[Senate Report 105-55]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]



                                                       Calendar No. 121

105th Congress                   SENATE                          Report
 1st Session                                                     105-55
_______________________________________________________________________


 
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 
                                  1998

                                _______
                                

                  July 22, 1997--Ordered to be printed

                                _______


    Mr. Shelby, from the Committee on Appropriations, submitted the 
                               following

                              R E P O R T

                         [To accompany S. 1048]

    The Committee on Appropriations reports the bill (S. 1048) 
making appropriations for the Department of Transportation and 
related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1998, 
and for other purposes, reports favorably thereon and 
recommends that the bill do pass.



Amounts of new budget (obligational) authority for fiscal year 1998

Amount of bill as reported to Senate.................... $12,610,422,883
Amount of budget estimates, 1998........................  13,115,727,000
Fiscal year 1997 enacted................................  11,109,835,396


                            C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              

                    SUMMARY OF MAJOR RECOMMENDATIONS

                                                                   Page
Total obligational authority.....................................     4

                 TITLE I--DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
                        Office of the Secretary

Salaries and expenses............................................     7
Office of Civil Rights...........................................     7
Transportation planning, research, and development...............     8
Transportation Administrative Service Center.....................     8
Payments to air carriers.........................................     9
Rental payments..................................................    12
Minority Business Resource Center Program........................    15
Minority business outreach.......................................    15

                            U.S. Coast Guard

Operating expenses...............................................    21
Acquisition, construction, and improvements......................    26
Environmental compliance and restoration.........................    32
Port safety development..........................................    32
Alteration of bridges............................................    33
Retired pay......................................................    33
Reserve training.................................................    33
Research, development, test, and evaluation......................    34
Boat safety......................................................    35

                    Federal Aviation Administration

Operations.......................................................    36
Facilities and equipment.........................................    44
Research, engineering, and development...........................    65
Grants-in-aid for airports.......................................    69
Aircraft Purchase Loan Guarantee Program.........................    83

                     Federal Highway Administration

Limitation on general operating expenses.........................    84
Motor carrier safety operations..................................    85
Highway-related safety grants....................................    90
Federal-aid highways.............................................    91
Right-of-way revolving fund......................................    98
Motor carrier safety grants......................................    98
State infrastructure banks.......................................    99

             National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Operations and research..........................................   101
Highway traffic safety grants....................................   105

                    Federal Railroad Administration

Office of the Administrator......................................   108
Railroad safety..................................................   110
Railroad research and development................................   111
Northeast Corridor Improvement Program...........................   114
Railroad Rehabilitation Improvement Program......................   116
Next generation high-speed rail..................................   116
Alaska railroad rehabilitation...................................   118
Rhode Island rail development....................................   118
Direct loan financing program....................................   119
Grants to National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak).......   119

                     Federal Transit Administration

Administrative expenses..........................................   123
Formula grants...................................................   126
University transportation centers................................   127
Transit planning and research....................................   127
Trust fund share of transit programs.............................   129
Discretionary grants.............................................   129
Mass transit capital fund........................................   143

              St. Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation

Operations and maintenance.......................................   144

              Research and Special Programs Administration

Research and special programs....................................   146
Pipeline safety..................................................   150
Emergency preparedness grants....................................   152

                      Office of Inspector General

Salaries and expenses............................................   153

                  Bureau of Transportation Statistics
                      Surface Transportation Board

Salaries and expenses............................................   155

                       TITLE II--RELATED AGENCIES

Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board: 
  Salaries and expenses..........................................   157
National Transportation Safety Board: Salaries and expenses......   157

                     TITLE III--GENERAL PROVISIONS

General provisions...............................................   160
Compliance with paragraph 7, rule XVI, of the Standing Rules of 
  the Senate.....................................................   162
Compliance with paragraph 7(c), rule XXVI, of the Standing Rules 
  of the Senate..................................................   162
Compliance with paragraph 12, rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of 
  the Senate.....................................................   163
Budgetary impact statement.......................................   164

  Total Obligational Authority Provided--General Funds and Trust Funds

    In addition to the appropriation of $12,610,422,883 in new 
budget authority for fiscal year 1998, large amounts of 
contract authority are provided by law, the obligation limits 
for which are contained in the annual appropriations bill. The 
principal items in this category are the trust funded programs 
for Federal-aid highways, for mass transit, and for airport 
development grants. For fiscal year 1998, estimated obligation 
limitations total $28,081,300,000.

                     program, project, and activity

    During fiscal year 1998, for the purposes of the Balanced 
Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (Public Law 
99-177), as amended, with respect to appropriations contained 
in the accompanying bill, the terms ``program, project, and 
activity'' shall mean any item for which a dollar amount is 
contained in appropriations acts (including joint resolutions 
providing continuing appropriations) or accompanying reports of 
the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations, or 
accompanying conference reports and joint explanatory 
statements of the committee of conference. This definition 
shall apply to all programs for which new budget (obligational) 
authority is provided, as well as to discretionary grants and 
discretionary grant allocations made through either bill or 
report language. In addition, the percentage reductions made 
pursuant to a sequestration order to funds appropriated for 
facilities and equipment, Federal Aviation Administration, and 
for acquisition, construction, and improvements, Coast Guard, 
shall be applied equally to each budget item that is listed 
under said accounts in the budget justifications submitted to 
the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations as modified 
by subsequent appropriations acts and accompanying committee 
reports, conference reports, or joint explanatory statements of 
the committee of conference.

                    istea authorizations expiration

    The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act 
provides authorizations for most Federal highway, transit, and 
highway safety programs, and most of those authorizations are 
contract authority. That means they are available for 
obligation without appropriation. The role of the 
appropriations process with respect to contract authority 
programs generally is to set obligation limitations so that 
overall Federal spending stays within legislated targets and to 
appropriate liquidating cash to cover the outlays associated 
with obligations that have been made.
    ISTEA authorized these Federal surface transportation 
programs through fiscal year 1997, and the Congress must 
reauthorize these programs in order to create new contract 
authority for fiscal year 1998 and later years. The Congress 
has begun the process to reauthorize ISTEA, but neither the 
Senate nor the House has passed reauthorization legislation. 
Until such legislation is enacted, there will not be new 
contract authority to fund such surface transportation programs 
as the Federal-aid highway program, transit discretionary 
grants, or highway safety grants, although any unobligated 
balances from prior years will carry over and be available for 
obligation.
    In developing fiscal year 1998 appropriations legislation 
for the Federal surface transportation programs authorized by 
ISTEA, the Committee has generally assumed continuation of 
current law. If, as the ISTEA reauthorization process moves 
forward, the Congress decides to make changes to these 
programs, there may need to be associated changes to the 
appropriations language for these programs.

               the government performance and results act

    The Government Performance and Results Act [Results Act] 
requires Federal agencies to develop strategic plans and annual 
performance plans and reports. The first multiyear strategic 
plan is due by the end of September 1997. The Committee is 
fully committed to support the Department as it seeks to 
implement the requirements of the Results Act.
    The Committee commends the Department for its aggressive 
implementation of the Results Act. Performance measures have 
been identified for most of the Department's major programs, 
and the Department has briefed staff of this Committee and 
others on these measures. The Department has distributed a 
draft strategic plan and invited comments from its stakeholders 
as part of the consultation process required by law. The draft 
strategic plan represents a commendable effort that builds on 
the Department's efforts to identify program performance 
measures and articulates broad goals and objectives for the 
array of departmental programs. The Committee is disappointed, 
however, that the draft plan does not set out priorities among 
those goals and objectives. Setting priorities among such a 
broad array of goals and objectives is a challenging and 
controversial task, but the Committee is convinced that a plan 
with as many goals and objectives as the Department's draft 
plan that lacks a priority scheme is, in the end, no plan at 
all. As OMB Director Raines said in a recent discussion of the 
Results Act, ``This is an era of fiscal limits. Resources are 
scarce. Not every priority can be met nor all needs satisfied. 
Every program must count.'' The Committee, therefore, strongly 
urges the Secretary to consult with this Committee and others 
in Congress and the Department's stakeholders, before the 
strategic plan is finalized, to identify priorities among the 
Department's goals and objectives. If the Secretary and the 
Congress agree on the Department's priorities, this Committee 
can work more effectively with the Department in the 
appropriations process to ensure resources are allocated in a 
manner best suited to achieving those priorities.
    As the Department moves forward with implementation of the 
Results Act, the Committee understands that revisions and 
realignments to current budgetary presentations will be likely 
to ensure consistency with strategic and annual performance 
plans. The Committee strongly encourages the Department to 
develop and propose such revisions, and to present any 
necessary reconciliation and crosswalks, to ensure that fiscal 
year 1999 and subsequent budget submissions display amounts 
requested against program activity structures for which annual 
performance goals and indicators have been established. The 
Committee further expects that the Department will develop any 
needed revisions to account and program activity structures in 
consultation with the Committee on Appropriations and cognizant 
authorizations committees.

                 TITLE I--DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

                        OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

                         Salaries and Expenses

Appropriations, 1997.................................... \1\ $52,966,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................      56,136,000
Committee recommendation................................      66,703,000

\1\ Does not include reduction for TASC pursuant to section 321 of 
Public Law 104-205.

    Section 3 of the Department of Transportation Act of 
October 15, 1966 (Public Law 89-670) provides for establishment 
of the Office of the Secretary of Transportation [OST]. The 
Office of the Secretary is composed of the Secretary and the 
Deputy Secretary immediate offices, the Office of the General 
Counsel, and five assistant secretarial offices for 
transportation policy, aviation and international affairs, 
budget and programs, governmental affairs, and administration. 
These secretarial offices have policy development and central 
supervisory and coordinating functions related to the overall 
planning and direction of the Department of Transportation, 
including staff assistance and general management supervision 
of the counterpart offices in the operating administrations of 
the Department.
    The Committee recommends a total of $66,703,000 for the 
salaries and expenses of the Office of the Secretary of 
Transportation including $40,000 for reception and 
representation expenses.

                             Bill Language

    User fees.--The Committee has included bill language which 
permits the Office of the Secretary to credit to this account 
$1,000,000 in user fees.

                         Office of Civil Rights

Appropriations, 1997....................................  \1\ $5,574,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................       5,574,000
Committee recommendation................................       5,574,000

\1\ Does not include reduction for TASC pursuant to section 321 of 
Public Law 104-205.

    The Office of Civil Rights is responsible for advising the 
Secretary on civil rights and equal employment opportunity 
matters, formulating civil rights policies and procedures for 
the operating administrations, investigating claims that small 
businesses were denied certification or improperly certified as 
disadvantaged business enterprises, and overseeing the 
Department's conduct of its civil rights responsibilities and 
making final determinations on civil rights complaints. In 
addition, the Civil Rights Office is responsible for enforcing 
laws and regulations which prohibit discrimination in federally 
operated and federally assisted transportation programs.
    The Committee has provided a total of $5,574,000 for the 
Office of Civil Rights.

           Transportation Planning, Research, and Development

Appropriations, 1997....................................  \1\ $3,000,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................       6,008,000
Committee recommendation................................       4,400,000

\1\ Does not include reduction for TASC pursuant to section 321 of 
Public Law 104-205.

    The Office of the Secretary performs those research 
activities and studies which can more effectively or 
appropriately be conducted at the departmental level. This 
research effort supports the planning, research and development 
activities, and systems development needed to assist the 
Secretary in the formulation of national transportation 
policies. The program is carried out primarily through 
contracts with other Federal agencies, educational 
institutions, nonprofit research organizations, and private 
firms.
    The Committee has reduced the administration's request by 
$1,608,000. The recommended level includes $300,000 for 
reimbursement to the Bureau of Transportation Statistics [BTS] 
for services provided by the Office of Aviation Information. 
These funds should be tendered to BTS in the first quarter of 
the fiscal year to assist BTS in defraying the costs of 
providing these and other services to OST.
    Transportation planning.--The recommended level includes 
funding for transportation planning assistance for the 2002 
Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City and for a multimodal 
transportation study for Albuquerque and Santa Fe, NM.
    Safety standards relating to the use of antihistamines.--
With funds appropriated during fiscal years 1996-97, the 
Department is preparing a 1998 public awareness campaign to 
combat the effect of fatigue, sleep disorders, and inattention 
related to motor vehicle crashes. In addition to this important 
effort, the Committee believes that specific attention must be 
paid to raising awareness of the potential operator impairment 
caused by various medications. The Federal Aviation 
Administration has been very vigilant in its review of 
medication suitable for use by pilots and safety-related 
personnel and has approved, for example, the use of certain 
antihistamines for allergy relief that are nonsedating. The 
Committee believes that other agencies within the Department, 
such as NHTSA and the Office of Motor Carriers, should follow 
the lead of the FAA in this regard. Therefore, the Committee 
directs the Secretary to provide by December 31, 1997, a report 
detailing his plan to develop safety standards relating to the 
use of antihistamines in all public/commercial modes of 
transportation.

              Transportation Administrative Service Center

Limitation, 1997......................................\1\ ($124,812,000)
Budget estimate, 1998...................................................
Committee recommendation................................................

\1\ Does not reflect reduction pursuant to section 321 of Public Law 
104-205.

    The Transportation Administrative Service Center [TASC] 
provides a business operation fund for DOT to provide a wide 
range of administrative services to the Department and other 
customers. TASC functions as an entrepreneurial and self-
sufficient entity and provides competitive quality services 
responsive to customer needs. The TASC is governed by a Board 
of Directors composed of customer agencies, operating in a 
competitive business like environment. The TASC presents 
proposed operating and financial plans to the Board at the 
beginning of each fiscal year. Once the Board has approved 
those plans the TASC provides cost-effective products and 
services to its full customer base. The Director of TASC 
provides quarterly performance and financial reports to the 
Board, makes recommendations for changes to the approved plans 
and is responsible for the day-to-day management of the TASC. 
DOT administrations must procure consolidated administrative 
services from the TASC unless a financial analysis of the 
services demonstrates that it is more cost beneficial to the 
Department as a whole--not to an individual operating entity 
alone--to change the nature of the service delivery (to 
consolidate a service or to decentralize a service). TASC 
services are being marketed to customers outside DOT to provide 
greater economies of scale, thus reducing costs to individual 
customers. TASC services include:
  --Functions formerly in DOT's working capital fund [WCF];
  --Office of the Secretary [OST] personnel, procurement and 
        information technology support operations;
  --Systems development staff;
  --Operations of the consolidated departmental dockets 
        facilities; and
  --Certain departmental services and administrative 
        operations, such as human resources management 
        programs, transit fare subsidy payments, and employee 
        wellness including substance awareness and testing.
    All of the services of the TASC will be financed through 
customer reimbursements, to the extent possible, on a fee-for-
service basis.
    The Committee is directing the Office of the Inspector 
General to undertake a study and report back to the Committee 
by April 1, 1998, that evaluates the cost effectiveness of TASC 
and whether the TASC provides quality services responsive to 
customer needs.

                        Payments to Air Carriers

                (liquidation of contract authorization)

                    (airport and airway trust fund)

Appropriations, 1997....................................   ($25,900,000)
Budget estimate, 1998...................................................
Committee recommendation................................................

    In fiscal year 1998, this account is being terminated, and 
remaining contract authority is being rescinded. The Essential 
Air Service Program is being funded in a new account (essential 
air service and rural airport improvement fund), reflecting 
provisions of the Federal Aviation Reauthorization Act of 1996.
    Many EAS points are located in remote rural areas: 57 of 69 
communities served by the Essential Air Service Program are 
more than 100 highway miles from the nearest small, medium, or 
large hub airport. Twenty-six more communities are located in 
Alaska, where, in all but two cases, year-round road access 
does not exist. Recognizing the critical importance of EAS 
service to these communities, the Committee intends that 
service in Alaska not be reduced. Without air service, such 
communities would be further isolated from the Nation's 
economic centers. Moreover, businesses are typically interested 
in locating in areas that have convenient access to scheduled 
air service. Loss of service would seriously hamper small 
communities' ability to attract new business or even to retain 
those they now have, resulting in further strain on local 
economies and loss of jobs.

        Essential Air Service and Rural Airport Improvement Fund

Appropriations, 1997....................................................
Budget estimate, 1998 (mandatory authority).............     $50,000,000
Committee recommendation (mandatory authority)..........      50,000,000

    The Essential Air Service [EAS] and Rural Airport 
Improvement Program provides funds directly to commuter/
regional airlines to provide air service to small communities 
that otherwise would not receive air service and for rural 
airport improvement as provided by the 1996 Federal Aviation 
Reauthorization Act.
    The Federal Aviation Reauthorization Act of 1996 authorizes 
$100,000,000 in user fees for flights that fly over, but do not 
land in, the United States. The first $50,000,000 of each 
year's fees go directly to carry out the Essential Air Service 
Program and, to the extent not used for essential air service, 
to improve rural airport safety.
    The Committee recommendation includes a general provision 
which would limit the number of communities that receive EAS 
funding by excluding points in the 48 contiguous United States 
that are located fewer than 70 highway miles from the nearest 
large or medium hub airport, or that require a subsidy in 
excess of $200 per passenger unless such a point is more than 
210 miles from the nearest large or medium hub airport.
    The following table reflects the points currently receiving 
service and the annual rates as of the end of March 1997:

                                           RECENT EAS SUBSIDY DATA \1\                                          
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Estimated                                                  
                                                    mileage to     Average daily                                
                                                    nearest hub    enplanements   Current annual    Subsidy per 
               States/communities                     (small,      at EAS point    subsidy rates     passenger  
                                                    medium, or    (calendar year  (June 1, 1997)                
                                                      large)           1996)                                    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arizona:                                                                                                        
    Kingman.....................................             101             5.8        $155,369          $51.26
    Page........................................             280            25.4         129,560            9.78
    Prescott....................................             102            38.9         155,369            7.65
Arkansas:                                                                                                       
    El Dorado/Camden............................             108             7.0         569,344          112.48
    Harrison....................................             142             5.3         412,931          150.54
    Hot Springs.................................              53            12.4         412,931           63.96
    Jonesboro...................................              79             7.7         379,562           94.58
California:                                                                                                     
    Crescent City...............................             234            25.1         151,450           11.58
    Merced......................................             114             8.0         350,622           84.39
Colorado:                                                                                                       
    Cortez......................................             258            36.4         210,544           31.34
    Lamar.......................................             163         ( \2\ )         595,788         ( \2\ )
Hawaii: Kamuela.................................              39             3.1         292,061          180.84
Illinois:                                                                                                       
    Mattoon.....................................             126             5.7         182,319           61.62
    Mount Vernon................................              92             4.3         205,766           91.33
    Sterling/Rock Falls.........................             105             1.1         382,072          645.39
Iowa: Ottumwa...................................              85             4.0         382,072          181.16
Kansas:                                                                                                         
    Dodge City..................................             149            10.1         146,225           27.70
    Garden City.................................             201            21.5         101,767            9.07
    Goodland....................................             189         ( \2\ )         437,412         ( \2\ )
    Great Bend..................................             120             8.3         146,225           33.84
    Hays........................................             180            20.3         146,225            9.61
    Liberal/Guymon..............................             145            15.9         101,767           12.30
    Topeka......................................              71            11.1         102,362           17.59
Maine:                                                                                                          
    Augusta/Waterville..........................              71            12.0         330,080           52.57
    Bar Harbor..................................             157            28.4         330,080           22.26
    Rockland....................................              80            18.5         330,080           34.18
Michigan:                                                                                                       
    Alpena......................................             236            21.2         141,363           37.26
    Ironwood/Ashland............................             218            10.6         412,223           23.79
    Manistee....................................             115             4.5         132,014           55.87
    Sault Ste. Marie............................             280            34.0         141,363            7.96
Minnesota:                                                                                                      
    Fairmont....................................             127         ( \3\ )         ( \3\ )         ( \3\ )
    Fergus Falls................................             186         ( \3\ )         ( \3\ )         ( \3\ )
    Mankato.....................................              75         ( \3\ )         ( \3\ )         ( \3\ )
Missouri:                                                                                                       
    Cape Girardeau..............................             138            13.1         108,120           24.02
    Fort Leonard Wood...........................             130            11.8         164,667           26.75
    Kirksville..................................             137             5.1         275,969          102.71
Montana:                                                                                                        
    Glasgow.....................................             280             6.7         387,540          110.25
    Glendive....................................             223             2.8         501,442          348.47
    Havre.......................................             248             5.0         483,798          187.01
    Lewistown...................................             125             3.7         483,798          249.12
    Miles City..................................             146             3.2         501,442          301.71
    Sidney......................................             273             6.7         501,442          110.73
    Wolf Point..................................             293             5.6         387,540          131.86
Nebraska:                                                                                                       
    Alliance....................................             256             2.2         346,863          296.21
    Chadron.....................................             311             1.8         346,863          374.58
    Hastings....................................             162         ( \2\ )         500,000         ( \2\ )
    Kearney.....................................             181         ( \2\ )         437,412         ( \2\ )
    McCook......................................             271             3.4         657,724          365.61
    Norfolk.....................................             109             8.6         343,232           76.75
Nevada: Ely                                                  237             2.9         508,759          335.37
New Hampshire: Keene............................              56             5.6         382,283          131.82
New Mexico:                                                                                                     
    Alamogordo/Holloman AFB.....................              91            12.9         188,923           27.99
    Clovis......................................             103            15.1         208,578           26.48
    Silver City/Hurley/Deming...................             133             8.1         314,303           74.50
New York:                                                                                                       
    Massena.....................................             118             9.0         132,540           28.12
    Ogdensburg..................................             123             4.5         132,540           55.92
    Watertown...................................              65            12.5         132,540           20.29
North Dakota:                                                                                                   
    Devils Lake.................................             405            15.0         415,506           53.10
    Dickinson...................................             319            16.8         141,502           16.12
    Jamestown...................................             332            10.1         415,506           78.90
Oklahoma:                                                                                                       
    Enid........................................              84             6.0         381,517          121.15
    Ponca City..................................              81             8.7         381,517           84.28
Pennsylvania: Oil City/Franklin.................              86            25.5         118,373            8.89
South Dakota:                                                                                                   
    Brookings...................................             206         ( \3\ )         ( \3\ )         ( \3\ )
    Mitchell....................................             295         ( \3\ )         ( \3\ )         ( \3\ )
    Yankton.....................................             157             6.4         343,232          103.38
Texas: Brownwood................................             138             4.2         499,109          226.56
Utah:                                                                                                           
    Cedar City..................................             178            21.8         292,882           25.70
    Moab........................................             236             5.4         404,700          142.70
    Vernal......................................             174            13.3         194,466           28.07
Vermont: Rutland................................              69            11.9         382,283           61.51
Washington: Ephrata/Moses Lake..................             108            38.7         177,628            8.78
West Virginia:                                                                                                  
    Beckley.....................................             173             8.6         270,835           60.36
    Princeton/Bluefield.........................             137             7.6         270,835           67.88
Wyoming: Worland................................             164             9.6         155,468           31.01
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The above list of communities is based on currently available data, and is subject to change for a number of
  reasons. Subsidy rates change as their 2-year rate terms expire throughout the year. In addition, air carriers
  submit passenger traffic data on a quarterly basis. Changes in both subsidy rates and traffic levels will, of 
  course, change subsidy-per-passenger calculations. Further, some communities currently receiving subsidy-free 
  service may require subsidy in the future while some currently subsidized communities may attain profitability
  and no longer require subsidy. Finally, hub designations are recalculated annually and published by the FAA in
  the ``Airport Activities Statistics.''                                                                        
\2\ There was an extended service hiatus; thus, no meaningful calculation can be made.                          
\3\ No service or subsidy rate in place.                                                                        

                        Payments to Air Carriers

                 (rescission of contract authorization)

                    (airport and airway trust fund)

Rescission, 1997........................................    -$12,700,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................     -38,600,000
Committee recommendation................................     -38,600,000

    The Committee has included bill language which would 
continue the current eligibility criteria for essential air 
service. In addition, the Department is encouraged to explore 
establishing dual EAS hubs in Kansas within the eligibility 
criteria and available funding.

                            Rental Payments

Appropriations, 1997....................................    $127,447,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................      10,567,000
Committee recommendation................................................

