aircraft operators will conserve fuel and minimize 
     greenhouse gas emissions by flying more efficient routings.


            Modify the Airport and Airway Trust Fund Formula

       This proposal achieves deficit reduction by promoting 
     efficiency and reform of government by ensuring that the 
     amount that is made available from the Airport and Airway 
     Trust Fund (Trust Fund) each year to fund the Federal 
     Aviation Administration more accurately reflects actual 
     receipts.
       This proposal modifies the formula that determines the 
     amount that is made available from the Trust Fund each year 
     to fund the FAA. The modification ensures that the Trust Fund 
     maintains a positive balance despite overly-optimistic 
     revenue forecasts.
       The uncommitted cash balance in the Trust Fund has declined 
     dramatically in recent years. At the end of FY 2001, the 
     uncommitted cash balance was $7.3 billion. For FY 2009, the 
     uncommitted balance was approximately $299 million. This 
     decline in the Trust Fund's uncommitted balance is due to 
     overly-optimistic revenue projections, combined with a 
     statutory requirement to appropriate from the Trust Fund an 
     amount that is equal to those revenue projections.
       The current statutory formula requires that estimated Trust 
     Fund receipts each year must equal Trust Fund expenditures. 
     Under these conditions, the Trust Fund balance should remain 
     stable. However, the Trust Fund revenue estimates included in 
     the President's budget for the past seven years were overly 
     optimistic; such that the amounts appropriated from the Trust 
     Fund (based on those estimates) exceeded the amounts actually 
     deposited into the Trust Fund, resulting in declines in the 
     uncommitted cash balance. The eventual impact would either be 
     a dramatic decline in resources available to the FAA (and a 
     decline in service), or the need for additional revenues from 
     the General Fund.
       This proposal modifies the statutory formula to make 
     available from the Trust Fund an amount equal to 90 percent 
     of the estimated revenues, rather than the current 100 
     percent, until the actual level of revenues received for that 
     year is known. Once actual revenues are known, a ``look-
     back'' adjustment compares the actual revenues received by 
     the Trust Fund to the amounts made available from the Trust 
     Fund for that year, and the difference between the two is 
     applied as an adjustment to the amount made available from 
     the Trust Fund for the current budget year. This change 
     provides greater room for error in revenue estimates until 
     the actual level of revenues received for that year is known, 
     and an adjustment is made to reconcile actual amounts 
     deposited to the Trust Fund with actual amounts appropriated 
     from it. Given recent revenue estimates, a 10 percent margin 
     of error is necessary.
       This proposal is contained in section 105 of H.R. 915, the 
     ``FAA Reauthorization Act of 2009'', which passed the House 
     on May 21, 2009 by a vote of 277-136.
       The budgetary impact of this proposal would be greater 
     funding stability by mitigating the effect of overly-
     optimistic revenue projections. The current expenditures from 
     the Trust Fund could create a need to use the General Fund to 
     alleviate budget short-comings, or result in diminished 
     services. This proposal protects both services and the 
     General Fund.


