[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 162 (2016), Part 9]
[House]
[Pages 13137-13138]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




       AMENDING TITLE 49 WITH RESPECT TO CERTAIN GRANT ASSURANCES

  Mr. ZELDIN. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the 
bill (H.R. 5944) to amend title 49, United States Code, with respect to 
certain grant assurances, and for other purposes.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The text of the bill is as follows:

                               H.R. 5944

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

     SECTION 1. GRANT ASSURANCES.

       Section 47107 of title 49, United States Code, is amended 
     by adding at the end the following:
       ``(t) Renewal of Certain Leases.--
       ``(1) In general.--Notwithstanding subsection (a)(13), an 
     airport owner or operator who renews a covered lease shall 
     not be treated as violating a written assurance requirement 
     under this section as a result of such renewal.
       ``(2) Covered lease defined.--In this subsection, the term 
     `covered lease' means a lease--
       ``(A) originally entered into before the date of enactment 
     of this subsection;
       ``(B) under which a nominal lease rate is provided;
       ``(C) under which the lessee is a Federal or State 
     government entity; and
       ``(D) that supports the operation of military aircraft by 
     the Air Force or Air National Guard--
       ``(i) at the airport; or
       ``(ii) remotely from the airport.''.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from New 
York (Mr. Zeldin) and the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Carson) each will 
control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York.


                             General Leave

  Mr. ZELDIN. 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. 5944.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from New York?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. ZELDIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 5944. This bill will 
ensure regulatory consistency and stability for airports that are co-
located with Air National Guard or Air Force bases.
  In recent years, several Air National Guard units have had their 
manned aircraft mission replaced with an unmanned aircraft mission. For 
some of these units, the unmanned aircraft are remotely operated from 
the Guard facilities but not located at the airport.
  Since, in some instances, the unmanned aircraft do not land at the 
airport from where they are being operated, there is concern that the 
nominal leases these units have long enjoyed may no longer be permitted 
by the Federal Aviation Administration.
  This bill ensures that an airport's simple renewal of a nominal rate 
lease with an Air National Guard unit that operates aircraft, remotely 
or otherwise, does not result in the airport losing its Federal grant 
funding.
  The bill in no way prohibits airports from negotiating new lease 
terms with Air National Guard units, but it ensures that should an 
airport and an Air National Guard unit agree to renew a nominal rate 
lease they may do so.
  Mr. Speaker, in this time of transition for military aviation, this 
bill allows airports and the Department of Defense sufficient 
flexibility to rebalance and adjust the missions of Air National Guard 
units without jeopardizing the airports' FAA grants.
  This bill provides that flexibility while preserving the right of 
airports to renew leases that it believes are in the best interest of 
the airport and surrounding community.
  I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 5944.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CARSON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I support this bill as well, which will allow our 
Nation's military to continue leasing space at airports at nominal 
rates.
  Current law requires that airports agree to certain conditions to 
receive Federal airport grants. One of these requirements is for an 
airport to generate revenue that sustains most, if not all, of the 
airport's operations. If airports continue to renew leases under which 
tenants of airport property pay discounted rates, they could violate 
their grant assurances and put their Federal airport funding in 
jeopardy.
  This bill allows airports to continue offering below-market rates to 
military tenants. I have no objection to this bill. However, I would 
like to note

[[Page 13138]]