    In 1996 and 1997 payments to the General Services 
Administration [GSA] for headquarters and field space rental 
and related services for all operating administrations were 
consolidated into this account. Beginning in 1998, the 
administration proposes that all GSA rental payments be 
included in the modal budgets. Therefore, the budget request 
includes funding only for OST utilized space and related 
services and departmentwide facility security enhancements. The 
administration believes that decentralized budgeting for rent 
will encourage the operating administrations to reduce excess 
space. The Committee includes funding for rent, but has 
included the funding in the Office of the Secretary salaries 
and expenses.

                                                                 GSA RENTAL PAYMENTS \1\                                                                
                                                         [Dollars and square feet in thousands]                                                         
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                Fiscal year 1996 enacted \2\    Fiscal year   Fiscal year 1997 projected \3\   Fiscal year 1998 request 
                Administration                 ------------------------------    1996 GSA    -----------------------------------------------------------
                                                    Funding      Square feet     billings         Funding       Square feet      Funding     Square feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Highway Administration................        [17,685]  ............        [17,112]        [18,005]         [1,070]        18,275         1,067
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration  ..............  ............          4,381           4,386             217          4,234           217
Federal Railroad Administration...............  ..............  ............          3,493           4,955             212          2,955           156
Federal Transit Administration................  ..............  ............          3,237           3,304             152          3,239           153
Federal Aviation Administration...............  ..............  ............         69,431          68,309           4,160         67,024         4,213
U.S. Coast Guard..............................  ..............  ............         40,334          36,237           2,363         34,815         2,364
St. Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation...  ..............  ............            193             196               9            150             9
Research and Special Programs Administration..  ..............  ............          2,022           2,077             103          2,075           103
Office of the Inspector General...............  ..............  ............          2,225           2,386             110          2,350           110
Office of the Secretary of Transportation:                                                                                                              
    Core......................................  ..............  ............         12,885           6,381             291          5,898           291
    Security..................................  ..............  ............  ..............  ..............  ..............         4,669  ............
Transportation Administrative Services Center.  ..............  ............  ..............          6,526             321          6,640           321
Bureau of Transportation Statistics...........  ..............  ............            452             587              26            575            26
OST--rental payments to GSA...................       [135,200]  ............       [138,653]       [135,344]         [7,964]  ............  ............
                                               ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal................................        135,200   ............        138,653         135,344           7,964        152,899         9,030
Federal Highway Administration................         17,685   ............         17,112          18,005           1,070   ............  ............
                                               ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, consolidated account..........        152,885          8,580        155,765         153,349           9,034   ............  ............
Maritime Administration.......................          4,594            298          4,433           4,465             299          4,684           299
                                               ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Department of Transportation.....        157,479          8,878        160,198         157,814           9,333        157,583         9,329
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Enacted as a single account under the Office of the Secretary of Transportation. Fiscal years 1996 and 1997 appropriations directed the             
  reimbursement of FHWA GSA rent from FHWA LGOE account to the consolidated account. The fiscal year 1998 budget proposes the termination of the        
  consolidated rent account and the return of funding for space utilized by the operating administrations to their respective budgets                   
\2\ Fiscal year 1996 requirements are best represented by the actual billings. There is no distribution by mode of the enacted amounts of $152,885 and  
  8,580 square feet because they are less than our existing inventory. The shortfall of $3,500,000 for the consolidated account was covered by GSA.     
\3\ Fiscal year 1997 requirements are best represented by the projected billings. There is no distribution by mode of the enacted amounts of $144,741   
  and 8,580 square feet because they are less than our existing inventory.                                                                              

               Minority Business Resource Center Program

Appropriations, 1997....................................      $1,900,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................       1,900,000
Committee recommendation................................       1,900,000

    Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization 
[OSDBU]/Minority Business Resource Center [MBRC].--The OSDBU/
MBRC provides assistance in obtaining short-term working 
capital and bonding for disadvantaged, minority, and women-
owned businesses [DBE/MBE/WBE's]. In fiscal year 1998, the 
short-term loan program will focus on the lending of working 
capital to DBE/MBE/WBE's for transportation-related projects in 
order to strengthen their competitive and productive 
capabilities.
    Since fiscal year 1993, the loan program has been a 
separate line item appropriation, which reflects the 
President's budget proposal, which segregated such activities 
in response to changes made by the Federal Credit Reform Act of 
1990. The limitation on direct loans under the Minority 
Business Resource Center is at the administration's requested 
level of $15,000,000.
    The Department is projecting that the authorized loan level 
of $15,000,000 will be reached in fiscal years 1998 and 1999. 
Of the funds appropriated, $1,500,000 covers the direct subsidy 
costs for loans not to exceed $15,000,000; and, $400,000 is for 
administrative expenses to carry out the Direct Loan Program.

                       Minority Business Outreach

Appropriations, 1997....................................      $2,900,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................       2,900,000
Committee recommendation................................       2,900,000

    This appropriation provides contractual support to assist 
minority business firms, entrepreneurs, and venture groups in 
securing contracts and subcontracts arising out of projects 
that involve Federal spending. It also provides support to 
historically black and Hispanic colleges. Separate funding is 
requested by the administration since this program provides 
grants and contract assistance that serves DOT-wide goals and 
not just OST purposes.

                           General Provisions

    Political and Presidential appointees.--The Committee has 
included a provision in the bill (sec. 305), which is similar 
to general provisions that have been included in previous 
appropriations acts, which limits the number of political and 
Presidential appointees within the Department of 
Transportation. The Committee is recommending that the ceiling 
for fiscal year 1998 be 107 personnel.
    Advisory committees.--The Committee has included a general 
provision (sec. 323) which would limit the amount of funds that 
could be used for the expenses of advisory committees utilized 
by the Department of Transportation. The limitation specified 
is $1,000,000, which is $250,000 below that enacted in fiscal 
year 1997.
    Minority business outreach program.--The bill includes a 
provision in the bill (sec. 337) that would allow the 
repurchase of preferred stock at a rate determined by the 
Secretary to facilitate the administration of the Minority 
Business Resource Center Program and to make more funds 
available for the underlying purposes of the program.

                                 Other

    Reductions in fiscal year 1997 appropriations.--In fiscal 
year 1997, reductions were made to a number of accounts due to 
limitations or reductions imposed in various areas, such as the 
Transportation Administration Services Center, performance 
awards, and rescissions required by the Omnibus Consolidated 
Appropriations Act of 1997 (Public Law 104-208). In the Senate 
Committee report, each account head shows the amount 
appropriated in Public Law 104-205 and Public Law 104-208, 
before the various reductions were made. The table below 
depicts the amount of funds appropriated for each of the 
accounts, and the reductions required.

                                         CHANGES IN FISCAL YEAR 1997 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION APPROPRIATIONS                                        
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Public Law 104-205                          Public Law 104-208                           
                   Account                   ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Net appropriation
                                                Appropriations     TASC GP 321     Awards GP 346    Appropriations     Rescissions                      
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office of the Secretary:                                                                                                                                
    Salaries and expenses...................       $52,966,000      -$1,458,200   ...............  ...............  .................       $51,507,800 
    Transportation planning, research, and                                                                                                              
     development............................         3,000,000          -69,869   ...............  ...............  .................         2,930,131 
    Office of Civil Rights..................         5,574,000          -25,735   ...............  ...............  .................         5,548,265 
                                             -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal..............................  .................      -1,553,804   ...............  ...............  .................  .................
                                             ===========================================================================================================
U.S. Coast Guard:                                                                                                                                       
    Operating expenses (excluding                                                                                                                       
     $300,000,000 transferred from DOD).....     2,294,725,000       -2,026,805          -$3,000   ...............  .................     2,292,695,195 
                                             -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Subtotal............................  .................      -2,026,805           -3,000   ...............  .................  .................
                                             ===========================================================================================================
Federal Aviation Administration:                                                                                                                        
    Operations..............................     4,900,000,000       -2,811,301         -176,888      $57,900,000   .................     4,954,911,811 
    Facilities and equipment................     1,790,000,000   ...............  ...............     147,700,000   .................     1,937,700,000 
    Research, engenering, and development...       187,412,000   ...............  ...............      21,000,000   .................       208,412,000 
    Grants-in-Aid (contract authority)......    (2,280,000,000)  ...............  ...............  ...............     (-$50,000,000)    (2,230,000,000)
                                             -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal..............................  .................      -2,811,301         -176,888      226,600,000   .................  .................
                                             ===========================================================================================================
Federal Highway Administration:                                                                                                                         
    Highway related safety grants (contract                                                                                                             
     authority).............................       (20,000,000)  ...............  ...............  ...............       (-9,100,000)       (10,900,000)
    Motor carrier safety grants (contract                                                                                                               
     authority).............................       (90,000,000)  ...............  ...............  ...............      (-12,300,000)       (77,700,000)
    Limitation on general operating expenses      (521,114,000)     (-1,883,438)       (-141,652)  ...............  .................      (519,088,910)
    Federal-aid Highways--ER................  .................  ...............  ...............      82,000,000   .................        82,000,000 
    Federal-aid highways (obligation                                                                                                                    
     limitation)............................    18,241,000,000       -2,001,532         -178,512   ...............  .................    18,238,819,956 
                                             -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal..............................  .................      -2,001,532         -178,512       82,000,000   .................  .................
                                             ===========================================================================================================
National Highway Traffic Safety                                                                                                                         
 Administration:                                                                                                                                        
    Highway traffic safety grants (contract                                                                                                             
     authority).............................      (171,000,000)  ...............  ...............  ...............      (-11,800,000)      (159,200,000)
    Operations and research (general).......        80,900,000         -327,812          -20,000   ...............  .................        80,552,188 
    Operations and research (trust).........        51,712,000         -270,000          -12,000   ...............  .................        51,430,000 
                                             -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal..............................  .................        -597,812          -32,000   ...............  .................  .................
                                             ===========================================================================================================
Federal Railroad Administration:                                                                                                                        
    Office of the Administrator.............        16,739,000         -103,000           -4,000   ...............  .................        16,632,000 
    Railroad Safety.........................        51,407,000          -57,979          -11,000   ...............  .................        51,338,021 
    Railroad research and development.......        20,100,000           -8,000   ...............  ...............  .................        20,092,000 
    Northeast corridor program..............       115,000,000   ...............  ...............      60,000,000   .................       175,000,000 
    Next generation high-speed rail.........        24,757,000           -2,000   ...............  ...............  .................        24,755,000 
    Direct loan financing program...........  .................  ...............  ...............      58,680,000   .................        58,680,000 
    AMTRAK..................................       565,450,000   ...............  ...............      22,500,000   .................       587,950,000 
                                             -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal..............................  .................        -170,979          -15,000      141,180,000   .................  .................
                                             ===========================================================================================================
Federal Transit Administration:                                                                                                                         
 Administrative expenses....................        41,497,000         -451,135               -4   ...............  .................        41,045,861 
                                             ===========================================================================================================
St. Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation:                                                                                                            
 Operations and maintenance.................        10,337,000          -12,704           -2,000   ...............  .................        10,322,296 
                                             ===========================================================================================================
Research and Special Programs                                                                                                                           
 Administration:                                                                                                                                        
    Research and special programs...........        26,886,000         -179,100           -3,900        3,000,000   .................        29,703,000 
    Pipeline Safety.........................        29,460,000         -100,742           -1,300   ...............  .................        29,357,958 
                                             -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal..............................  .................        -279,842           -5,200        3,000,000   .................  .................
                                             ===========================================================================================================
Office of Inspector General: Salaries and                                                                                                               
 expenses...................................        37,900,000          -94,086           -1,000   ...............  .................        37,804,914 
                                             ===========================================================================================================
Bureau of Transportation Statistics \1\.....       (25,000,000)       (-118,094)        (-36,860)  ...............  .................        24,845,046 
                                             ===========================================================================================================
Surface Transportation Board: Salaries and                                                                                                              
 expenses...................................        12,344,000   ...............        -100,000   ...............  .................        12,244,000 
                                             ===========================================================================================================
      Total reductions, Department of                                                                                                                   
       Transportation.......................  .................     -10,000,000         -513,604      452,780,000   .................  .................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ BTS reductions in parentheses included under Federal-aid highways.                                                                                  

    Asset sales.--The Coast Guard and FAA, like many other 
agencies, are reorganizing and downsizing while providing 
critical services to the public at less cost.
    The Committee believes that the Coast Guard, the FAA, the 
FHWA, and the Government as a whole, would benefit 
substantially if allowed budgetary credit for property they 
expect to excess as part of downsizing efforts. Clearly, there 
is the potential for a very positive benefit if the Coast Guard 
and the FAA are permitted to receive credit for the value of 
excessed property.
    Rebates, refunds, and incentive payments.--The Department 
receives funds from various Government programs at different 
time intervals (that is, weekly, monthly, quarterly). For 
example, under the General Services Administration's Travel 
Management Center [TMC] Program, rebate checks received from 
the travel contractor are distributed monthly to each element 
of the Department in proportion to net domestic airline sales 
arranged by the contractor. Past expenditures have to be 
analyzed to determine the proper sources to refund which can be 
a time-consuming process. The staff time and cost associated 
with the precise accounting for each such refund is 
prohibitive. To alleviate the need to specifically identify the 
source for each repayment the language allows a fair and 
sensible allocation of the rebates and miscellaneous and other 
funds.
    Many repayments are received late in the fourth quarter of 
the fiscal year or in the first quarter of the new fiscal year 
and thus are not effectively available to the agency for new 
obligations. For example, rebate checks for September travel 
are received from the travel management contractor in October. 
To maintain good financial management incentives and avoid 
injudicious commitments, this provision would provide specific 
authority to use rebated funds for program purposes beyond the 
fiscal year of the appropriation charged for the initial 
payment.

                            U.S. COAST GUARD

                  Summary of Fiscal Year 1998 Program

    The U.S. Coast Guard, as it is known today, was established 
on January 28, 1915, through the merger of the Revenue Cutter 
Service and the Lifesaving Service. In 1939, the U.S. 
Lighthouse Service was transferred to the Coast Guard, followed 
by the Bureau of Marine Inspection and Navigation in 1942. The 
Coast Guard has as its primary responsibilities the enforcement 
of all applicable Federal laws on the high seas and waters 
subject to the jurisdiction of the United States; promotion of 
safety of life and property at sea; assistance to navigation; 
protection of the marine environment; and maintenance of a 
state of readiness to function as a specialized service in the 
Navy in time of war (14 U.S.C. 1, 2).
    The Committee recommends a total program level of 
$3,964,731,000 for the activities of the Coast Guard in fiscal 
year 1998. The following table summarizes the Committee's 
recommendations:

                                            [In thousands of dollars]                                           
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   Fiscal year                                  
                            Program                               1997 enacted     Fiscal year      Committee   
                                                                       \1\        1998 estimate  recommendations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Operating expenses.............................................   \2\ 2,619,725   \3\ 2,740,000    \2\ 2,731,700
Acquisition, construction, and improvements....................         374,840     \4\ 379,000      \4\ 412,300
Environmental compliance and restoration.......................          22,000          21,000           21,000
Port safety development........................................           5,000  ..............  ...............
Alteration of bridges..........................................          16,000  ..............           26,000
Retired pay....................................................         617,284         645,696          653,196
Reserve training...............................................          65,890          65,000           65,535
Research, development, test, and evaluation....................          19,200          19,000           20,000
Boat safety....................................................          35,000          55,000           35,000
                                                                ------------------------------------------------
      Total....................................................       3,774,939       3,924,696        3,964,731
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Excludes reductions pursuant to sections 321 and 346 of Public Law 104-205.                                 
\2\ Includes $300,000,000 in Department of Defense Appropriations Act.                                          
\3\ Includes $300,000,000 from defense discretionary funds.                                                     
\4\ Excludes $9,000,000 in proposed asset sales.                                                                

                           Operating Expenses

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 General            Trust             Total     
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 1997 \1\..................................    $2,594,725,000       $25,000,000    $2,619,725,000
Budget estimate, 1998 \2\.................................     2,715,000,000        25,000,000     2,740,000,000
Committee recommendation \3\..............................     2,706,700,000        25,000,000     2,731,700,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Includes $300,000,000 by transfer from the Department of Defense. Excludes reductions for TASC and awards   
  pursuant to sections 321 and 346 of Public Law 104-205.                                                       
\2\ Includes $300,000,000 from defense discretionary funds.                                                     
\3\ Includes $300,000,000 by transfer from the Department of Defense.                                           


    The ``Operating expenses'' appropriation provides funds for 
the operation and maintenance of multipurpose vessels, 
aircraft, and shore units strategically located along the 
coasts and inland waterways of the United States and in 
selected areas overseas.
    The program activities of this appropriation fall into the 
following categories:
    Search and rescue.--One of its earliest and most 
traditional missions, the Coast Guard maintains a nationwide 
system of boats, aircraft, cutters, and rescue coordination 
centers on 24-hour alert.
    Aids to navigation.--To help mariners determine their 
location and avoid accidents, the Coast Guard maintains a 
network of manned and unmanned aids to navigation along our 
coasts and on our inland waterways, and operates radio stations 
in the United States and abroad to serve the needs of the armed 
services and marine and air commerce.
    Marine safety.--The Coast Guard insures compliance with 
Federal statutes and regulations designed to improve safety in 
the merchant marine industry and operates a recreational 
boating safety program.
    Marine environmental protection.--The primary objectives of 
this program are to minimize the dangers of marine pollution 
and to assure the safety of U.S. ports and waterways.
    Enforcement of laws and treaties.--The Coast Guard is the 
principal maritime enforcement agency with regard to Federal 
laws on the navigable waters of the United States and the high 
seas, including fisheries, drug smuggling, illegal immigration, 
and hijacking of vessels.
    Ice operations.--In the Arctic and Antarctic, Coast Guard 
icebreakers escort supply ships, support research activities 
and Department of Defense operations, survey uncharted waters, 
and collect scientific data. The Coast Guard also assists 
commercial vessels through ice-covered waters.
    Defense readiness.--During peacetime the Coast Guard 
maintains an effective state of military preparedness to 
operate as a service in the Navy in time of war or national 
emergency at the direction of the President. As such the Coast 
Guard has primary responsibility for the security of ports, 
waterways, and navigable waters up to 200 miles offshore.

                    committee funding recommendation

    The Committee recommendation for Coast Guard operating 
expenses is $2,731,700,000, including $25,000,000 from the 
oilspill liability trust fund and $300,000,000 from the Defense 
appropriations bill for national security missions.

                        [In thousands of dollars]                       
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                Fiscal year                             
                                    1997        Budget       Committee  
                                enacted \1\    request    recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pay and allowances:                                                     
    Military pay and benefits.    1,221,311    1,252,440      1,252,440 
    Civilian pay and benefits.      180,402      189,625        189,625 
    Permanent change of                                                 
     station..................       57,862       60,247         60,247 
    Medical care and equipment      117,660      119,461        119,461 
    Leased housing............       14,014       14,125         14,125 
    Activitywide adjustments..  ...........                             
                               -----------------------------------------
      Total, pay and                                                    
       allowances.............    1,591,249    1,635,898      1,635,898 
                               =========================================
Depot level maintenance:                                                
    Aircraft..................      144,276      154,659        154,659 
    Electronics...............       34,632       35,780         35,780 
    Shore facilities..........       96,170      104,411        104,411 
    Vessels...................      100,227      101,140        101,140 
    Program reestimate........  ...........                             
                               -----------------------------------------
      Total, depot level                                                
       maintenance............      375,305      395,990        395,990 
                               =========================================
Operations and support:                                                 
    Area operations and                                                 
     support:                                                           
        Cutters:                                                        
            Medium endurance                                            
             (WMEC)...........       17,803       18,939         18,939 
            High endurance                                              
             (WHEC)...........       11,529       11,944         11,944 
            Polar WAGB's......        2,380        2,858          2,858 
        Area offices..........       18,062       18,400         18,400 
        Maintenance and                                                 
         logistics commands...      136,137      130,469        122,169 
        Communication stations        2,236        2,335          2,335 
    District operations and                                             
     support:                                                           
        District offices......       46,898       47,395         47,395 
        Groups/bases..........       67,196       69,112         69,112 
        Combined group/air                                              
         station..............        9,928       10,281         10,281 
        Air stations..........       45,373       49,820         49,820 
        Marine safety offices.        9,926       10,104         10,104 
        Long-range electronic                                           
         navaids (Loran)......        6,283        6,362          6,362 
        Cutters-WLB's and                                               
         smaller; Mackinaw....       31,761       34,504         34,504 
        Vessel traffic service                                          
         [VTS] systems........          241          244            244 
    Ammunition and small arms.        2,612        2,639          2,639 
                               -----------------------------------------
      Total, operations and                                             
       support................      408,365      415,406        407,106 
                               =========================================
Recruiting and training                                                 
 support:                                                               
    Recruiting................        6,767        7,313          7,313 
    Training centers..........       26,467       28,706         28,706 
    Coast Guard Academy.......       12,985       13,650         13,650 
    Professional training and                                           
     education................       21,514       26,606         26,606 
                               -----------------------------------------
      Total, recruiting and                                             
       training support.......       67,733       76,275         76,275 
                               =========================================
Coast Guard-wide centralized                                            
 services and support:                                                  
    Headquarters-managed                                                
     units:                                                             
        Engineering Logistics                                           
         Center...............        8,052        8,157          8,157 
        Finance center........        4,786        4,843          4,843 
        Human Resources                                                 
         Service and                                                    
         Information Center...        1,371        1,391          1,391 
        Coast Guard yard......        2,771        2,846          2,846 
        National Strike Force.        2,099        2,114          2,114 
        National Pollution                                              
         Funds Center.........        1,080        1,118          1,118 
        Command and Control                                             
         Engineering Center                                             
         [C\2\CEN]............        2,584        3,522          3,522 
        Air station                                                     
         Washington, DC.......          773          871            871 
        Operations Systems                                              
         Center [OSC].........        7,200        7,229          7,229 
        Telecommunications/                                             
         information systems                                            
         command [TISCOM].....        4,116        4,138          4,138 
        Navigation Center                                               
         [NAVCENT]............        1,896        1,899          1,899 
        Intelligence                                                    
         Coordination Center                                            
         [ICC]................          189        1,458          1,458 
        Electronics                                                     
         Engineering Center                                             
         [EECEN]..............        2,304          346            346 
        Coast Guard Institute.          968          979            979 
        Research and                                                    
         Development Center...          243          246            246 
        Coast Guard Personnel                                           
         Center...............          957          970            970 
        National Maritime                                               
         Center...............        3,246        3,287          3,287 
    Headquarters..............      100,531      103,999        103,999 
    Centralized bill paying:                                            
        Postal................        6,297        6,431          6,431 
        FTS...................       11,544       12,344         12,344 
        Federal employment                                              
         compensation.........        6,486        6,452          6,452 
        Unemployment                                                    
         compensation.........        5,250        4,639          4,639 
        GSA rent..............  ...........       35,748         35,748 
    Intergovernmental                                                   
     reimbursements...........          300        1,404          1,404 
                               -----------------------------------------
          Total, Coast Guard-                                           
           wide centralized                                             
           services and                                                 
           support............      175,043      216,431        216,431 
                               =========================================
          Total, accountwide                                            
           adjustments........  ...........                             
                               =========================================
          Total appropriation.    2,617,695    2,740,000      2,731,700 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Includes reduction of $2,030,000 for TASC and awards pursuant to    
  sections 321 and 346 of Public Law 104-205.                           
                                                                        
Note.--Fiscal year 1997 enacted and fiscal year 1998 request includes   
  $300,000,000 provided by transfer from the Department of Defense.     

                           PAY AND ALLOWANCES

    Medical care and equipment.--The Committee has provided the 
full amount requested for medical care and equipment. The 
Committee feels that the Coast Guard has done a good job to 
keep its medical care and equipment line item under budget.

                         OPERATIONS AND SUPPORT

Area operations and support

    Maintenance and logistics commands.--The Committee has 
provided the amount requested for the maintenance and logistics 
commands less the caretaker fund requested for Governor's 
Island. The Committee encourages the Coast Guard to auction the 
Governor's Island property as quickly as possible. The sale of 
the Governor's Island facility was anticipated in the budget 
agreement and the Committee has provided bill language that 
relieves the Coast Guard from the responsibility for 
maintaining the property in caretaker status.