          Update Revenues for the Inland Waterways Trust Fund

       This proposal achieves deficit reduction by promoting 
     efficiency and reform of government by updating revenues for 
     the Inland Waterways Trust Fund to ensure the ability to meet 
     the authorized non-Federal cost-share of inland waterways 
     capital investment projects carried out by the Corps of 
     Engineers.
       Section 102 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 
     establishes that the costs of construction for navigation 
     projects on the inland waterways transportation system of the 
     United States are equally divided between funds appropriated 
     from general revenues of the United States and funds 
     appropriated from the Inland Waterways Trust Fund (Trust 
     Fund). The Trust Fund was established in 1978, consisting of 
     receipts from a new inland fuel tax. Title XIV of the Water 
     Resources Development Act of 1986 amended the tax rate, which 
     is currently derived from a 20-cent-per-gallon tax on diesel 
     fuel used by commercial vessels engaged in inland waterway 
     transportation, plus investment income.
       Over the past few years, the annual balance in the Inland 
     Waterways Trust Fund has declined (estimated to be just $23 
     million at the end of fiscal year 2010), and this lack of 
     available funding is expected to have an adverse impact on 
     the pace of construction projects on the inland system due to 
     the unavailability of the 50 percent share of the 
     construction costs for such projects that is derived from the 
     Trust Fund.
       In April 2010, the Inland Marine Transportation Systems 
     Capital Investment Strategy Team released a report, entitled 
     Inland Marine Transportation Systems (IMTS) Capitol Projects 
     Business Model, Final Report that recommends several actions 
     to address the construction of projects on the inland system. 
     One recommendation in the report to address the ongoing 
     shortfall in the Inland Waterways Trust Fund is to adjust the 
     current fuel tax by an amount ranging between $0.06 and $0.09 
     per gallon. (The $0.09 per gallon increase would increase the 
     current fuel tax to the level it would otherwise have reached 
     if it had been indexed for inflation from 1994.)
       The budgetary impact of the proposal would preserve the 
     role of non-Federal interests participating in construction 
     and rehabilitation of the inland waterways. The current $0.20 
     per gallon tax on diesel fuel has been in place since 1994. 
     According to the Congressional Research Service, had the 
     initial authorization of fuel tax been indexed for inflation 
     since 1994, an additional $302 million would have been 
     available from the Trust Fund for construction. Because the 
     shortfall in revenues in the Trust Fund is expected to 
     adversely impact the pace of construction of these vital 
     inland waterways projects, modifying the current fuel tax to 
     a level that adjusts the rate for inflation over the past 16 
     years is essential to efficient construction of navigation 
     projects on the inland system. In addition, modifying the 
     fuel tax ensures that users of the inland system continue to 
     contribute an equitable portion of the funding for inland 
     navigation projects.


              Restructure Surface Transportation Programs

       This proposal achieves deficit reduction by promoting 
     efficiency and reform of government by dramatically reforming 
     the programmatic structure through which Federal surface 
     transportation funding is distributed to States and local 
     governments. The proposal consolidates or terminates more 
     than 75 existing programs and directs the majority of surface 
     transportation funding into several core categories. The 
     proposal also requires the Department of Transportation (DOT) 
     to work in an integrated manner to increase intermodal 
     transportation solutions.
       H.R.   , the ``Surface Transportation Authorization Act of 
     2009'', as recommended favorably by the Subcommittee on 
     Highways and Transit on June 24, 2009, includes such 
     provisions.
       The Department of Transportation currently has 108 surface 
     transportation programs administered separately by a 
     multitude of different agencies attempting to address 
     mobility and infrastructure needs. While each of these 
     programs serves an important purpose, because they are 
     segmented and focused on addressing specific modal issues 
     rather than intermodal goals, managing 108 separate programs 
     prevents DOT from using all available tools simultaneously 
     and efficiently in a truly intermodal fashion.
       The budgetary impact of reforming the structure of the 
     Department of Transportation's Federal programs will provide 
     taxpayers with a better return on their investment. DOT will 
     be able to provide intermodal solutions to the mobility, 
     safety, and maintenance challenges facing our transportation 
     network. By bringing together different programs and modes, 
     DOT can offer effective, least-cost solutions, reducing costs 
     in our Nation's surface transportation programs and making 
     them more transparent and accountable.


    Improve Management of Federal Aviation Administration Property 
                               Inventory

       This proposal achieves deficit reduction by promoting 
     efficiency and reform of government by clarifying the FAA's 
     current authority to purchase and sell property needed for 
     airports and air navigation facilities, and includes the 
     authority to retain funds associated with disposal of 
     property.
       This proposal is contained in section 217 of H.R. 915, the 
     ``FAA Reauthorization Act of 2009'', which passed the House 
     on May 21, 2009 by a vote of 277-136.
       Real property assets that are not needed for FAA's mission 
     are marked as ``Inactive/

[[Page 15838]]