that our Nation's airport infrastructure needs far exceed the Federal 
funding available. I regret that we are not here discussing some 
accompanying language that would increase airports' ability to generate 
revenue, such as through the passenger facility charge or an increase 
in funding for the Airport Improvement Program.
  I am very pleased this bill is narrowly tailored to accommodate the 
important missions of the National Guard and the U.S. Air Force, as 
well as to protect the needs of airports.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. ZELDIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from 
North Dakota (Mr. Cramer).
  Mr. CRAMER. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleagues from New York and 
Indiana and the other colleagues supporting this legislation. They have 
described it beautifully.
  I would just simply state that what this really does is it brings FAA 
policy up to the contemporary standards of modern-day missions by our 
Air Force and Air National Guard.
  Many flying missions have made the transition or are making the 
transition from manned aircraft to remotely piloted aircraft, just like 
the Happy Hooligans in my home State of North Dakota, and I think this 
policy recognizes that reality.
  I am just going to wrap up by simply stating, Mr. Speaker, that there 
are many benefits to this bill in addition to the ones that have been 
stated. First of all, it is taxpayer friendly, and it is mission 
appropriate. It does nothing to diminish but rather enhances the 
integrity of the Air Force's mission, and it is good for taxpayers. It 
supports airport authorities and their flexibility, as well as military 
and defense operations.
  Ultimately, Mr. Speaker, it strengthens the defense of our country, 
which is our highest priority, by keeping military installations at 
local airports.
  I urge a ``yes'' vote on H.R. 5944.
  Mr. CARSON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my 
time.

                              {time}  1930

  Mr. ZELDIN. Mr. Speaker, I urge all Members to support H.R. 5944.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the House for their swift 
consideration of H.R. 5944. This important, bipartisan piece of 
legislation helps our National Guard and Air Force continue to evolve 
into the 21st Century as Remote Piloted Aircraft--or RPA's--become a 
modern tool in our efforts to defend our nation.
  RPA's provide key intelligence, reconnaissance, close air combat 
support, and have become one of the most reliable tools in our toolbox 
as we fight terrorism abroad. Years ago, we could not have envisioned 
the advances in technology that now allow our soldiers and pilots to 
fly missions from a control center thousands of miles from the 
battlefield. Yet our laws are unfortunately woefully outdated when it 
comes to the infrastructure that supports RPA's. Now is the time to 
update those laws and now is the time to update this critical 
infrastructure.
  This bill allows our National Guard and Air Force stations on 
civilian airfields that operate and participate in RPA missions to 
remain eligible for nominal leases. Doing so will save our military 
millions of dollars that can be spent elsewhere--on soldiers and 
equipment.
  Without this fix to federal law, estimates show that the National 
Guard would be forced to spend over $155 million each year just to keep 
their leases for bases they are on now. That would be an additional 
$155 million on top of the current costs. If faced with this enormous 
cost, bases would be forced to shutter their operations permanently and 
missions would be eliminated entirely.
  This legislation not only saves dollars, it saves our current defense 
structure that helps protect our country, which in turn saves lives.
  Nothing in this legislation creates a mandate for our airports or the 
military, rather it allows leases and current agreements to be renewed. 
Future agreements can be fairly negotiated without the risk of 
airfields losing FAA grant eligibility or the Guard losing their entire 
budget to lease payments.
  I have many constituents that work at the Battle Creek Air National 
Guard Based in Michigan, which is just one of the many dual-use 
airfields that will immediately benefit from our legislation. Those 
servicemen and women support missions from cyberspace, on the ground, 
and in the air with our MQ-9 RPA mission that contribute to combat 
terror efforts overseas as we speak.
  We cannot risk disturbing these critical missions by moving or 
eliminating the capability the Guard and Air Force provide simply 
because of outdated laws that could not have foreseen the technology we 
would be using to effectively carry out missions. Every Guard and Air 
Force base on a civilian airfield will have the certainty to continue 
their operations without the fear of losing the lease structure 
currently in operation. With our bill, airfields will have the 
certainty knowing they are still eligible for FAA grants and together, 
the Guard and the FAA can develop better agreements for the future of 
airfields across the nation.
  H.R. 5944 prevents a disruption of our missions, saves taxpayer 
dollars, and allows our Guard to modernize for the 2lst century and 
beyond.
  I would like to sincerely thank the House Transportation and 
Infrastructure, Chairman Shuster and Subcommittee Chairman LoBiondo, 
both majority and minority staff, Nick Bush on my staff, as well as the 
Federal Aviation Administration for working together on this bipartisan 
solution for our airfields across the country.
  Providing for the national defense and supporting our troops around 
the country is one of Congress' foremost priorities and H.R. 5944 
ensures that our military will continue to be the greatest in the 
world.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. Zeldin) that the House suspend the rules 
and pass the bill, H.R. 5944.
  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.

                          ____________________