                    RECRUITING AND TRAINING SUPPORT

    The recruiting and training support category has several 
subsets, including recruiting, training centers (Yorktown, VA; 
Petaluma, CA; and Cape May, NJ), the Coast Guard Academy, and 
professional training and education. The Committee has provided 
$76,275,000 consistent with the budget request. The Committee 
believes that the Coast Guard has done a good job in trying to 
hold costs down, and though its budget for professional 
training and education is sizable, further cuts are not 
necessary at this time and would undermine the Coast Guard's 
efforts to recruit and train to meet personnel needs in a 
streamlined Coast Guard.

                    CENTRALIZED SERVICES AND SUPPORT

    The centralized services and support line item includes a 
number of individual activities. The Committee has provided 
$216,431,000 overall for centralized services and support. The 
recommendation provides a $41,388,000 increase over the fiscal 
year 1997 level for this subactivity.

                             BILL LANGUAGE

    National security.--The Committee's recommendation includes 
$300,000,000 transferred from the Department of Defense for 
Coast Guard support of national security activities. The Coast 
Guard plays a key role in support of military missions under 
the U.S. Atlantic and Southern Commands in support of drug 
interdiction missions, refugee and immigration support, and 
enforcement and joint military training.
    The Coast Guard is a cost-effective force which is 
multimissioned. Its ships, aircraft, shore units, and people 
have four primary roles: maritime safety, maritime law 
enforcement, marine environmental protection, and national 
defense. These roles are complementary and contribute to the 
Coast Guard's unique niche within the national security 
community. The value of the Coast Guard forces and their 
mission experience was clearly evident by their active 
participation in Operations Desert Shield/Storm in the Persian 
Gulf, and more recently, in operations restore/uphold democracy 
in Haiti. The Coast Guard is one of the five Armed Forces, and 
is a full partner on the joint national security team. To be a 
credible partner, the Coast Guard must maintain a high state of 
operational readiness. Many parts of the Coast Guard's budget 
contain funding requests that, if cut, would severely impair 
the Coast Guard's operational readiness and, therefore, its 
ability to meet national security commitments.

                           GENERAL PROVISIONS

    Vessel traffic safety fairway, Santa Barbara/San 
Francisco.--The Committee has included a general provision 
(sec. 313) that would prohibit funds to plan, finalize, or 
implement regulations establishing a vessel traffic safety 
fairway which is less than 5 miles wide between the Santa 
Barbara vessel traffic separation scheme and the San Francisco 
vessel traffic separation scheme. This language has been 
included in previous appropriations bills.
    Regulations regarding animal fats and vegetable oils.--The 
Committee has retained a general provision (sec. 335) that 
prohibits Coast Guard from using funds to issue, implement, or 
enforce a regulation that fails to provide for the differences 
between animal fats, vegetable oils, and other oils.

                                 OTHER

    Mackinaw.--The bill includes the $4,865,000 in requested 
funding for continued operation and maintenance of the 
icebreaking cutter Mackinaw during fiscal year 1998. The 
Committee discourages the administration from pursuing 
proposals to charge user fees for icebreaking services.
    Marine Fire and Safety Association.--The Committee remains 
supportive of efforts by the Marine Fire and Safety Association 
[MFSA] to provide specialized fire fighting training and 
maintain an oilspill response contingency plan for the Columbia 
River. The Committee encourages the Secretary to provide 
funding for MFSA consistent with the authorization and directs 
the Secretary to provide $146,500 to continue efforts by the 
MFSA to provide specialized communications, fire fighting 
training and equipment, and to implement the oilspill response 
contingency plan for the Columbia River.
    Defense readiness.--The Committee has provided the 
requested $34,300,000 increase in resources for the war on 
drugs. It should be left to the Commandant's discretion how the 
drug interdiction funding is to be distributed; however, the 
Committee believes that this area is perfectly suited for 
application of performance measures and evaluation of program 
impacts.
    Civilian staffing.--The Coast Guard recently provided the 
Committee with a report analyzing its current personnel 
management structure to determine whether greater use of 
civilians would be of benefit to the agency. The report 
concludes that a military member costs more than a civilian 
filling the same position; the cost differential representing 
the premium paid for frontline, rapid-response capability in an 
operational environment.
    In the aftermath of completing a major streamlining 
initiative, the Coast Guard must now conduct military position 
essentiality review. The report outlines the criteria to be 
used in such a review, including: deployment, command and 
control, operations, military skills, jurisdiction of the 
Uniform Code of Military Justice, statutory requirements, 
organizational structure, and unusual work hours. The Committee 
is very interested in the ongoing process of the essentiality 
review and the results flowing from that effort. The Coast 
Guard is to be commended for the openness of the report and the 
Committee encourages the Coast Guard to pursue the essentiality 
review with the same openness.

              Acquisition, Construction, and Improvements

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      General          Trust           Total    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 1997............................................    $354,840,000     $20,000,000   $374,840,000 
Budget estimate, 1998...........................................     359,000,000      20,000,000    379,000,000 
Committee recommendation........................................     392,300,000      20,000,000    412,300,000 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This appropriation provides for the major acquisition, 
construction, and improvement of vessels, aircraft, shore 
units, and aids to navigation operated and maintained by the 
Coast Guard. Currently, the Coast Guard has in operation 
approximately 250 cutters, ranging in size from 65-foot tugs to 
399-foot polar icebreakers, more than 2,000 boats, and an 
inventory of more than 200 helicopters and fixed-wing aircraft. 
The Coast Guard also operates approximately 600 stations, 
support and supply centers, communications facilities, and 
other shore units. The Coast Guard provides over 48,000 
navigational aids--buoys, fixed aids, lighthouses, and radio 
navigational stations.

                        committee recommendation

    The following table summarizes the Committee's programmatic 
recommendations:

                                            [In thousands of dollars]                                           
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Fiscal year      Fiscal year       Committee   
                                                                 1997 enacted    1998 estimate    recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vessels......................................................          216,500          186,900          214,700
Aircraft.....................................................           18,040           26,400           26,400
Other equipment..............................................           41,700           49,700           51,200
Shore facilities and aids to navigation......................           52,350           69,000           73,000
Personnel and related support................................           46,250           47,000           47,000
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Total..................................................          374,840      \1\ 379,000      \1\ 412,300
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Includes $9,000,000 in proposed asset sales.                                                                

                                vessels

    The Committee recommends $214,700,000 for vessel 
acquisition and improvement. The projected allocation of these 
funds is shown in the table below:

                                 VESSELS                                
                        [In thousands of dollars]                       
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            Fiscal year      Committee  
                                           1998 estimate  recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acquire vessels and equipment:                                          
    Seagoing buoy tender [WLB]                                          
     replacement........................          55,000          41,000
    Coastal buoy tender [WLM]                                           
     replacement........................          21,000          21,000
    47-foot motor lifeboat [MLB]                                        
     replacement project................          21,600          21,600
    Coastal patrol boat [CPB]...........          37,300          68,100
    Follow-on for polar icebreaker                                      
     replacement........................           4,000           4,000
    Stern loading buoy boat replacement.          12,000          12,000
    Survey and design--cutters and boats             500             500
    Mackinaw replacement................  ..............           2,000
    ATS-1 conversion....................  ..............          13,000
    Surface search radar replacement                                    
     project............................          15,400          15,400
    Independent maritime response vessel           2,000           2,000
    Deepwater capability concept                                        
     exploration........................           5,000           5,000
Repair, renovate, or improve existing                                   
 vessels and small boats:                                               
    Configuration management............           3,800           3,800
    Polar class icebreaker reliability                                  
     improvement project [RIP]..........           9,300           5,300
                                         -------------------------------
        Total (new program level).......         186,900         214,700
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Committee recommends a funding level of $214,700,000 
for vessels procurement. This is an increase of $27,800,000 
over the budget request. This level of funding is necessary to 
begin to relieve the out-year pressure on the ACI account due 
to anticipated replacement of the deepwater fleet. By 
increasing the procurement of current production vessels, the 
Coast Guard will realize per unit savings and will create out-
year room for anticipated new procurements. In addition, the 
increased procurement of vessels will provide the Coast Guard 
with additional flexibility in positioning assets as the Coast 
Guard moves to a more modern generation of vessels. This 
flexibility will enable the Coast Guard to better meet its 
multimission challenges and better deploy a streamlined force.
    Seagoing buoy tender [WLB] replacement.--The Coast Guard 
plans to replace its 50-year-old fleet of seagoing buoy tenders 
with up to 16 new tenders. The request of $55,000,000 for 
fiscal year 1998 is to pay for the award of the second ship 
under the full production contract, and to cover additional 
costs such as spare parts, logistics, and project 
administration. According to recent estimates, the contract for 
the first two production ships will be awarded in the second 
quarter of fiscal year 1998.
    The Committee is concerned about the growing carryover 
balances in this program. Last year, the Committee restored 
much of the House reductions in this account pursuant to the 
belief that the Coast Guard would be able to obligate a 
substantial portion of the requested funds. That has not 
happened. Accordingly, the Committee recommends a reduction of 
$14,000,000 in the request which can be made up by the 
$46,564,000 unobligated balance. This program continues to 
concern the Committee due to the increasing program 
administration costs, the vacillating sail-away costs, and the 
current unobligated balance. The Coast Guard estimates the 
first vessel in the class to have cost $49,400,000, and the 
second vessel in the class to have cost $29,800,000. Assuming 
these estimates are accurate, the funds provided are adequate 
to award a contract in the second quarter of fiscal year 1998 
for two vessels if the lower cost is accurate or if the first 
two vessels under the production contract have similar cost 
profiles of the first two vessels in the class.
    Coastal buoy tender [WLM] replacement.--The Committee has 
provided $21,000,000 for the coastal buoy tender replacement 
program. This program replaces the Coast Guard's existing 133-
foot and 157-foot coastal buoy tenders with 14 new ships. The 
Coast Guard's request of $21,000,000 for fiscal year 1998 is 
for economic price adjustments change orders, logistics, and 
administration. All 14 ships have been ordered. Based on recent 
information on the 1998 spending plans, it appears that the 
Coast Guard should have virtually no unobligated carryovers 
that could be used in fiscal year 1998 against this request.
    Coastal patrol boat/82-foot WPB replacement.--The Committee 
has provided $68,100,000 for the coastal patrol boat 
replacement program, which is a $30,800,000 increase to the 
amount requested for fiscal year 1998. This program would 
replace the 82-foot coastal patrol boats which are over 30 
years old with 31 new boats. The request for fiscal year 1998 
was to procure eight new boats.
    The Committee recommendation is to procure an additional 
seven CPB's by exercising existing options which will provide 
the Coast Guard increased flexibility in asset deployment at an 
earlier date than under the current procurement schedule. The 
CPB is one of the more versatile vessels in the Coast Guard 
inventory and should provide increased flexibility and 
capability as the Coast Guard transitions from the current 
fleet mix and recapitalizes the fleet.
    Stern loading buoy boat replacement project.--The Committee 
recommendation provides the entire Coast Guard request of 
$12,000,000 in fiscal year 1998 to procure eight new buoy 
boats.
    Mackinaw replacement.--The Committee recommends $2,000,000 
for concept exploration to refine the specifications and costs 
for a heavy icebreaking replacement vessel, including a new 
multimission vessel, for the 53-year-old Mackinaw. While the 
Committee is pleased that the Commandant has committed to the 
continued operation of the Mackinaw to maintain heavy 
icebreaking capabilities on the Great Lakes, the Committee is 
concerned about the long lead time projected by the Coast Guard 
to receive a replacement vehicle when the Coast Guard has been 
studying this issue for a number of years, and projects that a 
replacement vehicle would not be available until the year 2006. 
The funding provided in the bill will prevent another year's 
delay in the acquisition process for a replacement heavy 
icebreaking vessel. The Committee expects the Coast Guard to 
issue an interim status report on the concept exploration to 
the Committee by May 1, 1998.
    Polar class icebreaker reliability improvement project 
[RIP].--The Committee recommends a reduction of $4,000,000 in 
this program in order that the Coast Guard can effectively 
manage the reliability improvement project for polar class 
icebreakers.
    ATS-1 conversion.--The Committee recommends $13,000,000 for 
conversion and the addition of a flight deck.

                                aircraft

    For aircraft procurement, the Committee recommends 
$26,400,000 consistent with the budget request. Funds for 
aircraft acquisitions are distributed as follows:

                                AIRCRAFT                                
                        [In thousands of dollars]                       
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            Fiscal year      Committee  
                                           1998 estimate  recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Traffic alert and collision avoidance                                   
 system [TCAS]..........................           3,300           3,300
Global positioning system installation--                                
 phase VII, IX..........................           1,900           1,900
HC-130 engine conversion................           5,200           5,200
HH-65A helicopter kapton rewiring.......           3,200           3,200
Long range search aircraft capability                                   
 preservation...........................           4,600           4,600
HH-65A helicopter mission computer unit                                 
 replacement............................           4,400           4,400
HC-130 aircraft sensor upgrade..........           3,800           3,800
                                         -------------------------------
      Total.............................          26,400          26,400
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                            other equipment

    The Committee recommends $51,200,000. The following table 
displays the project allocation:

                             OTHER EQUIPMENT                            
                        [In thousands of dollars]                       
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            Fiscal year      Committee  
                                           1998 estimate  recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fleet logistics system [FLS]............           9,200           9,200
Ports and waterways safety system                                       
 [PAWSS]................................           5,500           5,500
Port security equipment.................  ..............           3,500
Marine information for safety and law                                   
 enforcement [MISLE]....................           4,000           4,000
Local notices to mariners [LNM]                                         
 automation.............................           1,800           1,800
Frequency spectrum reallocation.........           5,100           5,100
Conversion of software applications.....           2,000           2,000
Defense message system [DMS]                                            
 impementation..........................           1,400           1,400
Communication system [COMMSYS] 2000.....           1,000           1,000
Differential global positioning system                                  
 [DGPS] (coastal gaps) phase II.........           1,000           1,000
Personnel management information system/                                
 joint uniform military pay system II...           1,600           1,600
Aviation logistics management                                           
 information system [ALMIS].............           2,700           2,700
National distress system modernization..           7,000           5,000
VHF-FM high level site upgrade--phase                                   
 III....................................           7,400           7,400
                                         -------------------------------
      Total.............................          49,700          51,200
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Ports and waterways safety system [PAWSS].--The Committee 
recommends $5,500,000 for the development and implementation of 
a new ports and waterways safety system [PAWSS], as requested 
by the administration. The Committee continues to be interested 
in Coast Guard activities to develop a new approach to 
navigation safety, with an emphasis on streamlining and 
reducing the cost of such safety systems. The Committee 
applauds the Coast Guard's efforts to develop such a system in 
cooperation with the maritime community and to apply 
information technology.
    Personnel management information system.--The Committee has 
provided the full amount requested.
    National distress system modernization.--The Committee 
recommends a reduction of $2,000,000 to $5,000,000. The 
Committee believes the Coast Guard can complete the activities 
anticipated for fiscal year 1998 in this program within the 
reduced funding level.

                shore facilities and aids to navigation

    The program level recommended is $73,000,000.

                 SHORE FACILITIES AND AIDS TO NAVIGATION                
                        [In thousands of dollars]                       
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          Fiscal year       Committee   
                                         1998 estimate    recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shore--General:                                                         
    Survey and design shore projects..           6,000            6,000 
    Minor AC&I shore construction                                       
     projects.........................           8,000            8,000 
    Personnel support facilities:                                       
     Public family quarters...........          15,900           15,900 
Groups/bases/stations/MSO's:                                            
    Station Bellingham--relocation....           4,000            4,000 
    ISC Kodiak--hanger renovation.....  ...............           4,000 
    Group Woods Hole--waterfront                                        
     renovation.......................           2,900            2,900 
    Group/Station New Orleans--                                         
     relocation phase I...............           4,200            4,200 
    Base, Ketchikan--replace                                            
     breakwater.......................           1,600            1,600 
Aids to navigation facilities:                                          
 Waterways aids-to-navigation projects           5,000            5,000 
OMEGA termination cost................           6,700            6,700 
Coast Guard District 1--construct                                       
 Bayonne pier.........................           4,100            4,100 
Integrated support command--                                            
 Portsmount, VA:                                                        
    Create command and control                                          
     engineering center...............           4,700            4,700 
    Leadership development center--                                     
     phase IV.........................           5,900            5,900 
Asset sales...........................          (9,000)          (9,000)
                                       ---------------------------------
      Total...........................          69,000           73,000 
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Air Stations Brooklyn and Cape May.--The Committee 
understands that the Coast Guard has proposed to consolidate 
Air Station Brooklyn and Air Station Cape May due to improved 
operational capabilities of its assets which result in 
budgetary savings. However, the Committee remains concerned 
about maintaining critically important Coast Guard air rescue 
response time in the New York City areas at the level currently 
provided by Air Station Brooklyn during the peak boating 
season. Therefore, the Committee encourages the Coast Guard to 
establish and operate a seasonal air facility in the New York 
City area to provide helicopter rescue capability during the 
period April 15 through October 15.
    Kodiak electricity cogeneration.--The Committee encourages 
the Coast Guard to explore innovative means of assisting the 
local electrical cooperative from which it purchases power in 
upgrading its power production capability.

                     PERSONNEL AND RELATED SUPPORT

    The program level recommended is $47,000,000. Within the 
amount provided, $500,000 shall be for core acquisition costs.
    The Committee has provided the full amount requested for 
AC&I personnel and related support.

                        [In thousands of dollars]                       
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            Fiscal year      Committee  
      Personnel and related support        1998 estimate  recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Direct personnel costs..................          46,500          46,500
Core acquisition costs..................             500             500
                                         -------------------------------
      Total.............................          47,000          47,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                             bill language

    Asset sales.--The bill includes a provision which would 
credit the proceeds from the sale or lease of surplus Coast 
Guard real property to this appropriation. The administration 
requested this authority which allows asset sale revenues to be 
credited to this appropriation as offsetting collections, but 
limits the amount of offsetting collections in fiscal year 1998 
to $9,000,000. Any excess proceeds from asset sales would 
accrue to the following fiscal year. Accordingly, the Committee 
encourages the Coast Guard to explore the auction or sale of 
the Governor's Island facility during fiscal year 1998 with an 
eye toward supplmenting fiscal year 1999 appropriations. In 
addition, the bill includes language that protects the Coast 
Guard from liability for the cost of maintaining Governor's 
Island.
    The Coast Guard's closure of Governors Island provides and 
example of the cost savings attainable by streamlining the 
agency's infrastructure and the potential significant revenue 
available to the Coast Guard and the rest of the Federal 
Government by selling nonessential or noncritical, high-value 
assets. The Committee would also like to know about additional 
properties of high value in the Coast Guard's real property 
portfolio; therefore, the Coast Guard is directed to submit to 
the Committee by April 2, 1998, a list of its 25 most valuable 
properties. This list should include information on the fair 
market value of each property (or an estimate thereof), the 
amount of land and the number of buildings, the current use 
being made of the property, and the annual operating costs for 
the activities housed on each property.
    The Coast Guard needs funding it can depend upon to carry 
out necessary projects. The Senate supports the authority 
vested in the Commandant which allows the sale of real property 
and specified operational assets, with proceeds to be credited 
to the ``Acquisition, construction, and improvements'' 
appropriation.
    Pier space use agreement.--The bill includes language that 
allows the Secretary of Transportation, acting through the 
Commandant of the Coast Guard, to enter into a long-term use 
agreement with the city of Unalaska for dedicated pier space on 
the municipal dock. This authority is necessary to support 
Coast Guard vessels when such vessels call on the Port of Dutch 
Harbor, AK. The terms and conditions of the use agreement shall 
be develop by the Secretary and the city of Unalaska.
    New York search and rescue capability.--The Committee 
directs the Department of Defense to provide facilities 
including runway; hangar; fire crash and rescue; and support 
spaces at the Air National Guard site at the Francis S. 
Gabreski Airport, Hampton, Long Island, NY, to the Coast Guard. 
This facility will provide seasonal search and rescue 
capability during the period April 15 through October 15. 
Support spaces will consist of suitable operations, berthing, 
and maintenance spaces.
    General provisions.--The Committee has included a general 
provision directing the transfer of the U.S.N.S. Edenton to the 
Coast Guard.

                Environmental Compliance and Restoration

Appropriations, 1997....................................     $22,000,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................      21,000,000
Committee recommendation................................      21,000,000

    The Committee recommends funding of $21,000,000 to continue 
the environmental restoration and compliance-related actions 
throughout the Coast Guard.
    These fiscal year 1998 funds will be used to address 
environmental problems at former and current Coast Guard units 
as required by applicable Federal, State, and local 
environmental laws and regulations. Planned expenditures for 
these funds include major upgrades to petroleum and regulated-
substance storage tanks, restoration of contaminated ground 
water and soils, remediation efforts at hazardous substance 
disposal sites, and initial site surveys and actions necessary 
to bring Coast Guard shore facilities and vessels into 
compliance with environmental laws and regulations.
    ISC Kodiak remediation funding.--The investigation and 
potential cleanup of 34 sites on ISC Kodiak, as per the 1990 
Resources Conservation Recovery Act consent order, goes well. 
Eight of these sites have been closed and eight other sites 
have been approved for no further action status. Due to reduced 
levels of contamination anticipated, lower than expected costs 
to meet consent order milestones, and successful ongoing 
milestone negotiations with the regulatory bodies, annual 
requirements for this project have been reduced from past 
levels of $4,400,000 to $5,400,000 to about $3,000,000 to 
$3,500,000. Given overall budget constraints and other demands 
placed on the ``Environmental compliance and restoration'' 
appropriation, these levels will be adequate to continue this 
remediation effort in fiscal year 1998.

                        Port Safety Development

Appropriations, 1997....................................      $5,000,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................................
Committee recommendation................................................

    This appropriation provided funds in 1996 and 1997 for the 
reduction of debt incurred by the Port of Portland, OR, from 
prior infrastructure development. No funds are requested for 
1998.

                         Alteration of Bridges

Appropriations, 1997....................................     $16,000,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................................
Committee recommendation................................      26,000,000

    The ``Alteration of bridges'' appropriation provides funds 
for the Coast Guard's share of the cost of altering or removing 
bridges obstructive to navigation. Under the provisions of the 
Truman-Hobbs Act of June 21, 1940, as amended (33 U.S.C. 511 et 
seq.), the Coast Guard, as the Federal Government's agent, is 
required to share with owners the cost of altering railroad and 
publicly owned highway bridges which obstruct the free movement 
of navigation on navigable waters of the United States in 
accordance with the formula established in 33 U.S.C. 516.
    The Committee directs that, of the funds provided, 
$5,000,000 shall be allocated to the Sand Island Road Tunnel in 
Honolulu, HI, $3,000,000 shall be allocated to the Florida 
Avenue railroad/highway combination bridge in New Orleans, LA, 
and $18,000,000 shall be allocated to the Sidney Lanier highway 
bridge in Brunswick, GA.

                              Retired Pay

Appropriations, 1997....................................    $617,284,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................     645,696,000
Committee recommendation................................     653,196,000

    The ``Retired pay'' appropriation provides for retired pay 
of military personnel of the Coast Guard and Coast Guard 
Reserve, members of the former Lighthouse Service, and for 
annuities payable to beneficiaries of retired military 
personnel under the retired serviceman's family protection plan 
(10 U.S.C. 1431-1446) and survivor benefit plan (10 U.S.C. 
1447-1455), and for medical care of retired personnel and their 
dependents under the Dependents Medical Care Act. The average 
number of personnel on the retired rolls is estimated to be 
31,279 in fiscal year 1998, as compared with an estimated 
30,433 in fiscal year 1997 and 29,650 in fiscal year 1996.
    The bill includes $653,196,000 for retired pay, consistent 
with the budget request, adjusted by $6,100,000 to annualize 
fiscal year 1997 supplemental funding. This is scored as a 
mandatory appropriation in the congressional budget process.
    In addition, this funding level includes $1,400,000 in 
anticipation of congressional action to extend partial veteran 
benefits to Merchant Mariners who served between August 16, 
1945, and December 31, 1946. The Committee recommends the 
additional funds for the Coast Guard to process up to 50,000 
applications in fiscal year 1998.