     Excess'' in the Real Estate Management System. These are non-
     performing assets. Currently, because of costs associated 
     with disposal (such as demolition, environmental audits, and 
     asbestos abatement), some extraneous properties and equipment 
     (e.g., non-directional beacons, radars, outer markers) 
     unnecessarily remain in the FAA's active inventory for long 
     periods of time. These are physical assets that provide no 
     benefits to the FAA or public, yet require continuing 
     involvement by the FAA.
       The budgetary impact of this proposal is from allowing the 
     FAA to reduce its non-performing assets. According to the 
     FAA, the current total replacement value of non-performing 
     assets, as reported to the Office of Management and Budget, 
     is $64.1 million. Allowing the FAA to dispose of these assets 
     will remove costs associated with carrying the assets, plus 
     allow any real property to be placed into productive use. 
     Clarification that the FAA has the authority to retain 
     proceeds from the sale of property will allow the FAA to 
     cover the costs of disposal and the shutdown of extraneous 
     equipment, and will ultimately improve the Federal balance 
     sheet.


   Include Stakeholders in Air Traffic Control Modernization Projects

       This proposal achieves deficit reduction by promoting 
     efficiency and reform of government, and avoiding waste, 
     fraud, and abuse by ensuring that employees are involved in 
     Air Traffic Control (ATC) modernization projects.
       This proposal requires the FAA to establish a process for 
     including and collaborating with qualified employees selected 
     by each affected exclusive collective bargaining 
     representative in the planning, development and deployment of 
     ATC modernization projects, including Next Generation Air 
     Transportation System (NextGen). In addition, the FAA is 
     required to report to the House and Senate committees of 
     jurisdiction on the implementation of this section within six 
     months of the date of enactment.
       This proposal is contained in section 205 of H.R. 915, the 
     ``FAA Reauthorization Act of 2009'', which passed the House 
     on May 21, 2009 by a vote of 277-136.
       Many past ATC modernization projects had to be reworked 
     because employee groups, representing the operators of new 
     equipment, were not consulted on human factors issues early 
     in the development of the project. Experience demonstrates 
     that active engagement with employees can improve the 
     decisions affecting employee performance.
       Investments needed to achieve the end-state NextGen, FAA's 
     primary ATC modernization effort, are estimated to cost 
     between $15 billion and $22 billion. Utilizing tools to 
     improve the efficiency of that process will ensure that 
     benefits are maximized for the expenditures made.


   Reform the Federal Aviation Administration's Pilot Records System

       This proposal achieves deficit reduction by promoting 
     efficiency and reform of government and reducing expenditures 
     from the General Fund by requiring the FAA to create a pilot 
     records database.
       Under the Pilot Records Improvement Act of 1996 (PRIA) 
     (P.L. 104-264), air carriers must obtain the last five years' 
     performance and disciplinary records for a prospective pilot 
     from his or her previous employer. PRIA also requires 
     carriers to obtain records for a pilot from the FAA. FAA 
     records regarding pilot certification are protected by the 
     Privacy Act of 1974. However, PRIA requires carriers to 
     obtain a limited waiver from prospective pilots allowing for 
     the release of information concerning their current airman 
     certificate and associated type ratings and limitations, 
     current airman medical certificates, including any 
     limitations, and summaries of closed FAA legal enforcement 
     actions resulting in a finding by the FAA Administrator of a 
     violation that was not subsequently overturned.
       The FAA's records system is technologically outdated and 
     inefficient. The ``Airline Safety and Federal Aviation 
     Administration Extension Act of 2010'' (P.L. 111-216) reforms 
     the records process by requiring the FAA to establish one 
     database containing each airman's comprehensive record, 
     including both FAA records and air carrier records.
       When fully implemented, such a database will enable the FAA 
     to process records requests more efficiently and in an 
     automated fashion. As envisioned in the statute, the FAA will 
     be responsible for establishing the database and inputting 
     years of record information. While the initial process of 
     establishing the database will require sufficient time and 
     funding, the long-term effects will be a more efficient 
     system for all users--the FAA, air carriers, and airmen--and 
     will allow for the quick and seamless retrieval of 
     information that is necessary to improve airline safety. In 
     addition, the statute enables the FAA to establish fees for 
     airmen to access their records, which will enable the FAA to 
     recover some system costs.
       The budgetary impact associated with this proposal will be 
     determined from a combination of reduced processing costs and 
     offsets from fees, reducing demands on the General Fund.