                            Reserve Training

Appropriations, 1997....................................     $65,890,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................      65,000,000
Committee recommendation................................      65,535,000

    Under the provisions of 14 U.S.C. 145, the Secretary of 
Transportation is required to adequately support the 
development and training of a Reserve force to ensure that the 
Coast Guard will be sufficiently organized, manned, and 
equipped to fully perform its wartime missions. The purpose of 
the Reserve training program is to provide trained units and 
qualified persons for active duty in the Coast Guard in time of 
war or national emergency, or at such other times as the 
national security requires. Coast Guard reservists must also 
train for mobilization assignments that are unique to the Coast 
Guard in times of war, such as port security operations 
associated with the Coast Guard's Maritime Defense Zone [MDZ] 
mission and include deployable port security units.
    The Committee has provided $65,535,000 for Reserve 
training. The amount provided is $535,000 above the President's 
request.
    The Coast Guard is provided Reserve training funding as 
follows:

                                            [In thousands of dollars]                                           
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                    President's      Committee  
                   Functional program element                       Fiscal year   request (7,600  recommendation
                                                                    1997 levels       SELRES)     (8,000 SELRES)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Drill pay and benefits..........................................          26,763          26,203          26,763
Full-time support personnel.....................................          20,904          21,013          21,013
Annual training program.........................................          11,665          11,467          11,467
District administration/training................................           2,315           2,250           2,250
Recruiting......................................................           2,051           2,066           2,066
O/M support to training facilities..............................           1,532           1,316           1,316
Headquarters administration.....................................             660             685             660
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      Total.....................................................          65,890          65,000          65,535
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

              Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      General          Trust           Total    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 1997............................................     $14,180,000      $5,020,000     $19,200,000
Budget estimate, 1998...........................................      15,500,000       3,500,000      19,000,000
Committee recommendation........................................      16,500,000       3,500,000      20,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Coast Guard's Research and Development Program seeks to 
improve the tools and techniques with which Coast Guard carries 
out its varied operational missions and to increase the 
knowledge base upon which it depends to fulfill its regulatory 
responsibilities.
    The bill includes $20,000,000 for research, development, 
test, and evaluation, which is $1,000,000 above the budget 
request.
    The Committee recommendation for funding distribution is as 
follows:

                        [In thousands of dollars]                       
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Fiscal year                
                               Fiscal year      1998         Committee  
                                  1997        estimate    recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Program areas:                                                          
    Search and rescue.......         1,872         1,875          1,875 
    Waterways safety and                                                
     management.............         1,385         1,225          1,225 
    Marine safety...........         3,825         2,955          2,955 
    Ship structure committee           223           437            437 
    Marine environmental                                                
     protection.............         1,791         1,525          2,525 
    Maritime law enforcement           791         1,250          1,250 
    Safety and environmental                                            
     compliance.............         2,452         3,125          3,125 
    Human resource                                                      
     management.............           147  ............  ..............
    Command, control,                                                   
     communications,                                                    
     computers, and                                                     
     intelligence...........           928         1,050          1,050 
    Technology advancement..         1,000         1,463          1,463 
    Personnel, program                                                  
     support, and operations         4,786         4,095          4,095 
                             -------------------------------------------
        Total...............        19,200        19,000         20,000 
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Committee has made a slight adjustment to the fiscal 
year 1998 request for research and development. In the marine 
environmental protection area, the Committee has provided the 
amount requested for the aquatic nuisance species program, 
which is $1,529,000 and increased the funding for this activity 
by $1,000,000 to further research effects into a nonchemical 
interim ballast management practice for fully loaded vessels to 
prevent the ballast-mediated transfer of species. This research 
should focus in particular on vessels reporting no ballast on 
board [NOBOB]. In addition, this funding is also intended to 
assist the Coast Guard's other efforts consistent with the 
National Invasive Species Act.

                              Boat Safety

                     (aquatic resources trust fund)

Appropriations, 1997....................................    $35,000,000 
Budget estimate, 1998 \1\...............................    (55,000,000)
Committee recommendation................................     35,000,000 

\1\ The President's budget proposed, contingent on enactment of 
legislation, that $55,000,000 be available as a direct (mandatory) 
program and no discretionary funds.

    This account provides financial assistance for a 
coordinated National Recreational Boating Safety Program for 
the several States. Title 46, United States Code, section 
13106, establishes a ``Boat safety'' account from which the 
Secretary may allocate and distribute matching funds to assist 
in the development, administration, and financing of qualifying 
State programs. The ``Boat safety'' account consists of amounts 
transferred from the highway trust fund which are derived from 
the motorboat fuel tax (18.4 cents per gallon).
    The President's budget requests no discretionary funding in 
1998. Instead, the President's budget proposes to provide all 
funding for the State boating safety grant program by providing 
$35,000,000 from the aquatic resources trust fund, together 
with $20,000,000 from the ``Sport fish restoration'' account as 
authorized under the Clean Vessel Act of 1992 (title V of the 
Oceans Act of 1992).
    The Committee cannot support the administration's proposal 
to convert this program to mandatory spending. After highway 
fatalities, recreational boating accidents result in the 
highest number of transportation fatalities annually. The 
number of boats is increasing each year and the National 
Transportation Safety Board continues to list boating safety as 
one of the areas most in need of safety improvement. Annual 
congressional review and guidance is necessary for timely 
implementation of boating safety initiatives.

                    FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

                  Summary of Fiscal Year 1998 Program

    The Federal Aviation Administration traces its origins to 
the Air Commerce Act of 1926, but more recently to the Federal 
Aviation Act of 1958 which established the independent Federal 
Aviation Agency from functions which had resided in the Airways 
Modernization Board, the Civil Aeronautics Administration, and 
parts of the Civil Aeronautics Board. FAA became an 
administration of the Department of Transportation on April 1, 
1967, pursuant to the Department of Transportation Act (October 
15, 1966).
    The total recommended program level for the FAA for fiscal 
year 1998 amounts to $9,179,154,883 including $50,000,000 in 
user fees credited to the ``Operations'' appropriation and a 
$1,700,000,000 obligation limitation on the use of contract 
authority for the Airport Grants Program. The following table 
summarizes the Committee's recommendations:

                                            [In thousands of dollars]                                           
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Fiscal year 1997    Fiscal year 1998      Committee    
                        Program                               enacted        budget estimate     recommendation 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Operations............................................      \1\ 4,957,900           5,086,100          5,375,900
User fees:                                                                                                      
    Offsetting........................................        \2\ (75,000)            -50,000            -50,000
    Budget authority..................................  ..................        \3\ 300,000  .................
Facilities and equipment..............................          1,937,700           1,875,000          1,889,005
Research, engineering, and development................            208,412             200,000            214,250
Grants-in-aid for airports \4\........................          1,460,000           1,000,000          1,700,000
National Civil Aviation Review Commission.............              2,400   .................  .................
                                                       ---------------------------------------------------------
      Total...........................................          8,491,412           8,411,100          9,129,155
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Excludes reductions for TASC and awards pursuant to sections 321 and 346 of Public Law 104-205.             
\2\ Reflects maximum amount provided in Public Law 104-205. FAA estimates collections of only $20,000,000 in    
  fiscal year 1997.                                                                                             
\3\ Proposed user fees.                                                                                         
\4\ Limitation on obligations.                                                                                  

                               Operations

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  General           Trust          User fees          Total     
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 1997........................   $3,182,500,000   $1,700,400,000      $75,000,000   $4,957,900,000
Budget estimate, 1998.......................    1,611,100,000    3,425,000,000      350,000,000    5,386,100,000
Committee recommendation....................    3,424,272,000    1,901,628,000       50,000,000    5,375,900,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FAA's ``Operations'' appropriation provides funds for the 
operation, maintenance, communications, and logistic support of 
the air traffic control and navigation systems and activities. 
It also covers the administration and management of the 
regulatory, airports, commercial space, medical and 
engineering, and development programs.
    User fees.--The administration proposed collecting 
$400,000,000 in user fees in fiscal year 1998. Of these fees, 
$100,000,000 is available without Appropriations Committee 
action, including $50,000,000 for the essential air service 
program and rural airport safety and $50,000,000 for FAA 
expenses.
    The bill includes a total of $5,325,900,000 for the 
operations activities of the Federal Aviation Administration, 
of which $1,901,628,000 shall be derived from the airport and 
airway trust fund. An additional $50,000,000 for FAA operations 
will be derived from user fees.
    As in past years, FAA is directed to report immediately to 
the Committees on Appropriations in the event resources are 
insufficient to operate a safe and effective air traffic 
control system.
    The activities of the operations accounts comprise eight 
main areas consistent with FAA's reorganization to bring 
together functions and activities that support the provision of 
a single, major service and to establish a single executive 
responsible for that service.
    Air traffic services.--The operations and maintenance of 
the national air traffic control and navigation system and the 
installation of air traffic and navigation equipment. Air 
traffic services consists of five subactivities: air traffic, 
NAS logistics, systems maintenance, leased telecommunications, 
and flight inspections.
    Aviation regulation and certifications.--Promotes aviation 
safety and ensures compliance with safety and certification 
standards for air carriers, commercial operators, air agencies, 
airmen, and civil aircraft, including aircraft registration; 
develops and administers safety standards for airworthiness of 
aircraft and components. Includes accident investigation, 
aviation medicine, aviation rulemaking, and the suspected 
unapproved parts office.
    Civil aviation security.--Provides for the overall 
planning, direction, management, evaluation, and enforcement of 
civil aviation security; supports efforts covering the 
investigation and interdiction of illegal drugs and the 
assessment of foreign airports.
    Research and acquisition.--Responsible for all research, 
prototyping, system development, and acquisition activities. 
Includes the William J. Hughes Technical Center.
    Administration of airports.--Provides for the 
administration of airport grants and the safety inspection and 
certification of the Nation's airports.
    Commercial space transportation.--Facilitates and promotes 
commercial space launches by the U.S. private sector and 
licenses and regulates commercial launches, launch site 
operations, and certain payloads.
    Administration.--Funds the administrative functions that 
establish policy and direct and develop programs in the areas 
of FAA aircraft use and management, building space management, 
budget and accounting, business information and consultation, 
human resource management, and technical and management 
training; includes the regional administrators and the 
Aeronautical Center Director.
    Staff offices.--Funds the Office of the Administrator and 
the Deputy Administrator, and offices that report directly to 
the Administrator and provide executive direction; operations 
and communications control; civil rights; government and 
industry affairs; policy, planning, and international aviation; 
legal counsel; and public affairs.
    The following table summarizes the Committee's 
recommendation in comparison to the budget estimate:

                                            [In thousands of dollars]                                           
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          Fiscal year 1997   Fiscal year 1998      Committee    
                                                         program level \1\   budget estimate    recommendations 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air traffic services...................................          3,801,353          4,192,516          4,181,916
Aviation regulation and certification..................            501,921            613,768            614,168
Aviation security......................................            114,360             98,651             98,651
Research and acquisition...............................             85,767             92,858             92,858
Administration of airports.............................             45,051             48,052             48,052
Commercial space transportation........................              6,040              6,182              6,182
Administration.........................................            330,044            262,143            262,143
Staff offices..........................................             70,376             71,930             71,930
Accountwide adjustments................................  .................                                      
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
      Total............................................          4,954,912          5,386,100          5,375,900
                                                        ========================================================
User fees..............................................  .................            350,000             50,000
Appropriated funds.....................................  .................          5,036,100          5,325,900
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
      Total available funds............................  .................          5,386,100          5,375,900
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Includes reduction for TASC and awards pursuant to sections 321 and 346 of Public Law 104-205.              

                          air traffic services

    The Committee recommends a total of $4,181,916,000 for the 
operation and maintenance of the national air traffic control 
and flight service system. This is $10,600,000 less than the 
budget estimate, but $380,563,000 above the fiscal year 1997 
level.
    Over the next decade, the Committee expects to see the 
billions of dollars of new technology being developed, 
procured, and implemented under the ``Facilities and 
equipment'' account--computers, communications equipment, and 
information analysis capability--reflected in a projected trend 
toward more productive work forces and, therefore, lower 
operations budget estimates.
    The major activities include:
    Air traffic.--The Committee recommends $2,536,258,000 and 
24,581 FTE's. The Committee's recommendation provides a net 
increase of 500 additional air traffic controllers as request 
by the administration.
  --Equipment and staffing deficiencies in the New York/New 
        Jersey region.--The Committee continues to be concerned 
        with the shortage of adequately trained air traffic 
        controllers as well as persistent problems with air 
        traffic control equipment at the FAA's air traffic 
        facilities in the New York/New Jersey metropolitan 
        area. These staffing shortages and equipment outages 
        have resulted in increased delays and inefficiencies 
        that have placed an inordinate amount of pressure on 
        the overtaxed FAA work force, the air carriers serving 
        the region, as well as the flying public.
      The Subcommittee on Transportation held a special hearing 
        on this topic on June 12, 1997, during which testimony 
        was received from Members of Congress as well as 
        representatives of the FAA, air carriers, the air 
        traffic controllers, and technicians unions. The 
        hearing served to highlight the urgent need for the FAA 
        to expedite staffing of its facilities in the New York/
        New Jersey area so that they meet or exceed authorized 
        staffing levels. It also highlighted the failure of the 
        FAA to fully utilize all the tools at its disposal, 
        including the tools granted under its personnel reform 
        authorities, to alleviate critical staffing shortages 
        at these facilities as expeditiously as possible. 
        Finally, the hearing highlighted the need for the FAA 
        to expedite the installation of upgraded and new air 
        traffic control equipment in order to expedite the 
        replacement of outdated equipment and assist the air 
        traffic controllers and air carriers serving the region 
        in handling growing volumes of air traffic, especially 
        during inclement weather.
      The Committee is pleased with the FAA's progress over the 
        past year in increasing the staffing levels at area 
        towers, the New York TRACON and the New York center. 
        However, the Committee directs the Administrator to 
        meet the authorized staffing levels for all facilities 
        in the New York/New Jersey region by the dates 
        identified in the pending agreements with the pertinent 
        employee organizations. The Administrator is further 
        directed to inform the Committee immediately if it 
        appears that those deadlines will not be met. The 
        Committee further requests the Administrator to use all 
        tools at his or her disposal to rectify the ongoing 
        problems highlighted during the special hearing held by 
        the Transportation Subcommittee.
  --Contract tower program.--The Committee recommends 
        $43,700,000 for the contract tower program, as 
        requested by the administration, and directs FAA to 
        study traffic at the airports in New Bern and Hickory, 
        NC, and at the Salisbury/Wicomico County Regional 
        Airport in Maryland, and, if those airports meet or are 
        projected to meet FAA's benefit/cost criteria for tower 
        operations within the next 2 years or if tower 
        operation could be justified under a cost-sharing 
        arrangement, directs FAA to open contract towers at 
        those airports for service during fiscal year 1998.
      The Committee is aware that FAA has notified 22 airports 
        around the Nation that the FAA will withdraw funding 
        for towers at those airports in 2 years unless the 
        benefit/cost ratio at those airports exceeds 1.0 by the 
        end of 1998. The Committee is concerned about the 
        impacts loss of tower service would have at these 22 
        airports and will monitor developments with respect to 
        these airports. The Committee urges FAA to work with 
        the communities to explore alternatives, such as 
        sharing of the tower operating costs, to maintain tower 
        operations if the benefit/ cost criteria are unlikely 
        to be satisfied at any of these airports by the end of 
        1998.
    National airspace system logistics support.--The Committee 
recommends $180,833,000 for this subactivity including 1,188 
FTE's.
    The funding provided for the national airspace system 
logistics support activity is the full amount requested by the 
administration for fiscal year 1998.
    Maintenance of air traffic control system.--The Committee 
recommends $1,064,545 and 9,505 FTE's for this budget 
subactivity, as requested by the administration. For the 
reasons discussed below, the Committee has concluded that FAA 
is likely to continue to underutilize its radio communications 
link [RCL] network in favor of leased telecommunications. The 
Committee suggests that FAA accommodate the $4,000,000 
reduction by disposing of a part of its underutilized RCL 
network and taking staffing savings.
    Leased telecommunication services.--The Committee 
recommends $343,339,000 for this budget subactivity. This is a 
reduction of $4,000,000 from the request level.
    FAA's leased telecommunications request for fiscal year 
1998 ($347,339,000) represents a $17,077,000 increase over the 
fiscal year 1997 level. In the report accompanying last year's 
appropriation bill, the Committee expressed concern about 
underutilization of the radio communications link [RCL], which 
is owned by FAA and is one of the largest microwave networks in 
the country. The alternative to increased use of the RCL is 
increased reliance on leased telecommunications costs for the 
use of private networks. The Committee directed FAA to transfer 
to the radio communications link as much of the existing 
workload as possible to better utilize that resource. The 
Committee understands that FAA plans to use an additional 2,300 
to 2,900 RCL circuits rather than leasing circuits from a 
private vendor. Even if FAA adopts this plan, it would still 
only be utilizing 56 to 61 percent of its analog circuits and 
still have a significant amount of digital capacity sitting 
idle.
    Given that FAA will apparently continue to underutilize the 
RCL and prefers leased telecommunications links, the Committee 
is recommending a reduction of $4,000,000 from the request for 
the systems maintenance subactivity.
    Satellite communications technology.--The Committee has 
added $400,000 to the air traffic activity to provide a low-
earth orbit [LEO] satellite communication system at Anchorage, 
AK, to augment present communications systems. Extensive areas 
of Alaska are not within present radio coverage. The LEO system 
will be available for widespread use in Alaska within 2 years, 
and the Committee anticipates that pilots with the appropriate 
onboard equipment will be able to use this new capability to 
call FAA's flight service stations from such locations within 
the State.
    Flight inspection.--The Committee recommends $63,942,000 
and 579 FTE's for this activity which is the full amount 
requested.
    Accountwide adjustment.--Based upon a GAO analysis of the 
request of $51,200,000 for 82 NAS Plan Hand-Off projects that 
identified 14 percent in excess costs (associated, for example, 
with project requirements that had been canceled since the 
budget estimates were developed), the Committee believes 
$7,000,000 can be reduced from air traffic services with no 
impact on FAA's ability to field new equipment.

                 aviation regulation and certification

    The Committee recommends $614,168,000 and 5,882 FTE's for 
this activity.
    Funding provided for aviation regulation and certification 
is an increase of $112,247,000 over fiscal year 1997 and 
$400,000 over the administration's request. The Committee fully 
funds the requested employment increases for administrative 
support (+68), airworthiness inspectors (+117), airline 
operations inspectors (+118), certification engineers and 
pilots (+17), and manufacturing certification inspectors (+6).
    The Committee has included an additional $400,000 to 
continue the human intervention and motivation study [HIMS], a 
comprehensive education and training program for alcohol and 
drug abuse prevention in the airline industry with emphasis on 
peer identification and intervention. Since its inception in 
1974, HIMS has been a very successful program to deal with the 
problem of alcoholism in the air transportation workplace and 
to enhance the safety of air travel. Lack of funding now 
threatens to stifle the program at a time when the need for it 
is great, especially in the regional airline industry.

                        civil aviation security

    The Committee recommends $98,651,000 and 1,109 FTE's for 
this budget activity. The Committee has fully funded the civil 
aviation security program.

                        research and acquisition

    The Committee recommends $92,858,000 and 809 FTE's for this 
budget activity as requested by the administration. This is an 
8-percent increase over the fiscal year 1997 enacted level.

                       administration of airports

    The Committee recommends $48,052,000 and 495 FTE's for this 
activity, the same as the administration's request.

                    COMMERCIAL SPACE TRANSPORTATION

    The Committee recommends $6,182,000 and 34 FTE's for this 
activity.
    The Committee's recommendation for the Commercial Space 
Transportation Office is the same as the administration's 
request.

                             administration

    The Committee recommends $262,143,000 and 1,987 FTE's for 
this budget activity. The Committee has fully funded the 
administration's request for fiscal year 1998 in the 
administration activity level.

                             staff offices

    The Committee recommends $71,930,000 and 591 FTE's for this 
budget activity, the same as the requested amount.

                             BILL LANGUAGE

    Second career training program.--The Committee has included 
bill language which was included in the President's budget 
request which prohibits the use of appropriated funds for the 
second career training program. This prohibition has been 
carried in annual appropriations acts for many years.
    Sunday premium pay.--The bill retains a provision, first 
included in the fiscal year 1995 appropriations bill, which 
prohibits FAA from paying Sunday premium pay, except in those 
cases where the individual actually worked on a Sunday. This 
provision is identical to that which was in effect for fiscal 
years 1995, 1996, and 1997. It was requested by the 
administration for fiscal year 1998.
    Manned auxiliary flight service stations.--The Committee 
has retained bill language which was requested by the 
administration to prohibit the use of funds for operating a 
manned auxiliary flight service station in the contiguous 
United States. There is no funding provided in the 
``Operations'' account for such stations in fiscal year 1998.
    Commercial space transportation.--The Committee has 
retained language which prohibits the use of any funds from the 
airport and airway trust fund for the support of the operations 
and activities of the Associate Administrator for Commercial 
Space Transportation. This prohibition was requested by the 
administration.

                                 other

    GPS nonprecision approaches.--The Committee urges FAA to 
establish a global positioning system [GPS] nonprecision 
instrument approach at Atka, AK, along with appropriate 
weather, communications, and lighting equipment.
    The Committee also urges the FAA to seriously consider 
developing, in conjunction with the Pennsylvania Department of 
Transportation, Bureau of Aviation, 200 helicopter-only GPS 
approach systems to support emergency air medical services in 
Pennsylvania.
    User fees.--The administration's request included 
$300,000,000 in new aviation user fees to be appropriated for 
operations. The Committee does not recommend such an approach. 
Instead, the Committee recommends an appropriation of 
$5,325,900,000, which will be supplemented by $50,000,000 in 
user fees that were authorized last year and should be 
available for operations expenses in fiscal year 1998.
    Last year the Committee approved an administration request 
for $75,000,000 in new user fees in order to offset a portion 
of FAA operations costs. In approving these new user fees the 
Committee made clear this was on a trial basis only and further 
noted that expansion of the user fee concept in future years 
would depend upon whether a consultative process had been 
developed in concert with specific fee schedules. At this 
point, that standard has not been met. Based on the FAA's first 
attempt to craft such a rule (the foreign overflight fee), 
which has resulted in concerns being raised in Congress, the 
U.S. Department of State, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 
District of Columbia, it is apparent to the Committee that 
Congress should be very wary of providing the FAA with such 
authority in the future.
    House and Senate committees have made clear to FAA that, 
for safety reasons, Congress did not intend to authorize 
foreign overflight fees on general aviation when it granted FAA 
authority to establish overflight fees. In addition, the 
Committee believes general aviation operations should be 
exempted from the rule since the administrative cost of 
including such operations likely would exceed the anticipated 
fees from general aviation sources. To date, FAA has failed to 
follow the direction of Congress in this matter.
    The Committee also believes Canada-to-Canada and Mexico-to-
Mexico overflights should be exempted, provided those two 
countries do not impose similar charges on flights operated by 
United States citizens. The Committee is concerned that, absent 
such an exemption, Mexico and Canada will be forced to impose 
similar overflight fees on United States airlines that 
presently are not charged for such services. A fee which 
invites retaliation by a foreign government is nothing more 
than a hidden tax on the American people. Further, such fees 
may have the perverse effect of influencing airlines' choice of 
airspace or takeoff and landing preferences which may have a 
deleterious impact on safety. In addition, since there are more 
American domestic operations that transit foreign airspace, the 
financial impact on United States airlines will be greater than 
that on foreign airlines, so the Committee also questions the 
FAA's interim final rule approach from a national interest 
vantage.
    The Committee is concerned that the FAA's interim final 
rule fails to comply with international law and bilateral 
aviation obligations of the United States. The Committee 
understands the U.S. Department of State has received 
diplomatic correspondence from many countries expressing 
concern that the FAA, inconsistent with our international 
commitments, failed to provide meaningful advance consultation. 
Specifically, these governments assert that the cost allocation 
materials made available in support of the interim final rule 
were insufficient to permit an accurate review or analysis of 
the reasonableness of the overflight charges and that FAA 
failed to adequately respond to questions raised about the 
rule. The Committee expects that the FAA will be responsive to 
U.S. Department of State's entreaties that FAA address the 
concerns of the international community. To date the rule has 
been formally objected to by Canada, the United Kingdom, Hong 
Kong, and Austria. In addition, a combined diplomatic note was 
presented to the Department of State by the Embassies of 
Australia, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, 
Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, New 
Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, the 
United Kingdom, and the Commission of the European Union. These 
concerns are currently the subject of pending litigation in the 
U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.
    The Committee rejects the FAA's contention to the 
international community that the United States' obligation to 
provide prior consultations can be fully met by giving affected 
parties an opportunity to comment after a rule has gone into 
effect. We expect foreign countries to engage in meaningful 
prior consultations with U.S. airlines before they impose any 
fees and, accordingly, expect nothing less from the FAA with 
respect to affected foreign parties. The Committee does not 
share FAA's cavalier attitude about complying with the United 
States' international law and bilateral aviation obligations. 
The Committee is disappointed that, to this point, FAA has 
failed to develop an adequate consultative process and, based 
on FAA's performance in establishing foreign overflight fees, 
is skeptical of FAA's ability to administer a more 
comprehensive user fee system.

                        Facilities and Equipment

                    (Airport and Airway Trust Fund)

Appropriations, 1997....................................  $1,937,700,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................   1,875,000,000
Committee recommendation................................   1,889,004,883

    Under the ``Facilities and equipment'' appropriation, 
safety, capacity and efficiency of the Federal airway system 
are improved by the procurement and installation of new 
equipment and the construction and modernization of facilities 
to keep pace with aeronautical activity and in accordance with 
the Federal Aviation Administration's comprehensive capital 
investment plan [CIP], formerly called the national airspace 
system [NAS] plan.

                                                      CIP MILESTONES FOR MAJOR SYSTEM ACQUISITIONS                                                      
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               Year of first-site implementation                           Year of last-site implementation             
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
           System name             1983 NAS                                                    1983 NAS                                                 
                                     plan      1991 CIP    1993 CIP    1996 CIP    1997 CIP      plan      1991 CIP    1993 CIP    1996 CIP    1997 CIP 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Advanced automation system [AAS]        1990        1991        1991     ( \1\ )     ( \1\ )        1994        2001        2004     ( \1\ )     ( \1\ )
    Display system replacement                                                                                                                          
     [DSR]......................  ..........  ..........  ..........        1998        1998  ..........  ..........  ..........        2000        2000
    Standard terminal automation                                                                                                                        
     replacement system [STARS].  ..........  ..........  ..........     ( \1\ )        1998  ..........  ..........  ..........     ( \2\ )        2005
    Tower control computer                                                                                                                              
     complex [TCCC].............  ..........  ..........  ..........     ( \3\ )     ( \4\ )  ..........  ..........  ..........     ( \3\ )     ( \4\ )
    Tower automation program                                                                                                                            
     [TAP]......................  ..........  ..........  ..........  ..........     ( \5\ )  ..........  ..........  ..........  ..........     ( \5\ )
Air route surveillance radar                                                                                                                            
 [ARSR-4].......................        1988        1993        1994        1996        1996        1991        1996        1996        1997     ( \6\ )
Airport surface detection                                                                                                                               
 equipment [ASDE-3].............        1987        1992        1993        1993        1993        1990        1994        1996        1999        1999
Automated weather observing                                                                                                                             
 system [AWOS]..................        1986        1989        1989        1989        1989        1990        1997        1997        2000        2001
Central weather processor [CWP].        1990        1991        1991        1991        1991        1991        1998    \7\ 1992    \7\ 1993    \7\ 1993
Flight service automation system                                                                                                                        
 [FSAS].........................        1984        1991        1991        1991        1991        1989        1995        1994        1995        1995
Mode S..........................        1988        1993        1994        1994        1994        1993        1996        1996        1998        1999
Radio microwave link [RML]                                                                                                                              
 replacement and expansion......        1985        1986        1986        1986        1986        1989        1994        1993        1993        1993
Terminal doppler weather radar                                                                                                                          
 [TDWR].........................     ( \8\ )        1993        1994        1994        1994     ( \8\ )        1996        1996     ( \9\ )     ( \9\ )
Voice switching and control                                                                                                                             
 system [VSCS]..................        1989        1995        1995        1995        1995        1992        1997        1997        1997        1997
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The AAS Program has been restructured into three areas: En route [DSR], terminal [STARS], and tower [TAP].                                          
\2\ STARS schedule was being rebaselined in keeping with new acquisition strategy.                                                                      
\3\ TCCC schedule was being rebaselined to reflect the incorporation of surface management advisor [SMA].                                               
\4\ TCCC has been replaced by the Tower Automaton Program [TAP].                                                                                        
\5\ The Tower Automation Program [TAP] schedule is currently under review.                                                                              
\6\ ARSR-4 last-site implementation date has not been determined due to environmental issues at Ajo, AZ.                                                
\7\ Dates denoted are for MWP I only. The CWP-RWP segment has been eliminated as a continuation of the CWP Program, and has been merged with MWP II into
  the Weather and Radar Processor [WARP] Program.                                                                                                       
\8\ The TDWR was not included in the 1983 NAS plan.                                                                                                     
\9\ TDWR last-site implementation indefinite due to site availability and land acquisition problems.                                                    
                                                                                                                                                        
Source: FAA 1983 NAS plan, 1991, 1993, 1995 CIP, 1997 GAO ``Status of the FAA's Modernization Program.''                                                


          REASONS FOR DELAY AND COST INCREASES IN CIP PROJECTS          
------------------------------------------------------------------------
          System name                       Reasons for delay           
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Advanced automation system      In general, AAS delays were due to an   
 [AAS].                          overly ambitious plan, inadequate FAA  
                                 oversight of the contractor, and       
                                 ineffective resolution of requirements 
                                 issues. The AAS Program has been       
                                 restructured into three areas: En      
                                 route, terminal, and tower.            
Air route surveillance radar    Problems with the radar's development   
 [ARSR-4].                       and site preparation delayed first-site
                                 implementation. Testing took longer    
                                 than originally expected. Delays have  
                                 also occurred due to changes in system 
                                 design, interface problems with other  
                                 ATC systems, and slips in site         
                                 construction. The last-site            
                                 implementation change in the 1997 CIP  
                                 is due to the environmental assessment 
                                 having to be reaccomplished at Ajo, AZ.
Airport surface detection       Original delays occurred because FAA and
 equipment [ASDE-3].             the contractor underestimated software 
                                 complexity. FAA changed some           
                                 requirements, and testing uncovered    
                                 some performance problems. Software    
                                 development, establishing remote       
                                 towers, site selection/preparation, and
                                 the addition of seven systems have     
                                 delayed the program.                   
Automated weather observing     Site prep, installation, and maintenance
 system [AWOS].                  problems, as well as delays in         
                                 receiving Government-furnished         
                                 equipment contributed to original      
                                 delays. Last-site implementation delay 
                                 occurred because of communications     
                                 funding shortfalls and installation    
                                 delays of the communications           
                                 infrastructure to deliver weather      
                                 information. The last-site             
                                 implementation change in the 1997 CIP  
                                 is due to the addition of ASOS systems 
                                 per fiscal year 1997 congressional     
                                 direction.                             
Central weather processor       Early software development problems and 
 [CWP].                          software discrepancies during testing  
                                 delayed the system in early stages. The
                                 program was descoped to just the CWP-  
                                 MWP I segment, which is now fully      
                                 implemented.                           
Flight service automation       Original delays occurred because of     
 system [FSAS].                  software development and testing       
                                 problems with the Model I system.      
                                 Program implementation is complete.    
Mode S........................  Problems in developing hardware and     
                                 software during initial phases delayed 
                                 the system, and software problems      
                                 caused a delay in first-site           
                                 implementation. Implementation of the  
                                 last site has been moved due to en     
                                 route interface requirements. The last-
                                 site implementation change in the 1997 
                                 CIP is due to site preparation delays. 
Radar microwave link [RML]      In the early stages, site acquisition   
 replacement and expansion.      and prep problems delayed the system.  
                                 Other delays occurred because of a     
                                 change in the prime contractor and due 
                                 to problems encountered during         
                                 operational test and evaluation.       
                                 Program implementation is complete.    
Terminal doppler weather radar  Site availability and land acquisition  
 [TDWR].                         problems have delayed last-site        
                                 implementation. Last-site              
                                 implementation remains indefinite. TDWR
                                 has experienced schedule delays because
                                 of site availability and land          
                                 acquisition problems.                  
Voice switching and control     Early delays were due to the two        
 system [VSCS].                  prototype contractors having technical 
                                 difficulties in meeting FAA's          
                                 requirements for system reliability.   
                                 Additional delays occurred because of  
                                 software development and integration   
                                 problems during the upgrade of the     
                                 prototype to a production model. The   
                                 implementation schedule has not changed
                                 since the 1991 CIP. The last-site      
                                 implementation was achieved on schedule
                                 in February 1997.                      
------------------------------------------------------------------------


    The bill includes an appropriation of $1,889,004,883 for 
the facilities and equipment of the Federal Aviation 
Administration. The Committee's recommended distributions of 
the funds for each of the major accounts are as follows:

                        FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT                        
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Fiscal year                  
                Projects                   1998 budget      Committee   
                                            estimate      recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Engineering, development, test, and                                     
 evaluation:                                                            
    En route programs:                                                  
        Aviation weather services                                       
         improvements..................     $23,000,000     $23,000,000 
        Oceanic automation system......      32,000,000      32,000,000 
        Next generation VHF air/ground                                  
         communication system..........       7,400,000       7,400,000 
        Air traffic management.........      18,240,000      18,240,000 
                                        --------------------------------
          Subtotal, en route programs..      80,640,000      80,640,000 
                                        ================================
    Terminal programs:                                                  
        Terminal digital radar (ASR-11)      42,200,000      35,800,000 
        Terminal Automation Program....      68,000,000      68,000,000 
        Weather systems processor [WSP]       6,200,000       5,200,000 
                                        --------------------------------
          Subtotal, terminal programs..     116,400,000     109,000,000 
                                        ================================
    Landing and navigational aids                                       
     programs:                                                          
        Local area augmentation system                                  
         [LAAS] for GPS................       6,500,000       6,500,000 
        Wide area augmentation system                                   
         [WAAS]........................     101,530,000     101,530,000 
                                        --------------------------------
          Subtotal, landing and                                         
           navigational aids programs..     108,030,000     108,030,000 
                                        ================================
    Research, test, and evaluation                                      
     equipment and facilities:                                          
        Independent operational test                                    
         and evaluation [IOT&E] sup....       3,200,000       3,200,000 
        FAA Technical Center facility--                                 
         technical building lease......       5,290,000       5,290,000 
        NAS improvement of system                                       
         support laboratory............       2,000,000       2,000,000 
        Technical Center facilities....       7,000,000       7,000,000 
        Infrared heating for aircraft                                   
         deicing.......................  ..............         970,000 
                                        --------------------------------
          Subtotal, research, test, and                                 
           evaluation equipment and                                     
           facilities..................      17,490,000      18,460,000 
                                        --------------------------------
          Total, engineering,                                           
           development, test, and                                       
           evaluation..................     322,560,000     316,130,000 
                                        ================================
Air traffic control facilities and                                      
 equipment:                                                             
    En route programs:                                                  
        Long Range Radar [LRR] Program--                                
         replace/establish.............       6,600,000       6,600,000 
        En Route Automation Program....     214,240,000     214,240,000 
        Next generation weather radar                                   
         [Nexrad]......................       3,000,000       3,000,000 
        Air traffic operations                                          
         management system [ATOMS].....       1,000,000       1,000,000 
        Weather and radar processor                                     
         [WARP]........................      24,400,000      24,400,000 
        Aeronautical data link [ADL]                                    
         applications..................       8,000,000       4,000,000 
        ARTCC building improvements/                                    
         plant improvements............      98,551,700      98,551,700 
        Voice switching and control                                     
         system [VSCS].................      50,700,000      50,700,000 
        Remote communication facilities                                 
         [RCF's]--expand/relocate......       1,440,000       3,140,000 
        Air traffic management [ATM]...      44,200,000      44,200,000 
        Data multiplexing network [DMN]       3,900,000       3,900,000 
        Critical communications support       4,300,000       4,300,000 
        DOD base closure--facility                                      
         transfer......................       2,200,000       2,200,000 
        Backup emergency communications                                 
         [BUUEC]--interim..............       8,500,000       8,500,000 
        Air/ground communication radio                                  
         frequency interference........       2,000,000       2,000,000 
        ATC beacon interrogator [ATCBI]                                 
         replacement...................       7,400,000       7,400,000 
        Low density radio communicaters                                 
         link..........................      29,840,000      23,840,000 
        ATC en route radar facilities..       6,748,300       6,748,300 
        En route communications and                                     
         control facilities............         918,295         918,295 
        Volcano monitor................  ..............       2,000,000 
                                        --------------------------------
          Subtotal, en route programs..     517,938,295     511,638,295 
                                        ================================
    Terminal programs:                                                  
        Terminal doppler weather radar                                  
         [TDWR]--provide...............       4,800,000       2,300,000 
        Terminal Automation Program....      40,000,000      40,000,000 
        Terminal air traffic control                                    
         facilities--replace...........      62,000,000      70,000,000 
        Air traffic control tower                                       
         [ATCT]/TRACON facilites--                                      
         improve.......................      18,631,115  ...............
        Terminal voice switch                                           
         replacement [TVSR]/enhanced                                    
         terminal voice switch.........       9,940,000       1,640,000 
        Radio control equipment........       3,000,000       3,000,000 
        Employee safety/OSHA and                                        
         environmental standards                                        
         compliance....................      43,700,000      43,700,000 
        Chicago TRACON.................       4,700,000       4,700,000 
        New Austin Airport at Bergstrom       3,700,000  ...............
        Potomac (Dulles) TRACON........       2,600,000       2,600,000 
        Denver TRACON..................       1,200,000       1,200,000 
        Northern California TRACON.....      21,700,000      21,700,000 
        Atlanta TRACON.................      15,600,000      15,600,000 
        Tower Automation Program.......       2,000,000  ...............
        Voice Recorder Replacement                                      
         Program [VRRP]................       3,000,000       3,000,000 
        NAS infrastructure management                                   
         systems [NIMS]................      26,750,000      25,350,000 
        Airport surveillance radar [ASR-                                
         9]............................      23,700,000      23,700,000 
        Terminal radar [ASR]--improve..       3,240,550       3,240,550 
        Terminal communications                                         
         improvements..................       2,189,002  ...............
                                        --------------------------------
          Subtotal, terminal programs..     292,450,667     261,730,550 
                                        ================================
    Flight service programs:                                            
        Automated surface observing                                     
         system [ASOS].................      14,850,000      24,850,000 
        FSAS operational and                                            
         supportability implementation                                  
         system [OASIS]................       4,900,000       4,900,000 
        Digital altimeter setting                                       
         indicators [DASI].............       1,600,000       1,600,000 
        Flight services facilities                                      
         improvement...................       1,418,500       1,418,500 
                                        --------------------------------
          Subtotal, flight services....      22,768,500      32,768,500 
                                        ================================
    Landing and Navigational Aids                                       
     Program:                                                           
        Very high frequency                                             
         omnidirectional radio range                                    
         [VOR] with distance measuring                                  
         equipment.....................       2,445,000       2,445,000 
        Instrument landing system                                       
         [ILS]--establish/upgrade......       3,000,000      23,000,000 
        ILS replace....................       2,200,000       2,200,000 
        Low level windshear alert                                       
         system [LLWAS]--upgrade.......       4,300,000       4,300,000 
        Runway visual range [RVR]--                                     
         establish.....................       3,500,000       3,500,000 
        Gulf of Mexico Offshore Program       3,200,000       3,200,000 
        Instrument landing system                                       
         [ILS]--replace Wilcox Cat II/                                  
         III...........................       2,745,000       2,745,000 
        Wide area augmentation system                                   
         [WAAS]........................      51,300,000      51,300,000 
        Nondirectional beacon [NDB]....       1,400,000       1,400,000 
        Navigational and landing aids--                                 
         improve.......................       2,402,538       3,357,538 
        Tactical landing systems.......  ..............      10,000,000 
        Precision approach path                                         
         indicators [PAPI].............  ..............       5,000,000 
        Juneau, AK.....................  ..............       3,500,000 
                                        --------------------------------
          Subtotal, landing and                                         
           navigational aids...........      76,492,538     115,947,538 
                                        ================================
    Other ATC facilities programs:                                      
        Alaskan NAS interfacility                                       
         communications system [ANICS].       8,600,000       8,600,000 
        Fuel storage tank replacement                                   
         and monitoring................      30,000,000      30,000,000 
        FAA buildings and equipment--                                   
         improve/modernize.............      10,000,000      10,000,000 
        Electrical power systems--                                      
         sustain/support...............      16,200,000      20,200,000 
        Air navigational aids and air                                   
         traffic control facilities                                     
         (local projects)..............       2,000,000       2,000,000 
        Airport cable loop systems.....         500,000         500,000 
        Computer-aided engineering                                      
         graphics [CAEG] replacement...       1,000,000       1,000,000 
        Aircraft and Related Equipment                                  
         Program.......................       2,000,000       2,000,000 
        Aircraft fleet modernization...       2,701,000      18,951,000 
                                        --------------------------------
          Subtotal, other ATC facility                                  
           programs....................      73,001,000      93,251,000 
                                        --------------------------------
          Total, air traffic control                                    
           facilities and equipment....     982,651,000   1,015,335,883 
                                        ================================
Nonair traffic control facilities and                                   
 equipment:                                                             
    Support equipment:                                                  
        NAS Management Automation                                       
         Program [NASMAP]..............       1,000,000       1,000,000 
        Hazardous materials management.      20,000,000       7,000,000 
        Aviation safety analysis system                                 
         [ASAS]........................      16,800,000      16,800,000 
        Operational data management                                     
         system [ODMS].................       1,600,000       1,600,000 
        Logistics support systems and                                   
         facilities [LSSF].............       9,749,000       9,749,000 
        Test equipment--maintenance                                     
         support for replacement.......         500,000         500,000 
        Integrated flight quality                                       
         assurance.....................       4,000,000       4,000,000 
        Safety performance analysis                                     
         system [SPAS].................       4,100,000       4,100,000 
        Performance enhancement system                                  
         [PENS]........................      11,000,000      11,000,000 
        National Aviation Safety Data                                   
         Analysis Center [NASDAC]......       2,000,000       2,000,000 
                                        --------------------------------
          Subtotal, support equipment..      70,749,000      57,749,000 
                                        ================================
    Training, equipment, and                                            
     facilities:                                                        
        Distance learning..............       5,500,000       5,500,000 
        National airspace system [NAS]                                  
         training facilities...........       1,500,000       1,500,000 
        Aeronautical Center training                                    
         and support facilities........       6,000,000       6,000,000 
        Airport firefighting training                                   
         [RMESTC]......................  ..............         750,000 
                                        --------------------------------
          Subtotal, training,                                           
           equipment, and facilities...      13,000,000      13,750,000 
                                        --------------------------------
          Total, nonair traffic control                                 
           facilities and equipment....      83,749,000      71,499,000 
                                        ================================
Mission support:                                                        
    System support and services:                                        
        System engineering and                                          
         development support...........      31,930,000      31,930,000 
        Program support leases.........      27,500,000      27,500,000 
        Logistics support services                                      
         [LSS].........................       6,000,000       6,000,000 
        Mike Monroney Aeronautical                                      
         Center--lease.................      15,200,000      15,200,000 
        In-plant national airspace                                      
         system [NAS] contract support                                  
         services......................       2,500,000       2,500,000 
        Transition engineering support.      44,800,000      44,800,000 
        Frequency and spectrum                                          
         engineering...................       1,500,000       1,500,000 
        Permanent change of station                                     
         [PCS] moves...................       3,800,000       3,800,000 
        FAA corporate system                                            
         architecture..................       5,200,000       5,200,000 
        Technical services support                                      
         contract [TSSC]...............      54,700,000      54,700,000 
        Resource Tracking Program [RTP]         500,000         500,000 
        Center for Advanced Aviation                                    
         System Development............      55,300,000      55,300,000 
        Year 2000 date change program..      18,000,000      18,000,000 
                                        --------------------------------
          Total, mission support.......     266,930,000     266,930,000 
                                        ================================
Personnel and related expenses.........     219,110,000     219,110,000 
                                        --------------------------------
      Total, all activities............   1,875,000,000   1,889,004,883 
------------------------------------------------------------------------

             engineering, development, test, and evaluation

    The Committee recommends $316,130,000 for various 
engineering, development, test, and evaluation activities.
    En route automation includes the display system replacement 
[DSR] as a cost-effective modification to the initial sector 
suite system [ISSS]; display channel complex rehost [DCCR], a 
low-risk contingency system; advanced en route automation 
[AERA], enhancements providing direct benefits to airway users; 
en route software development support [ERSDS], maintains 
software in existing system; en route automation equipment, 
maintains existing hardware; flight data input/output [FDIO]; 
and en route stand alone radar training system [ESARTS].

En route programs

    Aviation weather service improvements.--The Committee has 
included $23,000,000 as requested by the administration.
    The Committee is aware of a plan developed by the Port 
Authority of New York and New Jersey in concert with the 
airports and airlines serving the New York/New Jersey region to 
procure with non-Federal funds a prototype integrated terminal 
weather system [ITWS] for installation at the New York TRACON. 
This installation will act as an interim measure until FAA 
installs a production model ITWS at Federal expense at the New 
York TRACON in 2001. The Committee strongly encourages the 
Administrator to work cooperatively and expeditiously with the 
Port Authority of New York and New Jersey and the airports and 
air carriers serving the New York/New Jersey region to ensure 
that this interim equipment is installed and operational as 
soon as possible. The Committee further directs that this 
interim installation, in no way, cause the FAA to delay the 
delivery of the production model ITWS to the New York TRACON.
    Oceanic automation system.--The oceanic automation system 
is a state-of-the-art platform that would provide improved air 
traffic control over the oceans. Of the amount requested, 
$2,000,000 would be used for continued development of the data 
link component, and project, $6,000,000 for program management, 
and $24,000,000 for phase 2, which is new software development 
replacing flight data processing structure and software.

Terminal programs

    Terminal digital radar (ASR-11).--The Committee has 
provided $35,800,000 for the terminal digital radar (ASR-11) 
program, which is a joint program with the Department of 
Defense and the Federal Aviation Administration. That is 
$6,400,000 less than the administration's request of 
$42,200,000. The administration's request includes $33,000,000 
for procurement of ASR-11 units and associated support costs 
and $9,200,000 for digitizers for the ASR-8 systems. The 
Committee understands that FAA plans to buy 10 digitizers under 
the request and that the leadtime for adding digitizers to the 
ASR-8's is about 1 year. FAA's current schedule shows that 7 of 
the 10 digitizers are designated for STARS equipment that will 
not be operational before May 2001. Therefore, the Committee 
has reduced the request by $6,400,000, an amount which can be 
deferred until fiscal year 1999 with no adverse impact on the 
program.
    Terminal automation program.--The Committee has provided 
the requested $68,000,000 for the terminal automation program, 
also known as standard terminal automation replacement system 
[STARS]. The fiscal year 1998 request is the second year on the 
STARS contract. The contract was awarded in September 1996. 
Fiscal year 1998 funds will be used to test and enhance 
commercial-off-the-shelf/nondevelopmental item [COTS/NDI]-based 
automated radar terminal systems for initial use in terminal 
radar approach control facilities and to develop the final 
system capability. The STARS contract is an exceptionally 
aggressive contract and one which is heavily dependent on 
software development notwithstanding the emphasis on COTS/NDI.
    Weather systems processor.--The administration has 
requested $6,200,000 for the weather systems processor program. 
Funds in fiscal year 1998 would be used to continue limited 
production activities and to establish final production 
baseline. These processors will provide terminal weather radar 
capability at those ASR equipped airports that do not have 
terminal doppler weather radars. The Committee continues to be 
concerned that there are a number of line items in the FAA's 
facilities and equipment and research, engineering, and 
development budgets which basically are intended to produce the 
same solution.
    The administration's request includes $1,000,000 to develop 
specifications and a statement of work for the final production 
contract. The Committee understands that the FAA does not plan 
to award the final production contract until fiscal year 2001 
and so has reduced $1,000,000 from the request. FAA can defer 
costs related to the final production contract until fiscal 
year 1999, which will allow time to identify and resolve 
problems that may occur with the first eight systems and to 
decide on whether this technology or another is the best way to 
provide a weather radar solution at existing airports.