  Establish Performance Measures and Accountability for the National 
                            Estuary Program

       This proposal achieves deficit reduction by promoting 
     efficiency and reform of government by implementing specific 
     performance measures and goals to track progress in meeting 
     specific environmental improvements to the Nation's estuaries 
     carried out by the 28 established National Estuaries 
     Programs.
       This proposal is contained in H.R. 4715, the ``Clean 
     Estuaries Act of 2010'', which passed the House on April 15, 
     2010, by a vote of 278-128.
       The National Estuaries Program was established in the Clean 
     Water Act in 1987 to improve the quality of estuaries of 
     national importance. The law directs the Environmental 
     Protection Agency (EPA) to work cooperatively with state and 
     local interests to develop plans for attaining or maintaining 
     water quality in an estuary. The Administrator of EPA 
     convenes a management conference of all interested parties 
     where the Administrator determines what control of point and 
     nonpoint sources of pollution to supplement existing controls 
     of pollution is required to provide for protection of public 
     water supplies and the protection and propagation of a 
     balanced, indigenous population of shellfish, fish, and 
     wildlife, and allows recreational activities, in and on 
     water. Each program establishes a comprehensive conservation 
     and management plan (CCMP) to meet the statutory goals.
       The Environmental Protection Agency currently has few tools 
     for holding recipients of National Estuaries Program grants 
     accountable for the timely, efficient, and effective use of 
     Federal funds. In addition, according to information from 
     EPA, several communities that currently participate in the 
     National Estuary Program were given an EPA rating of fair to 
     poor, but it is difficult to assess whether this is a result 
     of lack of available funding to implement National Estuary 
     Program CCMPs, or a result of the failure of individual 
     programs to achieve their stated environmental restoration 
     goals.
       The budgetary impact of specific performance measures, 
     including the authority for the Administrator to suspend or 
     terminate the eligibility of a grant recipient to receive 
     National Estuaries Program funding, will result in more 
     efficient use of taxpayer dollars, and provide for tangible 
     and measurable results from Federal investment in the 
     restoration of the Nation's estuary areas. In recent years, 
     individual national estuary programs have received, on 
     average, approximately $500,000 annually to carry out 
     restoration efforts within their geographic regions; however, 
     under current law, there are no specific criteria to evaluate 
     the performance of the 28 currently authorized programs. The 
     absence of performance criteria does not afford EPA a tool to 
     determine the effectiveness of the expenditures. It also 
     reduces the ability to disseminate information among estuary 
     programs.
       The performance measures contained in H.R. 4715 will 
     provide a mechanism for the evaluation of individual program 
     performance, as well as a process for suspending or barring 
     future appropriations to poor performing programs.


       Promote Asset Management of Publicly-Owned Treatment Works

       This proposal achieves deficit reduction by promoting 
     efficiency and reform of government by requiring all eligible 
     recipients of funding from Clean Water State Revolving Funds 
     to conduct an inventory and assessment of the critical assets 
     of the treatment works, and to prepare an asset management 
     plan for maintaining, repairing, and, as necessary, replacing 
     such assets (e.g., sewer lines, pumping stations, treatment 
     plants), as well as a plan for funding such activities.
       This proposal is contained in H.R. 1262, the ``Water 
     Quality Investment Act of 2009'', which passed the House on 
     March 12, 2009 by a vote of 317-101.
       The Environmental Protection Agency and others estimate 
     that the Nation will need to invest between $300 to $400 
     billion over the next 20 years to address critical water and 
     wastewater infrastructure needs, including the repair and 
     replacement of a large portion of the approximately 1,000,000 
     miles of storm and sanitary sewers across the United States. 
     However, a 2004 study by the then-General Accounting Office 
     (GAO) (GAO-04-461) estimated that significant long-term 
     savings on sewer system repairs and replacements could be 
     achieved through increased asset management by local 
     wastewater utilities. The rationale is that increased 
     awareness of the condition of local sewer systems, paired 
     with a more regimented asset replacement program, could 
     reduce the need for more costly repairs through emergency 
     actions (and the associated disruption in service), as well 
     as the potential increased response costs from the release of 
     untreated sewage into the environment. In addition, this 
     increased awareness of the actual condition of local systems 
     could provide incentives to better match local rates to both 
     short-term and long-term capital needs.
       The budgetary impact of asset management on budgetary 
     savings is undefined. The GAO report identified several local 
     examples of how increased asset management had resulted in 
     significant cost savings for individual utilities, both in 
     terms of decreased