Landing and navigational aids programs

    Local area augmentation system [LAAS] for GPS.--The 
Committee has included $6,500,000 as requested by the 
administration. These funds will support development of the 
functional specification for LAAS based on the architecture to 
be selected in fiscal year 1997. Hardware and software 
fabrication and demonstration will commence to evaluate and 
validate the functional specification and minimum operational 
performance standards. As development of this system moves 
forward, the Committee urges the FAA to give serious 
consideration to installation of early production units at 
Anchorage and Fairbanks International Airports in Alaska, where 
they will have significant benefits.
    Wide area augmentation system [WAAS].--Despite serious 
concerns about rising projections of the total cost of the WAAS 
program and concerns about whether the program is being well 
managed, the Committee is including the full request for this 
program but directs that none of the fiscal year 1998 funding 
is to be obligated until the Secretary reports to the Senate 
and House Transportation Appropriations Subcommittees on the 
status and management of the program. Specifically, the 
Secretary should provide a detailed report to the Senate and 
House Appropriations Committees, including:
    (1) key program milestones and deliverables related to the 
systems, communications, software, and fielding components of 
the program and plans for developmental and operational testing 
of the system during the upcoming fiscal year;
    (2) baseline cost, schedule, and performance goals;
    (3) the probability of meeting specified milestones and 
deliverables;
    (4) a detailed assessment of the technical risks associated 
with the major components of the WAAS program and FAA's plans 
to mitigate those risks; and
    (5) a certification by the Administrator of the FAA that 
the fiscal management controls of the prime contractor and its 
major subcontractors meet or exceed accepted U.S. Government 
standards.
    Additionally, FAA shall report quarterly on actual progress 
made against the baseline cost, schedule, and performance 
goals, the justification for any deviation from the goals, and 
the impact of any deviations. Specifically, the FAA shall 
report:
    (1) current cost variances that are 10 percent or more 
above the baseline goals, reasons for the variances, and 
corrective actions that have or will be taken;
    (2) current schedule variances that are 10 percent or more 
behind the baseline schedule, reasons for the variances, and 
corrective actions that have or will be taken;
    (3) variances in performance goals from the baseline, 
reasons for the variances, and corrective actions that have or 
will be taken;
    (4) the effect of corrective actions cited above on the 
overall program cost, schedule, and performance goals;
    (5) an overall progress rating, based on specified 
criteria, that indicates whether the contractor is meeting 
cost, schedule, and technical requirements for: the total 
program, systems, communications, software, fielding, resource 
management, and program management;
    (6) description of any modifications to the WAAS cost, 
schedule, and performance baselines; and
    (7) the status of contractor staffing.
    Not later than March 1, 1998, the Comptroller General shall 
review the status of the WAAS program and submit to the Senate 
and House Committees on Appropriations a report on the results 
of the review. The report shall address the status of cost, 
schedule, and performance modifications and include a 
conclusion regarding whether the WAAS program is likely to be 
successfully carried out within the cost and schedule baseline. 
Of the funds made available for WAAS in fiscal year 1998, the 
Committee directs that FAA not obligate more than 70 percent 
until the earlier of April 1, 1998, or the date on which the 
Senate and House Transportation Appropriations Subcommittees 
advise the Administrator that the Administrator may obligate 
the remaining funds. If, after reviewing the Department's 
reports and the Comptroller General's report, the subcommittees 
do not have confidence in the progress of the WAAS contract, 
they may consider directing reprogramming of WAAS funds to the 
air traffic management subactivity to support the center/TRACON 
automation system, conflict probe, and collaborative 
decisionmaking programs.

Research, test, and evaluation equipment and facilities

    Infrared heating for aircraft deicing.--The Committee has 
added $970,000 to demonstrate infrared heating for aircraft 
deicing at the Rhinelander/Oneida County Airport. This 
technology has been tested by the FAA, and that test found that 
its application appears to be a cost-effective alternative to 
glycol for deicing aircraft and that additional testing is 
warranted. Infrared heating also offers environmental benefits 
in that its use will reduce contamination of the watershed from 
airport runoff. Rhinelander/Oneida County Airport typifies the 
small commercial airport, and the climate of the region and the 
location of the airport in northern Wisconsin are appropriate 
for further evaluation of this technology in an operational 
commercial environment. The Committee believes this project 
will move us closer to making this advanced safety technology 
available to pilots, airports, and passengers across the 
country.

              AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT

En route programs

    Aeronautical data link [ADL] applications.--The 
administration is requesting $8,000,000 to continue development 
of ADL, which will provide the infrastructure necessary to 
allow the exchange of controller-pilot communications and 
flight information services using digital technology in the en 
route, terminal, and tower environments. The Committee 
understands that the FAA has been scaling back ADL requirements 
to design a more cost-effective and affordable project and is 
assessing the project's remaining requirements. As of April 
1997, the FAA had obligated only $1,200,000 of the $17,425,000 
that Congress appropriated in fiscal year 1997 and further 
obligations were pending clarification of the program's 
direction.
    Because of uncertainty over FAA's priorities and plans for 
ADL and the time it will take to obligate available funds once 
requirement decisions are made, the Committee is recommending 
$4,000,000 for this program in fiscal year 1998, which will 
allow FAA to spend down available, unobligated balances.
    Air route traffic control center [ARTCC] improvement/plant 
modernization/space expansion.--FAA is requesting $98,551,700 
to perform needed modernization and expansion at its ARTCC's to 
accommodate new equipment that will modernize controller 
displays and communications systems. The Committee has provided 
the full request.
    Honolulu CERAP.--For the relocation of the Honolulu 
Combined Center radar approach control [CERAP], the Committee 
has included $12,100,000. The FAA has made the determination to 
relocate the CERAP to the Honolulu air traffic control tower/
terminal radar approach control at the Honolulu International 
Airport. According to the FAA, the design and construction of 
the new facility will be completed in July 1999. After 
construction of the new facility, it will take approximately 1 
year to install and test the communications and radar equipment 
and an additional 6 months to train the controllers. The CERAP 
at Honolulu International Airport is scheduled to be 
operational on January 1, 2001. The Committee has supported 
this relocation effort in the past and expects the FAA to meet 
its January 1, 2001, deadline. Any further delay of this 
relocation project is unacceptable to the Committee.
    Remote communications facilities [RCF's]--expand/create.--
RCF's enable pilots to communicate with air traffic controllers 
and flight service stations in areas where normal radio 
communications are not possible. The administration requested 
$1,440,000 to expand or relocate five existing RCF's. The 
Committee has added $1,700,000 to establish new remote 
communication outlets in five Alaska sites where air/ground 
communications are nonexistent and aviation safety is 
threatened.
    Low density radio communications link.--Congress enacted 
legislation that has resulted in the sale of aeronautical radio 
spectrum used for operation of FAA long-range radars and FAA 
microwave radio communications links. As a result of these 
sales, FAA must relinquish operation of some of its 
communication and radar systems effective January 1, 1999. FAA 
is the largest single Government user of radio spectrum, and 
each frequency assignment supports safety, capacity, and 
efficiency. Therefore, the loss of such spectrum required for 
existing and future airspace operations could have serious 
impacts on the aviation traffic services provided. The fiscal 
year 1998 request of $29,840,000 is to continue conversion of 
FAA communication facilities to higher frequencies.
    The Committee understands that about $10,000,000 of the 
request is to install filters on long-range radars and that, of 
this amount, FAA plans to obligate about $4,000,000 during 
fiscal year 1998 to install filters on newer radars and 
$6,000,000 on older radars. Before that can occur, however, the 
Committee understands that FAA has to do prototype work to 
develop the filters that can work on these radars and that work 
is expected to take through July 1998. A contract for filter 
installation will likely not be awarded until about February 
1999. Therefore, the Committee has reduced the request by 
$6,000,000 for filter installation that can be deferred until 
fiscal year 1999.
    Volcano monitor.--The Committee has included an additional 
$2,000,000 for the Alaska Volcano Observatory for equipment and 
data transmission facilities on suspect volcanoes across the 
Alaska peninsula and the Aleutian Islands. The Committee urges 
the FAA to incorporate this item in its future budget requests.

Terminal programs

    Terminal doppler weather radar [TDWR].--The administration 
is requesting $4,800,000 to complete implementation activities 
for three TDWR systems that are currently in storage. Of the 
request, about $3,800,000 is for land acquisition, facility 
construction, equipment installation and checkout, and other 
site activities associated with the San Juan, Chicago-Midway, 
and New York systems. The Committee understands that FAA is 
considering shifting the planned system from Chicago-Midway to 
Colorado Springs (in which case, the existing system at Chicago 
O'Hare will provide coverage for Chicago-Midway) and that FAA 
does not expect to have a final environmental impact statement 
for the proposed New York site until December 1997 so that the 
system is not expected to be operational until late 1999. 
Because of the uncertainties and delays with respect to the 
Chicago-Midway and New York installations, the Committee is 
recommending a $2,500,000 reduction in the request. If FAA is 
able to move forward more quickly, it should have unobligated 
funds available to proceed.
    Terminal automation program.--The administration is 
requesting $40,000,000 for this subactivity. This includes 
$37,500,000 to procure five STARS systems and six support 
systems (STARS central support complex [SCSC] and five 
operational support facilities [OSF]), $1,000,000 to replace 
old television microwave link equipment with video compression 
to maintain the integrity of the digital bright radar indicator 
tower equipment [DBRITE] signal at affected satellite towers, 
and $1,500,000 for terminal software development 
implementation.
    The Committee is very concerned about this important 
program and whether the FAA can meet the aggressive schedule it 
has set. The Committee is including the full request in order 
to provide the FAA the opportunity to demonstrate successful 
management of this program using the new acquisition authority 
the Congress provided last year.
    In April 1997, the Department sought approval to reprogram 
$10,000,000 in small reductions from a broad range of F&E 
programs to the terminal automation program in order to have 
initial production items, including the first site (Boston) and 
support systems (training and logistics), in place when the 
STARS software becomes available. Reprogramming was necessary 
because, as a result of FAA's new acquisition process, the 
contract was awarded and the software was expected to be 
available sooner than originally projected. Both the Senate and 
House Appropriations Subcommittees on Transportation agreed on 
the reprogramming of the $10,000,000, but, as a result of a 
disagreement between the subcommittees on another element of 
the proposed reprogramming, the FAA did not proceed with the 
reprogramming for the terminal automation program. The 
Committee regrets FAA's failure to reprogram the $10,000,000 
when both subcommittees agreed to that reprogramming. If a 
reprogramming is still necessary, the Committee urges the FAA 
to reprogram up to $10,000,000 as needed from F&E funds 
provided for fiscal year 1998 or prior years to the terminal 
automation system in order to meet the needs of the STARS 
program.
    The Committee stands ready to assist the FAA to resolve 
problems with this program as they are identified and as 
solutions are proposed. The Committee is not sympathetic with 
an approach that would fund two simultaneous, alternative 
approaches in the event one is not successful.
    Terminal air traffic control facilities--replace.--The 
Committee has included an additional $8,000,000 above the 
administration's request of $62,000,000. The Committee intends 
$5,000,000 of this increase to be added to $700,000 in the 
request for a new control tower at North Las Vegas, NV, in 
order to accelerate this project and $3,000,000 to be used for 
a new control tower at Martin State Airport in Maryland. Martin 
is a reliever airport for Baltimore-Washington International 
Airport with growing traffic, and its present tower is almost 
50 years old.
    Airport traffic control tower [ATCT]/TRACON facilities--
improve.--The administration is requesting $18,631,115 to 
upgrade and improve various terminal facilities and equipment 
on a continuing basis to provide an acceptable level of safe 
service and to meet current and future operational 
requirements. As of March 31, 1997, ATCT/TRACON facilities 
improvement had $36,100,000 in unobligated balances. The 
Committee understands that FAA plans to obligate only 
$23,200,000 of that amount through the end of fiscal year 1998 
and to obligate only $4,800,000 of the requested $18,631,115 in 
fiscal year 1998. Therefore, the Committee is recommending no 
new funding for this program in fiscal year 1998. FAA should 
have ample funds from previous years.
    Within the amounts available for obligation, the Committee 
urges the FAA to seriously consider installation of an upgraded 
360-degree air traffic control simulator at Chicago's O'Hare 
Airport. The existing 135-degree simulator is ill-equipped to 
handle the training needed for the new traffic control tower 
and, as a result, air traffic controllers are training on the 
job, increasing the chance for distractions to operating 
controllers and delays to the flying public.
    Terminal voice switch replacement/enhancement.--The 
Committee has reduced the requested funding for this program by 
$8,300,000. The administration's request of $9,940,000 includes 
$8,300,000 to procure 16 enhanced terminal voice switches 
[ETVS]. The Committee is recommending a reduction of $8,300,000 
because it understands that it will be at least July 1997 
before FAA completes acceptance testing of the ETVS and FAA 
already has funding for the first 100 such switches. If the 
manufacturer continues to meet its scheduled milestones, FAA 
can use prior-year unobligated funds to continue this effort.
    The Committee urges the FAA to replace the outdated 
communications system at Charlotte-Douglas Airport in North 
Carolina with the rapid deployment voice switch [RDVS], rather 
than the untested ETVS, as quickly as possible.
    New Austin Airport at Bergstrom.--The city of Austin, TX, 
is constructing a new air carrier airport at the former 
Bergstrom Air Force Base, which was closed on September 30, 
1993. The administration is requesting $3,700,000 in fiscal 
year 1998 to complete the establishment of communications 
facilities, approach/landing aids, the weather sensor 
processor, and to relocate radar and navigation equipment. The 
Committee is recommending no new funding for this program in 
fiscal year 1998 because it understands that FAA's spending 
plan for funds that have already been appropriated leave 
approximately $14,400,000 at the end of fiscal year 1998, much 
more than the requested new funding.
    Potomac TRACON.--The Committee has provided $2,600,000 for 
the Potomac TRACON. The Committee believes that the 
administration's request is sufficient to meet proposed program 
initiatives for the Potomac TRACON.
    Tower automation program.--In today's airport traffic 
control towers [ATCT], there is a proliferation of locally 
procured information display systems [IDS]. These systems 
provide airport weather and environmental information to 
controllers. These systems also exchange airport information 
with airport management, air carriers, and the National Weather 
Service. The existing IDS must be maintained and brought under 
configuration control in such a way that they can be sustained 
as a national program. The administration is requesting 
$2,000,000 in fiscal year 1998 to initiate actions to bring the 
existing IDS systems under configuration control as a national 
program and establish a maintenance program for the existing 
IDS systems.
    The Committee is concerned that FAA has yet to identify the 
program office to be responsible for implementing the IDS 
program or to develop a schedule baseline for the program. 
Moreover, the Committee understands that, after investing 
$142,800,000 in the tower automation program over the past 15 
years, the FAA decided in February 1997 to end the program 
because the agency viewed the program as a low priority. As a 
result, FAA has little to show for this multimillion-dollar 
effort.
    The Committee does not intend to provide additional funds 
for this program until the FAA develops a sound plan. If the 
FAA is ready to proceed in fiscal year 1998, it is the 
Committee's understanding that it should have sufficient 
unobligated funds from previous years to undertake the planned 
activities.
    NAS infrastructure management systems [NIMS].--The 
administration is requesting $26,750,000 to provide the next 
generation of tools, services, and operational philosophies 
that govern the management, operation, and maintenance of the 
NAS infrastructure. The Committee recommends a reduction of 
$1,400,000 from the request based on its understanding that FAA 
has revised its estimated needs in fiscal year 1998 for 
wireless communications downward by that amount.
    The Committee is concerned that, even after revising its 
estimated needs, the FAA is assuming what appear to be very 
high unit costs for wireless communication devices--
specifically, $400 per pager, $917 per cell phone, and $4,650 
per satellite phone. The Committee directs the Administrator to 
provide a justification to the Committee by August 30, 1997, 
for the unit costs it is assuming for these devices.
    Airport surveillance radar [ASR-9].--The Committee is 
including $23,700,000, as requested by the administration. 
Within the funds available, the Committee urges the FAA to give 
serious consideration to installation of an additional ASR-9 
radar at Salt Lake City International Airport. The current 
system is inhibited by the surrounding 10,000- to 12,000-foot 
mountains. As a result, aircraft approaching from the south are 
not seen until they are essentially on the boundary that 
separates approach control airspace and Salt Lake City Center 
airspace. This creates problems with approach controllers' 
ability to gauge how much traffic is coming from the south to 
blend it with the traffic arriving from the north.
    Terminal communications improvements.--The administration 
is requesting $2,189,002 for this program in fiscal year 1998. 
The Committee recommends no new funding in view of the large 
amount of unobligated funds remaining from prior years.

Flight service programs

    Automated surface observing system [ASOS].--The Committee 
has provided $24,850,000 for ASOS, $10,000,000 more than the 
administration's request.
    The Committee intends that the requested $14,850,000 will 
be used to continue commissioning systems procured through 
fiscal year 1996 and for related program management costs and 
the additional $10,000,000 will be used to procure 50 new ASOS 
units.
    Last year, the Committee discovered that FAA did not 
adequately fund the program for several years. Funding was not 
provided for connectivity lines, controller equipment, or 
operation and maintenance funds. That oversight has left the 
FAA short of assets to fund ASOS systems for nontowered 
airports. The FAA, the National Transportation Safety Board 
[NTSB], and user aviation associations have identified over 200 
sites which should be equipped with ASOS.
    While the FAA works through previously identified problems, 
the ASOS manufacturing line must remain in operation. If the 
assembly line shuts down, it will be difficult to restructure 
the manufacturing team in the future. The facts relevant to 
ASOS demonstrate that there is a requirement for more than 200 
units.
    The Committee urges the FAA to install one of these new 
ASOS units at Mitchell Airport in South Dakota to replace an 
aged AWOS at that airport, which has exceeded it design life.

Landing and navigational aids program

    Airport lighting.--The Committee is concerned about 
factors, such as mountainous terrain, poorly equipped runways, 
bad weather, and extensive darkness, that create a challenging 
aviation environment in some parts of the country. It is the 
Committee's understanding that there are technologies in 
airport lighting, such as lasers, fiber optics, and energy-
efficient lamps, that could minimize the impact of difficult 
terrain, make lighting more affordable, and could provide 
improved operational safety. The Committee urges the FAA to 
review lighting capabilities at airports affected by such 
factors and to report to the Committee by February 1, 1998, on 
recommendations for lighting improvements which could enhance 
the safety of airport operations.
    Instrument landing system [ILS] establish/upgrade.--The 
administration is requesting $3,000,000 to install previously 
procured systems and associated equipment. In recent years, the 
Congress has repeatedly provided the FAA added resources to 
purchase additional ILS equipment to meet substantial ongoing 
system requirements. This enhances safety, capacity, and 
efficiency benefits at airports. At the present time, the FAA 
has only 45 remaining contract options available to acquire ILS 
equipment meeting all its precision approach requirements and 
specifications. The Committee is increasing funding for this 
program by $20,000,000 for FAA to use to exercise remaining 
options. FAA is directed to make the new equipment available on 
an expedited basis under streamlined acquisition procedures.
    The Committee urges the FAA to install an ILS at Bessemer 
Airport, AL, and at Manistee Blacker Airport, MI. Bessemer is a 
reliever airport for Birmingham International Airport. The 
Committee understands that installation of an ILS at Bessemer 
Airport will promote economic development of the community. 
Mannistee Blacker Airport is the only airport in Michigan with 
scheduled air service under the Essential Air Service Program 
that does not have an ILS. Without an ILS, the unreliability of 
air service at Manistee Blacker seriously reduces potential 
passenger traffic.
    Navigational and landing aids--improve.--The Committee 
recommends $3,357,538 for this subactivity, an increase of 
$955,000 over the administration request. The Committee directs 
the FAA to use $875,000 of the increased funding to improve the 
Rutland, VT, State airport instrument approach by reducing the 
ceiling and visibility minima, thereby providing increased 
reliability and safety for aircraft attempting to land at the 
airport. The Committee directs that FAA provide $875,000 for 
engineering, equipment, installation, site acquisition, and 
development of procedures.
    The Committee further directs that FAA provide $80,000 to 
install a standard omnidirectional approach lighting system 
[ODALS] under the approach to runway 9 at Cordova Airport in 
Alaska to replace the existing nonstandard guidance light 
facility, which is no longer sustainable and presents a safety 
hazard to technicians.
    Tactical landing systems.--The Committee has included 
$10,000,000 to procure 10 new tactical landing systems [TLS]. 
Using existing aircraft avionics, the system is designed to 
provide both guidance commands and safety alerts to pilots. All 
instrument flight rule [IFR] equipped aircraft in the United 
States are able to use the TLS without any new modifications or 
pilot training. These systems have the potential to 
significantly improve aviation safety. The Committee intends 
that the systems be installed and tested at regional airports 
that exhibit requirements for improved airport economic 
development and safety of operation including, but not limited 
to, the Pullman-Moscow Regional Airport in Washington State; 
the Friedman Memorial Airport in Idaho; and at rural airports 
in Brigham City, Logan, Wendover, and Tooele, UT.
    Precision approach path indicators [PAPI].--The Committee 
has included $5,000,000 for the PAPI navigational aid systems. 
The Committee has included funding with the understanding that 
FAA intends to replace existing visual approach slope 
indicators with PAPI, and funds are needed to prevent existing 
production lines from being closed. These systems can be of 
particular value at remote airports in Alaska where there is 
not sufficient lighting from surroundings and snow cover often 
masks terrain features making it difficult for the pilot to 
establish the proper glide angle for landing. Therefore, the 
Committee directs the FAA to install 10 of the PAPI systems at 
remote Alaskan airport locations.
    Juneau, AK.--The Committee has included $3,500,000 to buy 
the two wind profilers currently being leased at the airport 
along with new computers and navigational aids and to install 
anemometers, which measure wind speed and direction, and for 
the costs to calibrate the new equipment. These improvements 
will enable the airport to have fewer interruptions due to bad 
weather.

Other ATC facilities programs

    Electrical power systems--sustain/support.--The Committee 
is including an additional $4,000,000 in this program to 
accelerate replacement of existing, nonsupportable engine 
generators and to replace FAA's electrical distribution system 
at Cold Bay, AK, with an underground electrical distribution 
system. The Committee is concerned about continuing power 
outages at FAA facilities that cause delays and jeopardize the 
safety of the traveling public and expects the FAA to use 
$2,000,000 of the additional funds provided to move ahead more 
quickly to install modern, more reliable backup generators in 
its facilities. The other $2,000,000 is for FAA to upgrade and 
bury its cable system in Cold Bay. The current old and outdated 
system has caused 24 out of 30 power outages in the community 
over a 10-year period. When FAA power goes down, especially 
during bad weather and nondaylight hours air service, air 
service can be dramatically affected.
    Aircraft fleet modernization.--The Committee recommends 
$18,951,000 for this subactivity, an increase of $16,250,000 
over the administration's request. The Committee directs the 
FAA to use the increased funding to exercise the option 
presently in place for the acquisition of one new modified 
Learjet 60 flight inspection and airways calibration aircraft 
under the contract presently in force between the FAA and E-
Systems. The contract was awarded to E-Systems in January 1993 
and has a total projected value, including support and exercise 
of all options, of $400,000,000. The initial contract in 1993 
was for $65,000,000 and included the purchase of two Learjet 
60's. These aircraft have been in operation for 1\1/2\ years, 
and the Committee understands that FAA is pleased with their 
performance. Exercise of the option for one additional aircraft 
will continue the fleet modernization program.

                        major equipment activity

                                         TERMINAL DOPPLER WEATHER RADAR                                         
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                   City                                 Acceptance                     Commissioning dates      
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Memphis..................................  July 1993...........................  December 1994.                 
Houston Intercontinental.................  March 1993..........................  July 1994.                     
Atlanta..................................  April 1993..........................  December 1995.                 
Washington National......................  February 1994.......................  January 1996.                  
Denver...................................  December 1993.......................  August 1995.                   
Chicago O'Hare...........................  March 1994..........................  July 1996.                     
St. Louis................................  May 1994............................  February 1995.                 
Orlando..................................  June 1994...........................  April 1996.                    
New Orleans..............................  July 1994...........................  March 1996.                    
Tampa....................................  December 1994.......................  April 1996.                    
Miami....................................  November 1995.......................  June 1996.                     
Pittsburgh...............................  December 1994.......................  May 1997.                      
Andrews AFB..............................  ...do...............................  August 1996                    
Newark...................................  ...do...............................  July 1997.                     
Boston...................................  April 1995..........................  January 1996.                  
Kansas City..............................  December 1994.......................  July 1995.                     
Detroit..................................  March 1996..........................  September 1996.                
Houston Hobby............................  August 1995.........................  July 1996.                     
Dallas/Love..............................  May 1995............................  January 1996.                  
Dallas/Fort Worth........................  June 1995...........................  June 1996.                     
Dayton...................................  May 1995............................  July 1997.                     
Wichita..................................  June 1995...........................  September 1995.                
Indianapolis.............................  July 1995...........................  October 1996.                  
Cincinnati...............................  July 1996...........................  April 1997.                    
Philadelphia.............................  ...do...............................  May 1997.                      
Phoenix..................................  March 1997..........................  April 1997.                    
Milwaukee................................  ...do...............................  May 1997.                      
Chicago Midway...........................  To be determined....................  To be determined.              
Cleveland................................  July 1996...........................  October 1996.                  
Columbus.................................  December 1996.......................  April 1997.                    
San Juan.................................  To be determined....................  To be determined.              
West Palm Beach..........................  February 1996.......................  March 1997.                    
Nashville................................  April 1997..........................  June 1997.                     
Louisville...............................  June 1997...........................  July 1997.                     
Washington Dulles........................  November 1996.......................  April 1997.                    
Charlotte................................  September 1995......................  December 1995.                 
Salt Lake City...........................  March 1997..........................  June 1997.                     
Fort Lauderdale..........................  To be determined....................  To be determined.              
Baltimore................................  November 1996.......................  May 1997.                      
Raleigh/Durham...........................  April 1997..........................  June 1997.                     
Minneapolis..............................  March 1997..........................  April 1997.                    
Oklahoma City............................  ...do...............................      Do.                        
Tulsa....................................  May 1997............................  June 1997.                     
New York City (JFK and LGA)..............  To be determined....................  To be determined.              
Las Vegas................................  To be determined....................  To be determined.              
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


              AIRPORT SURFACE DETECTION EQUIPMENT [ASDE-3]              
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Commissioning  
         Site location              Delivery date             date      
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FAA Academy \1\...............  NA...................  NA               
FAA Technical Center \2\......  NA...................  NA               
Pittsburgh, PA................  December 1989........  June 1996.       
San Francisco.................  November 1991........  October 1995.    
Dallas/Fort Worth \3\.........  February 1992........  March 1995.      
Philadelphia..................  ...do................  March 1996.      
Los Angeles \3\...............  August 1992..........  April 1995.      
Detroit.......................  ...do................  December 1994.   
Cleveland.....................  ...do................      Do.          
Boston........................  ...do................  March 1995.      
Portland......................  ...do................  December 1994.   
Atlanta.......................  September 1992.......  January 1995.    
Seattle.......................  ...do................  December 1993.   
Los Angeles \3\...............  February 1993........  February 1995.   
Denver (DIA) \3\..............  March 1993...........  May 1995.        
St. Louis.....................  December 1993........  February 1995.   
Denver (DIA) \3\..............  ...do................  October 1995.    
New York-Kennedy..............  January 1994.........  February 1995.   
Minneapolis...................  July 1994............  March 1995.      
Anchorage.....................  August 1994..........  October 1995.    
New Orleans...................  October 1994.........  September 1995.  
Baltimore.....................  November 1994........  June 1995.       
Kansas City...................  December 1994........  May 1995.        
Miami.........................  February 1995........  November 1996.   
Houston \3\...................  ...do................  August 1995.     
Memphis.......................  June 1995............  November 1997.   
Chicago.......................  June 1995............  April 1996.      
Houston \3\...................  August 1996..........  April 1997.      
Charlotte.....................  May 1999.............  November 1999.   
Louisville \4\................  January 1999.........      Do.          
Washington National...........  February 1996........  August 1997.     
Cincinnati....................  October 1995.........  September 1996.  
Dulles........................  April 1997...........  April 1998.      
San Diego.....................  November 1995........  November 1996.   
Dallas-Fort Worth \3\ \4\.....  November 1996........  November 1997.   
Andrews AFB...................  June 1999............  November 1999.   
Salt Lake City \4\............  February 1998........  February 1999.   
Las Vegas \4\.................  June 1998............  June 1999.       
New York-LaGuardia............  September 1998.......  September 1999.  
Newark........................  October 1997.........  October 1998.    
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ FAA training/field support/depot support facility.                  
\2\ To be relocated to Aeronautical Center, Oklahoma City.              
\3\ Dual sensor facilities.                                             
\4\ Assets redirected from Tampa, Raleigh-Durham, Orlando, Orange       
  County.                                                               

         Instrument landing systems--Wilcox CAT II/III--replace

        Location                                                  Runway
Newburg/Stewart AFB, NY...........................................     9
Houston, TX.......................................................    27
Oklahoma City, OK.................................................   35R
    Do............................................................    17
Greensboro, NC....................................................    23
Raleigh-Durham, NC................................................   23R
Orlando, FL.......................................................    17
Tallahassee, FL...................................................    27
Salt Lake City, UT................................................   16L
Everett, WA.......................................................   16R
JFK, NY...........................................................   22R

Note.--Changing conditions at airport locations may dictate that 
installation priorities be modified.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          Runway visual range

Yakutat, AK
Buffalo, NY
LaGuardia, NY
Norfolk, VA
Champaign, IL
Columbus, OH
Bedford, MA
Groton, CT
Salem, OR
Seattle-Boeing, WA
Everett, WA
Savannah, GA
Greensboro, NC
Lexington, KY
Alexandria, LA
Amarillo, TX
Redding, CA
Salinas, CA
Santa Rosa, CA

    Note.--Changing conditions at airport locations may dictate that 
installation priorities be modified.

                Terminal air traffic control facilities

    Funding for terminal air traffic control facilities started in 
previous years:
  Merrill, AK
  Fort Smith, AR
  Covington, KY
  Louisville, KY
  Worcester, MA
  St. Louis (ATCT), MO
  St. Paul, MN
  Roswell, NM
  Syracuse, NY
  Portland, OR
  Beaumont, TX
  Houston (Hobby), TX
  Houston (IAH), TX
  Salt Lake City (ATCT), UT
  Salt Lake City (TRACON), UT
    Phase III for terminal air traffic control facilities started in 
fiscal year 1996 and before:
  Birmingham, AL
  Newark, NJ
  St. Louis, MO
    Phase II funding for terminal air traffic control facilities 
started in fiscal year 1997 and before:
  Abilene, TX
  E. St. Louis, IL
  Seattle, WA
  Richmond, VA
  Savannah, GA
  Boston, MA
    Phase I funding for terminal air traffic control facilities to be 
started in fiscal year 1998:
  Las Vegas, NV
  Medford, OR
  Swanton, OH

            nonair traffic control facilities and equipment

    Explosive detection equipment.--The Committee continues to 
place an extremely high priority on efforts to combat the 
threat of terrorism. Although funds have not been directed in 
this appropriation specifically for acquisition of additional 
explosives detection systems, the Committee is mindful of the 
possibility that the FAA may determine that additional systems 
should be purchased during the coming year. Should that be the 
case, the Committee expects that the FAA will request the 
requisite funds in fiscal year 1998 and will request the 
Committee's approval for a reprogramming of funds to meet that 
need.
    The deployment of explosives detection equipment would be 
of particular utility at airports where there is a security 
need for 100 percent of checked baggage from tour groups or 
from cruise ships due to the fact that the baggage has been 
separated from its owner subsequent to its being packed. The 
Committee is concerned by operational problems currently being 
experienced at these airports due to the FAA's requiring that 
all tour groups baggage be hand-searched.

Support equipment

    Hazardous materials management.--The FAA must comply with 
all Federal, State, interstate, and local pollution control 
statutes in the same manner and to the same degree as any other 
person or entity. In 1998, the FAA began implementing a program 
in compliance with Federal regulations to identify and clean up 
environmental contamination at FAA facilities. The 
administration is requesting $20,000,000 for continuation of 
the program.
    The Committee understands that FAA officials were not able 
to respond to a request from the General Accounting Office for 
information on the status of activity at the 116 sites or for a 
spending plan to show past, current, and future projects and 
how $17,500,000 in unobligated funds from fiscal years 1996 and 
1997 and the requested $20,000,000 in fiscal year 1998 are to 
be spent. In view of the large unobligated balances, the 
Committee is recommending a reduction of $13,000,000 from the 
request level for this program in fiscal year 1998. The 
Committee urges the Administrator to review this program and be 
sure that it is under good management and that funds previously 
appropriated are being used to clean up contaminated sites.

Training, equipment and facilities

    Firefighting training [RMESTC].--The Committee is 
recommending an additional $750,000 for additional training 
equipment for the Rocky Mountain Services Training Center 
[RMESTC]. RMESTC was created with FAA funds of $7,000,000 to 
provide specialized training and certification in fighting and 
preventing aircraft fires at class A, B, and C airports across 
the country. Those classes of airports account for 68 percent 
of all certified airports in the United States. The funding 
provided in fiscal year 1998 will expand the training 
capabilities to provide training for all emergency personnel. 
The local community will provide 37.5 percent of the expansion.
    Converging runway display aid.--The Committee is disturbed 
by the continuing delays in the implementation of a fully 
operational converging runway display aid [CRDA] at the New 
York TRACON. The Committee recognizes that the system has now 
been installed but the FAA is seeking to resolve automation 
interface problems. The Committee requests the Administrator to 
make every possible effort to bring the newly installed CRDA 
into full operation as soon as possible.

                         advance appropriations

    The Committee has not included the advance appropriations 
for fiscal years 1999 through 2005 requested by the 
administration. There has been substantial uncertainty and 
change with respect to projects financed through the 
``Facilities and equipment'' account, and the Committee 
believes that continuing, annual congressional review of the 
status and funding needs of these projects is critical.

                 Research, Engineering, and Development

                    (Airport and Airway Trust Fund)

Appropriations, 1997....................................    $208,412,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................     200,000,000
Committee recommendation................................     214,250,000

    This appropriation finances research, engineering, and 
development programs to improve the national air traffic 
control system by increasing its safety, security, 
productivity, and capacity. The programs are designed to meet 
the expected air traffic demands of the future and to promote 
flight safety. The major objectives are to keep the current 
system operating safely and efficiently; to protect the 
environment; and to modernize the system through improvements 
in facilities, equipment, techniques, and procedures in order 
to insure that the system will safely and efficiently handle 
the volume of aircraft traffic expected to materialize in the 
future.
    The bill includes $214,250,000 for research, engineering, 
and development. This level is $14,250,000 above the budget 
request. The Committee suggests the following allocation:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Fiscal year    Fiscal year                
                                                                          1997       1998 budget     Committee  
                                                                     appropriation    estimate    recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
System development and infrastructure:                                                                          
    System planning and resource management........................     $1,860,000    $1,164,000     $1,164,000 
    Technical laboratory facility..................................      6,600,000     3,341,000      3,341,000 
    Center for advanced aviation system development [CAASD]........      5,200,000     5,444,000      5,444,000 
    Personnel and related expenses.................................  .............    65,601,000     65,601,000 
                                                                    --------------------------------------------
      Subtotal.....................................................     13,660,000    75,550,000     75,550,000 
                                                                    ============================================
Capacity and air traffic management technology:                                                                 
    Traffic flow management........................................      4,000,000     2,986,000      2,986,000 
    Oceanic automation program.....................................      6,539,000  ............  ..............
    Runway incursion reduction.....................................      6,000,000     2,990,000      2,990,000 
    System capacity, planning, and improvements....................      8,950,000     1,367,000      1,367,000 
    Cockpit technology.............................................      3,000,000     1,765,000      1,765,000 
    General Aviation and Vertical Technology Flight Program........      2,600,000  ............  ..............
    Modeling, analysis, and simulation.............................      3,800,000  ............  ..............
                                                                    --------------------------------------------
      Subtotal.....................................................     34,889,000     9,108,000      9,108,000 
                                                                    ============================================
Communications, navigation, and surveillance:                                                                   
    Communications.................................................      6,000,000     4,706,000      4,706,000 
    Navigation.....................................................     13,000,000    10,426,000     10,426,000 
                                                                    --------------------------------------------
      Subtotal.....................................................     19,000,000    15,132,000     15,132,000 
                                                                    ============================================
Weather............................................................     13,000,000     3,982,000      8,982,000 
Airport technology.................................................      5,200,000     5,458,000      5,458,000 
Aircraft safety technology:                                                                                     
    Fire research and safety.......................................      6,993,000     2,049,000      2,049,000 
    Advanced materials/structural safety...........................      3,065,000     1,700,000      1,700,000 
    Propulsion and fuel systems....................................      3,400,000     1,691,000      1,691,000 
    Flight safety/atmospheric hazards research.....................      2,063,000     1,660,000      1,660,000 
    Aging aircraft.................................................     13,889,000    12,966,000     20,966,000 
    Aircraft catastrophic failure prevention research..............      3,094,000     1,270,000      1,270,000 
    Aviation safety risk analysis..................................      4,000,000     5,289,000      5,289,000 
                                                                    --------------------------------------------
      Subtotal.....................................................     36,504,000    26,625,000     34,625,000 
                                                                    ============================================
System security technology:                                                                                     
    Explosives and weapons detection...............................     41,397,000    36,200,000     37,450,000 
    Airport security technology integration........................      3,758,000     4,000,000      4,000,000 
    Aviation security human factors................................      5,039,000     4,695,000      4,695,000 
    Aircraft hardening.............................................      6,861,000     5,000,000      5,000,000 
                                                                    --------------------------------------------
      Subtotal.....................................................     57,055,000    49,895,000     51,145,000 
                                                                    ============================================
Human factors and aviation medicine:                                                                            
    Flightdeck/maintenance/system integration human factors........     10,898,000     7,272,000      7,272,000 
    Air traffic control/airway facilities human factors............      8,606,000     3,078,000      3,078,000 
    Aeromedical research...........................................      4,000,000       387,000        387,000 
                                                                    --------------------------------------------
      Subtotal.....................................................     23,504,000    10,737,000     10,737,000 
                                                                    ============================================
Environment and energy.............................................      3,600,000     2,891,000      2,891,000 
Innovative/cooperative research....................................      2,000,000       622,000        622,000 
                                                                    ============================================
      Total........................................................    208,412,000   200,000,000    214,250,000 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The objectives of and Committee recommendations for the 10 
major activities in FAA's Research, Engineering, and 
Development Program are discussed below.

                 system development and infrastructure

    Objectives: To provide (1) a systems engineering approach 
and benefit/cost analyses to the development of a comprehensive 
research, engineering, and development program and (2) 
visibility, accountability, coordination, and control of the 
research, engineering, and development activities.
    Advisory committee.--The Aviation Safety Research Act of 
1988 directed FAA to establish an advisory committee to provide 
a strategic look at those research and development efforts that 
would encourage FAA to take advantage of current technology and 
interface with activities being performed with other Government 
agencies and research laboratories. The Committee believes that 
this is a good use of Federal funds and has fully funded the 
$1,164,000 requested for system planning and resource 
management, which includes support for the FAA RE&D advisory 
committee and the Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics 
[RTCA].
    FAA Technical Center--Laboratory.--The administration's 
request was $3,341,000 for work at the FAA Technical Center. 
The Committee fully funds the administration's request.
    Center for Advanced Aviation Systems Development [CAASD].--
The Committee fully funds CAASD, which is for the Mitre support 
contract.
    Personnel and related expenses.--The Committee has provided 
$65,601,000, as requested by the administration. The Committee 
believes that including personnel and related expenses as a 
separate line item in R,E&D, rather than spreading them across 
all the individual program budget line items, ensures greater 
accountability for these costs and provides greater flexibility 
for FAA to reallocate R,E&D in-house staffing resources to high 
priority research programs in a timely fashion. This treatment 
also parallels the treatment of these costs in the facilities 
and equipment account.

             capacity and air traffic management technology

    Objectives: To ensure that air traffic management 
operations safety is maintained and then improved, to increase 
system capacity and utilization of existing airspace and 
airport resources, and to accommodate greater user flexibility 
and efficiency.

              communications, navigation, and surveillance

    Objectives: To develop and exploit high-quality 
communications, navigation, and surveillance services and make 
them available anywhere on the surface of the Earth, using 
satellite and data-link technologies when they are cost 
effective.

                                weather

    Objectives: To improve the timeliness and accuracy of 
weather forecasting in order to enhance flight safety, increase 
system capacity, improve flight efficiency, reduce air traffic 
control [ATC] and pilot workload, improve flight planning, and 
increase productivity.
    The Committee recommends $8,982,000 for the weather 
program, a $5,000,000 increase over the administration's 
request. This increase reflects the Committee's concern about 
the impact of weather on aviation safety and the need to 
continue an aggressive program of research and development. The 
funds the Committee has added to this program are intended to 
continue FAA's sensor for optically characterized ring-eddy 
atmospheric turbulence emanating sound [Project SOCRATES]. 
Project SOCRATES is the only ongoing project in the FAA to 
develop a new sensor technology aimed at improving air 
passenger safety by early detection of atmospheric hazards, 
including wind shear, wake vortex, and clear air turbulence.

                           airport technology

    Objectives: To provide new and improved standards, 
criteria, and guidelines to plan, design, construct, operate, 
and maintain the Nation's airports, heliports, and vertiports.

                       aircraft safety technology

    Objectives: To develop technologies, standards, and 
maintenance regulations that maintain or improve aircraft 
safety in an evolving, changing, and demanding aviation 
environment.
    Aging aircraft.--The Committee has provided $20,966,000 for 
FAA's research in the aging aircraft area, $8,000,000 more than 
the administration's request. This research supports airborne 
data monitoring systems, corrosion fatigue research, the Center 
for Aviation Systems Reliability [CASR], and the Aging Aircraft 
Nondestructive Inspection Validation Center [AANC], which 
conduct research in these areas. The Committee is concerned 
that the administration's request for this line item would hold 
aging aircraft research at a no-growth posture, which would 
severely strain the aging aircraft program. The administration 
request does not follow through on the recent Gore Commission 
report recommending that the aging aircraft program be 
increased to cover nonstructural systems. The Committee 
recommendation includes the $3,000,000 in the administration's 
request for direct support of the AANC's work. Of the request 
level, the Committee expects $1,000,000 to be available for 
aging aircraft-related activities at CASR. The additional 
funding above the request includes $6,000,000 to support the 
Airworthiness Assurance Center of Excellence, which the FAA is 
forming to integrate inspection, crashworthiness, and advanced 
materials research efforts of university programs with the 
validation efforts of the AANC. This center will work with 
industry in a comprehensive effort to improve the safety of 
aging aircraft. Of the total funds provided, the Committee 
directs that $4,400,000 be used to further the engine titanium 
inspection component of this line item.

                       system security technology

    Objectives: To enhance the security of passengers and crews 
in all aspects of aircraft, airports, and related ATC 
facilities by developing systems that prevent or deter 
terrorist activities.
    Explosives and weapons detection.--The Committee has 
provided $37,450,000 for the explosives and weapons detection 
line item. This activity is used to conduct research in trace 
and bulk detection of explosives and cargo screening. This is 
$1,250,000 more than the administration's request, and the 
Committee notes that it is in addition to $197,600,000 for 
airport security improvements, including research and 
development and placement of existing systems in airports, 
included in the Omnibus Consolidated Appropriations Act for 
Fiscal Year 1997.
    To date, the FAA has certified only one explosives 
detection system [EDS] for use in airports.
    The Committee believes that FAA's R,E&D efforts to identify 
and develop alternative technologies are very important. The 
Committee believes that a new technology using a neutron probe, 
which determines the number and ratio of atoms of hydrogen, 
carbon, nitrogen, and oxygen in small volumes throughout a 
suitcase and uses that information to identify contraband 
substances such as explosives and drugs, has potential worth 
further exploration. Therefore, the Committee has included an 
additional $1,250,000 in this line item to continue development 
of this technology.

                  human factors and aviation medicine

    Objectives: To establish ways to improve the effectiveness 
of human performance in the operation of the aviation system 
and to seek better methods for preventing human error, 
accidents, and incidents.

                         environment and energy

    Objectives: To protect the environment, conserve energy, 
and keep the U.S. air transportation industry strong and 
competitive.

                    innovative/cooperative research

    Objectives: To maximize the total effectiveness of 
research, engineering, and development by incorporating the 
efforts of other Government agencies, the industry, and 
universities.

                       Grants-in-Aid for Airports

                (Liquidation of Contract Authorization)

                    (Airport and Airway Trust Fund)

Appropriations, 1997....................................  $1,500,000,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................   1,500,000,000
Committee recommendation................................   1,600,000,000

    The Airport and Airway Improvement Act of 1982, as amended, 
authorizes a program of grants to fund airport planning and 
development and noise compatibility planning and projects for 
public use airports in all States and territories.
    The Committee recommends $1,600,000,000 in liquidating cash 
for grants-in-aid for airports. This is consistent with the 
Committee's obligation limitation on airport grants for fiscal 
year 1998 and for the payment of previous years' obligations.

                       Grants-in-Aid for Airports

                    (Airport and Airway Trust Fund)

                      (Limitation on Obligations)

Limitation, 1997........................................  $1,460,000,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................   1,000,000,000
Committee recommendation................................   1,700,000,000

    The bill also includes a limitation on obligations for 
airport development and planning grants which are financed 
under contract authority. The limitation recommended for fiscal 
year 1998 is $1,700,000,000. This is $700,000,000--70 percent--
above the budget request.
    The recommended amount is intended to be sufficient to 
continue the important tasks of enhancing airport safety, 
ensuring that airport standards can be met, maintaining 
existing airport capacity, and developing additional capacity.
    The Committee is concerned that the administration's 
request for the AIP program reflects an under appreciation of 
the importance of airports to the national aviation system or 
an under appreciation of the importance of Federal grant 
funding to the maintenance and improvement of those airports. 
The level that the Committee has proposed will mean more money 
for airports in all the States. The table below shows estimates 
of the entitlement and State allocation grant funds that each 
State would receive under the administration proposal and the 
recommendation of the Committee. This does not include 
discretionary funds, which would also be greater under the 
Committee recommendation.