[[Page 15839]]

     costs from more effective maintenance programs, as well as 
     prioritizing the expenditure of local resources on repairing 
     and replacing the highest-risk local assets (i.e., assets at 
     the highest risk of failure). In addition, the report 
     identified how detailed awareness of the actual conditions of 
     local systems could provide increased incentives to modify 
     local rates, which, according to EPA, could reduce the 
     overall long-term need for Federal capital expenditures. For 
     example, according to EPA estimates, a three percent annual 
     adjustment in local infrastructure spending could 
     significantly reduce the overall gap between annual 
     wastewater infrastructure spending and indentified needs.


Increase Efficiency in Addressing Water Quality Problems by Reinvesting 
                 in Nonpoint Source Management Programs

       This proposal achieves deficit reduction by promoting 
     efficiency and reform of government by increasing Federal 
     investment in addressing nonpoint sources of pollution as a 
     cost-effective way of improving water quality throughout the 
     Nation.
       During the initial years following enactment in 1972, the 
     modern Clean Water Act enabled the Nation to make great 
     advances in improving the quality of U.S. waters and 
     controlling various sources of pollution. However, over the 
     past two decades, progress has slowed because of the failure 
     to address a significant exception--nonpoint sources of 
     pollution. Nonpoint source pollution refers to the polluting 
     of water by diffuse sources rather than single identifiable 
     ``point'' sources such as industrial and municipal 
     discharges. These diffuse sources are usually associated with 
     precipitation runoff and land use activities as opposed to 
     end-of-pipe discharges. After 38 years of Federal and State 
     efforts to protect water quality under the Clean Water Act, 
     the single largest-remaining and uncontrolled contributor of 
     pollutants to the Nation's waters is nonpoint sources. In 
     fact, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) estimated 
     that 90 percent of the Nation's impaired waters are 
     contaminated, in part, by nonpoint sources of pollution.
       Because of the regulatory structure of the Clean Water Act, 
     EPA's ability and available tools to address pollution differ 
     whether the origin is a point source or a nonpoint source. 
     When a waterbody is impaired for certain pollutants, such as 
     nutrients, the structure of the Act can require imposing 
     ever-more-stringent requirements on individual point sources 
     of pollution, such as sewage treatment plants, to address 
     pollutants that may emanate from both point and nonpoint 
     sources. In many instances, it would be cheaper and more 
     effective to invest in upstream controls of nonpoint sources 
     of pollutants than to require the construction of advanced 
     treatment technologies for downstream dischargers. As noted 
     in the most recent EPA Clean Watershed Needs Survey, over 10 
     percent (or $24 billion) of the currently reported need for 
     wastewater infrastructure is for advanced treatment. Much of 
     that investment is associated with reducing nutrients from 
     nonpoint sources. Nonpoint source controls are generally more 
     effective and efficient than structural advanced treatment.
       The budgetary impact of the proposal, although difficult to 
     quantify, is that increased investment and implementation of 
     nonpoint source control measures will improve water quality 
     in many of the Nation's rivers, streams, and lakes in a more 
     cost-effective manner than expenditures for ever-more-
     stringent requirements of point sources for the same 
     pollutants.

                          ____________________