                                AIRPORT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FORMULA DISTRIBUTIONS                               
                         [Estimated fiscal year 1998 entitlement and State allocations]                         
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Total formula funds at       Formula funds
                              State                              --------------------------------     $1.7-$1   
                                                                   $1.7 billion    $1.0 billion       billion   
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama.........................................................     $11,004,479      $6,682,682      $4,321,796
Alaska..........................................................      44,350,159      24,998,463      19,351,697
Arizona.........................................................      19,095,831      11,929,955       7,165,876
Arkansas........................................................       8,029,555       4,794,814       3,234,741
California......................................................      83,851,933      54,213,702      29,638,231
Colorado........................................................      19,235,928      12,231,967       7,003,961
Connecticut.....................................................       5,417,951       3,304,385       2,113,566
Delaware........................................................         517,703         224,865         292,838
District of Columbia............................................         381,786         165,829         215,957
Florida.........................................................      41,243,479      27,217,140      14,026,340
Georgia.........................................................      28,167,195      18,806,335       9,360,860
Hawaii..........................................................      18,488,484      13,357,783       5,130,701
Idaho...........................................................       8,997,222       5,371,466       3,625,755
Illinois........................................................      26,022,923      16,297,124       9,725,799
Indiana.........................................................      10,790,020       6,444,012       4,346,008
Iowa............................................................      10,188,732       6,268,337       3,920,395
Kansas..........................................................       8,377,939       4,651,680       3,726,259
Kentucky........................................................      11,686,785       7,407,296       4,279,489
Louisiana.......................................................      11,790,052       7,273,937       4,516,115
Maine...........................................................       5,971,057       3,731,383       2,239,674
Maryland........................................................       6,916,271       4,041,803       2,874,468
Massachusetts...................................................      11,673,389       7,358,121       4,315,268
Michigan........................................................      24,610,408      15,151,917       9,458,491
Minnesota.......................................................      13,885,156       8,301,942       5,583,215
Mississippi.....................................................       8,224,316       4,960,326       3,263,990
Missouri........................................................      14,398,722       8,759,167       5,639,554
Montana.........................................................      12,183,371       6,942,332       5,241,039
Nebraska........................................................       9,190,478       5,485,990       3,704,488
Nevada..........................................................      12,279,032       7,408,488       4,870,544
New Hampshire...................................................       3,125,629       1,977,388       1,148,241
New Jersey......................................................      11,074,394       6,604,424       4,469,969
New Mexico......................................................       9,732,441       5,325,934       4,406,506
New York........................................................      37,153,530      23,327,631      13,825,899
North Carolina..................................................      25,025,635      16,539,422       8,486,212
North Dakota....................................................       6,346,247       3,650,213       2,696,034
Ohio............................................................      17,935,169      10,605,152       7,330,017
Oklahoma........................................................      10,147,566       5,990,962       4,156,604
Oregon..........................................................      12,424,797       7,378,618       5,046,179
Pennsylvania....................................................      28,715,422      18,352,654      10,362,768
Rhode Island....................................................       3,765,662       2,574,237       1,191,425
South Carolina..................................................      11,419,406       7,366,023       4,053,383
South Dakota....................................................       6,749,110       3,853,858       2,895,252
Tennessee.......................................................      12,297,112       7,609,298       4,687,814
Texas...........................................................      75,232,235      48,875,751      26,356,484
Utah............................................................       8,675,888       4,981,011       3,694,877
Vermont.........................................................       2,245,261       1,426,717         818,543
Virginia........................................................      18,292,784      11,786,080       6,506,704
Washington......................................................      15,956,001       9,945,725       6,010,275
West Virginia...................................................       5,675,992       3,537,287       2,138,706
Wisconsin.......................................................      13,976,575       8,535,261       5,441,315
Wyoming.........................................................       8,266,749       4,760,942       3,505,807
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      Total.....................................................     831,203,960     518,787,831     312,416,129
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note.--States allocation includes: General aviation, reliever, and nonprimary commercial service airports and is
  based on 1997 distribution.                                                                                   
Entitlement funds are those distributed to commercial service airports based on enplanements. Estimates are     
  based on 1996 enplanements.                                                                                   

    The Committee notes that a sizable alternative source of 
funding is now available to airports in the form of passenger 
facility charges [PFC's]. The first PFC charge began for 
airlines tickets issued on June 1, 1992. DOT data shows that as 
of January 1, 1997, 262 airports have been approved for 
collection of PFC's in the amount of $14,000,000,000. During 
calendar year 1996, airports collected $1,050,000,000 in PFC 
charges and $1,080,000,000 is estimated to be collected in 
calendar year 1997. Of the airports collecting PFC's, over 20 
percent collected about 85 percent of the total, and all of 
these are either large or medium hub airports. DOT estimates 
that airports will collect more than $900,000,000 in calendar 
year 1998, depending on the number of applications received and 
approved.
    While large hubs collected most of the PFC funds during the 
last 2 years, small airports also benefited from these 
collections because of the redistribution mechanism in the PFC 
legislation. According to the provision, an airport collecting 
PFC's must have its apportionment under the AIP grant program 
reduced by 50 percent of the forecast PFC revenue, but the 
reduction cannot be more than one-half of the airport's earned 
apportionment for that fiscal year. FAA then redistributes 
these returned trust funds primarily to small airports. For 
example, in fiscal 1997 $123,000,000 that would have been 
distributed as grants based on passenger enplanements to PFC-
charging airports is being redistributed to small airports. In 
redistributing these funds, FAA provides three-quarters of the 
total to the small airport fund, another 12.5 percent is 
available to small hubs, and the remaining 12.5 percent goes to 
FAA's discretionary account that can be provided to small, 
medium, or large airports.

                    AIP FUNDING FOR FISCAL YEAR 1998                    
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Committee   
                                       Budget estimate   recommendation 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriation limitation............    $1,000,000,000    $1,700,000,000
Entitlements:                                                           
    Primary airports................       392,445,465       531,483,478
    Cargo airports (2.5 percent)....        18,459,909        42,500,000
    Alaska supplemental.............        10,672,557        10,672,557
    States (18.5 percent)...........       136,603,326       314,500,000
    Carryover entitlements..........        61,866,629        61,866,629
                                     -----------------------------------
      Subtotal entitlements.........       620,047,886       961,022,664
                                     ===================================
Returned entitlements: Small airport                                    
 fund...............................        70,129,936        94,976,005
Discretionary set-asides:                                               
    Noise...........................        20,830,466       200,000,000
    Military airport program........         2,687,802        26,000,000
    General aviation/reliever/                                          
     nonprimary commercial..........  ................        39,533,622
Other discretionary:                                                    
    Capacity/safety/security/noise..       205,961,690       271,978,781
    Small hubs......................        11,688,323        15,829,334
    Remaining discretionary.........        68,653,897        90,659,594
                                     -----------------------------------
      Subtotal other discretionary..       286,303,910       378,467,709
                                     ===================================
      Total entitlement.............       620,047,886       961,022,664
      Total discretionary...........       379,952,114       738,977,336
                                     -----------------------------------
      Grand total...................     1,000,000,000     1,700,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          DISCRETIONARY GRANTS

    As the table above illustrates, the administration's 
proposed level of $1,000,000,000 for AIP grants would mean a 
very small amount of discretionary grant funds--about 
$380,000,000, compared to about $555,000,000 in the current 
fiscal year. At a level of $1,700,000,000 for the total AIP 
program, as recommended by the Committee, there is a 94-percent 
increase in discretionary funds--to almost $740,000,000. At 
this level, the authorization legislation would normally cause 
a transfer from the other discretionary programs--specifically, 
the discretionary account for capacity, safety, security, and 
noise and the remaining discretionary funds, which are critical 
in meeting commitments under letters of intent and advancing 
projects that have systemwide benefits--to the set-asides for 
noise, the military airport program, and a set-aside for 
general aviation, reliever, and nonprimary commercial airports. 
The latter category provides additional funds for airports that 
are most dependent on Federal assistance to make safety and 
capacity improvements. But, without caps, the set-asides for 
noise and the military airport program would increase to more 
than $239,000,000 and $65,290,000, respectively. Those would 
represent increases of two-thirds and one-half, respectively, 
over the set-asides for these purposes in the current fiscal 
year. In the Committee's judgment, a cap on the transfer to 
these two set-asides would result in a better allocation of 
resources to meet the airport capital investment needs that 
most impact air travelers today. Therefore, the Committee has 
recommended bill language that caps the noise set-aside at 
$200,000,000 and the military airport set-aside at $26,000,000.
    The Committee has carefully considered a broad array of 
discretionary grant requests that can be expected in fiscal 
year 1998. Since there would have been so little discretionary 
funds under the administration's request to meet these 
anticipated needs and the Committee's recommendation would 
significantly increase that amount, the Committee expects the 
Administrator to give great deference to the Committee's 
recommendations for discretionary grants in fiscal year 1998. 
Specifically, the Committee expects the FAA to give priority 
consideration to grant applications for the projects listed 
below in the categories of discretionary grants for which they 
are eligible. If funds in the remaining discretionary category 
are used for any projects in fiscal year 1998 that are not 
listed below, the Committee expects that they will be for 
projects for which FAA has issued letters of intent (including 
letters of intent the Committee recommends below that the FAA 
issue), or for projects that will produce significant aviation 
safety improvements or significant improvements in systemwide 
capacity or otherwise have a very high benefit/cost ratio and 
for which the Administrator has provided documentation of such 
improvements or high benefit/cost ratio to the Senate and House 
Committees on Appropriations at least 30 days before grant 
award.
    Abbeville Municipal Airport, AL.--Abbeville has several 
major corporations employing thousands of people located in 
close proximity to the Abbeville Municipal Airport, which is in 
such disrepair that it is almost unusable. These corporations 
all have their own private jets and need a facility close by 
for their senior management and for their middle management 
teams from other regions to be able to get to the plants 
quickly for inspection and management. The Committee directs 
the FAA to give priority consideration to requests for 
discretionary funding for projects to bring the airport up to 
FAA standards for private aircraft. These projects will help 
keep current industries from relocating and will help attract 
new industry.
    Austin Straubel International Airport, WI.--Runway and 
airfield pavements at Austin Straubel Airport in Green Bay, WI, 
are exhibiting various types of distress beyond the point where 
routine maintenance can control foreign object debris. In 1996, 
the Wisconsin DOT Bureau of Aeronautics recommended immediate 
attention to this problem in order to maintain a level of 
serviceability and safety commensurate with Austin Straubel's 
importance to the region and the State. The Committee directs 
the FAA to give priority consideration to a request for 
discretionary funds for pavement repair.
    Birmingham International Airport, AL.--The Committee notes 
that improvements planned at Birmingham International Airport 
will improve airport capacity and safety. A passenger facility 
charge [PFC] was recently approved to fund the rebuild of 
runway 5/23, but the planned improvements will require more 
funds than the PFC and Airport Improvement Program [AIP] 
entitlement grants to the airport will provide. The Committee 
directs the FAA to give priority consideration to grant 
requests for runway, taxiway, and apron improvements at the 
airport and for construction of a new perimeter road to reduce 
the number of vehicles crossing runways and taxiways and 
enhance safety.
    Broome County Airport, NY.--The Committee directs the FAA 
to give priority consideration to requests for discretionary 
funding for renovations of the terminal building.
    City of Inglewood, CA--Darby/Dixon noise mitigation.--
Located 2 miles from Los Angeles International Airport and 
beneath the landing and approaches for the airport's north and 
south runways, the city of Inglewood has pursued an aggressive 
noise mitigation strategy for many years. In those 
neighborhoods suffering from aircraft noise, the city has 
removed blighted housing and cleared the sites for more 
compatible commercial and industrial developments. The 
Committee directs the FAA to give priority consideration to 
requests for discretionary funding to purchase 284 units in the 
Darby/Dixon neighborhood and relocate the tenants to safe and 
decent housing to make way for new commercial development.
    Colorado Springs Airport, CO.--The Colorado Springs Airport 
continues to be the fastest growing airport in the United 
States. The airport, which shares its facilities with several 
military installations including Peterson Air Force Base, has 
experienced more than a 210-percent increase in passenger use 
since March 1995. With the advent of a new carrier, Western 
Pacific Airlines, and the expansion of other major carrier 
services, growth continues to skyrocket. Because of this 
tremendous growth, however, the Colorado Springs Airport is 
functioning far beyond its intended capacity. Numerous 
improvements are now needed to ensure the airport's 
functionality and safety. The Committee directs the FAA to give 
priority consideration to requests for discretionary funding 
for construction of taxiway ``C,'' completion of taxiway ``H,'' 
rehabilitation of taxiway ``A,'' and completion of taxiway 
``F.'' The Committee believes these projects would be an 
effective use of funds and will provide significant benefits to 
the Nation's aviation system.
    Dane County Regional Airport, WI.--New runway 3/21 at Dane 
County Regional Airport is a critical noise reduction measure 
for the high density residential areas of the city of Madison, 
WI. Runway 3/21 will direct aircraft overflights away from the 
heavily populated areas south of the airport and increase the 
safety of aircraft operations. The Committee directs the FAA to 
give priority consideration to a request for discretionary 
funds, which will leverage other financing for the project, 
which includes land acquisition, construction management, 
preparation of plans and specifications, environmental 
mitigation and construction of runway 3/21 and associated 
taxiways.
    Dona County Airport, NM.---The Committee directs the FAA to 
give priority consideration to requests for discretionary 
funding to widen taxiways and throat area, install highly 
elevated lights that would illuminate the ramp area, and to 
pave the parking area. These projects would allow the Dona 
County Airport facility to support full scale intermodal 
activity.
    Fairbanks International Airport, AK.--Fairbanks 
International Airport is a key international refueling point 
for international cargo and other flights. The airport needs 
improvements in a number of areas to be able to continue to 
serve international and domestic air travel demand. The 
Committee directs the FAA to give priority consideration to 
requests for discretionary funding for access ramps, terminal 
modernization, taxiways, and runway expansions.
    Global Transpark Airport, NC.--The Global Transpark, an 
integrated industrial and multimodal transportation and 
distribution facility in eastern North Carolina, needs to 
expand its runway to meet the cargo demands at the facility. 
The State has committed funds to the project, and the Committee 
directs the FAA to give priority consideration to a request for 
discretionary funds to support the runway expansion.
    Greater Orlando Aviation Authority, Florida.--The Committee 
directs priority consideration for planned improvements to 
Greater Orlando Airport, one of the fastest growing airports in 
the country.
    Gulfport-Biloxi Regional Airport, MS.--The Committee 
directs the FAA to give priority consideration to requests for 
discretionary funding to upgrade and provide improvements to a 
runway at Gulfport-Biloxi Regional Airport in cooperation with 
the Air National Guard, which will provide military 
construction funding as its share of improvements required to 
serve commercial air service and Air National Guard training at 
the airport.
    Hancock International Airport, Syracuse, NY.--The Committee 
directs the FAA to give priority consideration to requests for 
discretionary funding for a parallel runway and for drainage 
improvements.
    Huntsville International Airport, AL.--A 1996 update to the 
Huntsville International Airport master plan provides a 
blueprint for orderly development of an airport cited by the 
FAA as one of four potential new connecting hubs and the only 
one of the four in the Southeast United States. A major 
component of the master plan update is a land acquisition 
program of undeveloped property designed to protect the airport 
from encroachment by incompatible land uses and position the 
airport to take advantage of future development opportunities. 
The Huntsville-Madison County Airport Authority proceeded with 
the planned land acquisition and then sought FAA approval to 
impose and use PFC revenues for reimbursement of the land 
acquisition costs, in addition to other uses. The Committee was 
disappointed by FAA's determination that this reimbursement was 
not eligible for use of PFC revenues. In view of the impact of 
this determination on the airport's development plans, the 
Committee expects the FAA to give priority consideration to any 
future land acquisition efforts and any discretionary grant 
requests for development projects at the airport that are 
included in the master plan update.
    Jackson Municipal Airport, MS.--The Committee directs the 
FAA to give priority consideration to a request for 
discretionary funding to construct phase 1 of additional apron 
to accommodate international and domestic air cargo service at 
a new air cargo park.
    LaCrosse Municipal Airport, WI.--The Committee understands 
that the primary runway 18/36 at LaCrosse Municipal Airport has 
exceeded its useful life and is showing signs of serious 
deterioration. The Committee directs the FAA to give priority 
consideration to a request for discretionary funds to 
reconstruct the runway as soon as possible so that there is 
minimum disruption to the airport's regularly scheduled airline 
traffic.
    Lancaster Airport, PA.--The Lancaster Airport is in the 
bottom 20 percent of air carrier airports in terms of air 
carrier runway length. The main runway lacks 1,000-foot 
extended runway safe areas (overruns) which are required by FAA 
safety standards. The runway length limits most corporate 
aircraft to 60 percent of their useful loads and results in 
diversions to alternate airports in adverse weather. The 
Committee directs the FAA to give priority consideration to a 
request for discretionary funds for the necessary work to 
extend the runway in order to improve safety and economic 
growth and reduce airport noise impacts.
    Laughlin/Bullhead Airport, NV.--The Committee is aware that 
the leveling of a hillside bordering the current runway and 
expansion of the runway will facilitate the arrival and 
departure of larger aircraft and thereby provide the airlines 
the opportunity to transport the rapidly growing number of 
tourists and visitors to the Laughlin/Bullhead City area. The 
Committee directs the FAA to give this project priority 
consideration.
    Lexington Airport, NC.--The airport is in the midst of a 
$14,000,000 plan to build a new airport on the site of the old 
facility. The new runway will cross the old runway and will 
thus necessitate the closure of the airport during construction 
that is expected to last for 1 year. The Committee directs the 
FAA to give priority consideration to requests for 
discretionary funds to accelerate construction and shorten the 
period during which the airport will be closed.
    Long Island-MacArthur Airport, NY.--The Committee directs 
the FAA to give priority consideration to requests for 
discretionary funding for an apron expansion in the area south 
of the west concourse.
    Manistee Blacker Airport, MI.--The Committee is 
recommending that the FAA seriously consider installing an 
instrument landing system [ILS] at the Manistee Blacker Airport 
in northern Michigan to improve the reliability of air service 
to that community. The Committee directs the FAA to give 
priority consideration to requests for discretionary funding 
for land acquisition for installation of the ILS and 
construction of a parallel runway.
    Mesquite Airport, NV.--The Committee is aware that the 
Clark County, NV, Department of Aviation is conducting a site 
selection, airport master plan and an environmental assessment 
for a commercial airport to be located near Mesquite, NV. While 
this work was initiated in fiscal year 1997, the Committee 
directs the FAA to give priority consideration to a request for 
discretaionary funding to reimburse the Clark County Department 
of Aviation for these studies.
    Montgomery County Airport Authority, Pennsylvania.--
Montgomery County, PA, has established an airport authority to 
acquire and improve Wings Field, a private airport in the 
Philadelphia metropolitan area. The airport operates over 
42,000 flights each year and is rapidly expanding. The airport 
is vital to regional economic development and relied upon by 
local businesses. The Committee directs the FAA to give 
priority consideration to requests for discretionary grant 
funding to expand Wings Field.
    Ogden-Hinckley Airport, UT.--Ogden-Hinckley serves as the 
primary reliever and weather divert for Salt Lake City 
International Airport. The Committee continues to urge the FAA, 
as it has in past years, to give priority consideration to 
requests for discretionary funding for the upgrade of terminal 
facilities at Ogden-Hinckley Municipal Airport to meet the 
security needs of passengers in fulfilling its role as a 
weather divert destination and to prepare the facility for the 
transportation needs associated with the 2002 Winter Olympics.
    Oxford/University Airport, Oxford, MS.--There is a serious 
safety concern at the Oxford/University Airport as it strains 
to meet growing traffic demands with increasingly outdated 
equipment. The airport is in need of a new terminal building 
and the relocation of fuel tanks that in their present location 
represent a potential safety concern. The Committee directs the 
FAA to give priority consideration to a request for 
discretionary funding to upgrade the airport's facilities and 
meet modern safety requirements.
    Pittsburgh International Airport, PA.--The Committee is 
aware that Pittsburgh International Airport has been required 
to spend most of its AIP entitlement funds to repair airport 
pavement because of deteriorating conditions and that 
additional funds are needed for the airport to continue its 
progress and to maintain excellent service. The Committee 
directs the FAA to give priority consideration to requests for 
funds for replacement vehicles while existing people mover cars 
are being repaired and modified, for related improvements to 
the airside and landside people mover stations, and for 
conversion of a portion of an existing ramp to a taxilane and 
connection to taxiway N, which would provide a connection 
between the present Airside Business Park and the planned air 
cargo complex.
    Salt Lake City International Airport, UT.--The Committee 
directs the FAA to give priority consideration to requests for 
discretionary funding for the airport modernization program.
    Sanford-Lee County Airport, NC.--The Committee reiterates 
the direction it provided last year to the FAA to provide 
funding to accelerate construction of this new airport, which 
will serve as a reliever facility for Raleigh-Durham 
International Airport, to complete construction funding in 
fiscal years 1998-99.
    Shelby County Airport, AL.--Shelby County Airport is a 
designated reliever airport for Birmingham International 
Airport, but the airport has not been kept up to FAA standards 
and, with a runway length of 3,800 feet, is not practical for 
many aircraft, including larger general aviation aircraft. The 
Shelby County Airport Development Study outlines projects that 
would bring the airport into compliance with FAA standards and 
improve facilities so that the airport could accommodate 
corporate aviation activities and support economic development 
of the community. The Committee directs the FAA to give 
priority consideration to grant requests for projects in the 
study.
    Southwest Florida International Airport [RSW].--The 
Committee is disappointed that the FAA has not provided airport 
improvement discretionary funds to the Southwest Florida 
International Airport for its urgently needed capital expansion 
project. Last year, the Committee noted that RSW was the third 
fastest growing airport in the country with a growth rate over 
the past 10 years three times the national average, and 
recommended that the FAA give priority consideration to this 
project. However, to date the FAA has not released any funding 
for this project. The Committee again urges the FAA to provide 
discretionary funding to RSW and also suggests the FAA consider 
the merits of entering into a letter of intent with the project 
sponsor.
    Standiford Field Airport, Louisville, KY.--The Committee is 
aware that the FAA has agreed to reimburse Standiford Field 
Airport for the purchase of the category III instrument landing 
system [ILS] for runway 35R. Further, FAA has indicated the 
costs associated with this project are eligible under the AIP 
program. The Committee directs the FAA to give priority 
consideration to reimbursement of the airport for the 
appropriate share of costs for the ILS.
    Waynesboro Municipal Airport, MS.--A 10-year airport 
improvement program is underway at Waynesboro Municipal 
Airport. The required environmental studies have been prepared, 
and local funds have been obtained for right-of-way 
acquisition. The Committee directs the FAA to give priority 
consideration to requests for discretionary funding to support 
continuation of the airport's improvement program, including 
earthwork and site preparation for a project to lengthen and 
widen a runway.
    Westchester County Airport, NY.--The Committee directs the 
FAA to give priority consideration to requests for 
discretionary funding for parallel taxiway phase 3.
    Williamsport-Lycoming County Airport, PA.--Williamsport 
Airport, one of the oldest commercial airports in the Nation, 
is the transportation hub for north-central Pennsylvania and a 
significant factor in economic development in the region. The 
Committee directs FAA to give priority consideration to a 
request for funding of a runway extension and complete pavement 
overlay for its main instrument runway. A runway extension 
could substantially improve regional economic development 
opportunities for north-central Pennsylvania as it would 
accommodate larger planes for both passenger and cargo 
purposes.
    Zanesville Airport, OH.--Ohio has received repeated 
requests from locally and regionally based industries for 
upgraded approach procedures and updated air navigation 
facilities. The recent increase in jet-powered operations 
demands improved course guidance and vertical guidance 
establishing and maintaining the aircraft's horizontal and 
vertical approach/descend direction. The Committee directs the 
FAA to give priority consideration to requests for 
discretionary funding for construction, engineering, and 
administration to install a non-Federal localizer and a non-
Federal glide slope.

                           LETTERS OF INTENT

    Congress authorized FAA to use letters of intent [LOI's] to 
fund multiyear airport improvement projects that will 
significantly enhance systemwide airport capacity. FAA is also 
to consider a project's benefits and costs in determining 
whether to approve it for AIP funding. FAA adopted a policy of 
committing to LOI's no more than about 50 percent of forecasted 
AIP discretionary funds allocated for capacity, safety, 
security, and noise projects. The Committee viewed this policy 
as reasonable because it gave FAA the flexibility to fund other 
worthy projects that do not fall under a LOI. Both FAA and 
airport authorities have found letters of intent helpful in 
planning and funding airport development.
    The Committee appreciates the complexity of assessing a 
project's impact on systemwide capacity but believes that FAA 
should do its best in this regard before committing future AIP 
funds under a LOI.
    The Committee in the past was concerned that FAA had not 
exercised sufficient control over the use of LOI's. 
Accordingly, to maintain program integrity and ensure LOI 
commitments are met, the Committee repeats its recommendation 
that FAA be granted the authority to award new LOI's only after 
scheduled and recommended LOI payments fall to less than 50 
percent of AIP discretionary funds.
    Current letters of intent assume the following fiscal year 
1998 grant allocations:

Arkansas: Northwest Arkansas............................      $3,500,000
California: Sacramento Metropolitan.....................       9,200,000
Colorado: Denver International..........................      29,911,000
Georgia: Savannah International.........................       1,465,000
Illinois:
    Scott AFB (reliever)................................      14,000,000
    Chicago Midway......................................       1,000,000
Kentucky:
    Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky........................      11,593,000
    Standiford Field, Louisville........................      16,300,000
Louisiana: New Orleans International....................       9,147,000
Michigan: Detroit Metropolitan..........................      16,160,000
Mississippi: Golden Triangle Regional...................         400,000
Nevada: Reno Cannon International.......................       6,500,000
New York: Greater Buffalo International.................       1,700,000
Rhode Island: Theodore F. Green State...................       6,500,000
South Carolina:
    Hilton Head.........................................         532,000
    Florence regional...................................         400,000
Tennessee:
    Nashville International.............................       2,180,000
    Memphis International...............................      13,790,000
Texas:
    Austin (new)........................................      11,321,000
    Dallas/Fort Worth International.....................      12,500,000
    Midland.............................................       1,327,000
Virginia:
    Washington Dulles International.....................       4,463,000
    Washington National.................................      13,249,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Total.............................................     187,639,000

    Two sources exist to fund FAA's commitment to an airport's 
LOI. One is the discretionary portion of FAA's airport 
improvement program appropriation, and the other is the 
entitlement funding that an airport receives through the AIP on 
the basis of its passenger enplanements. Even though FAA 
expects an airport receiving an LOI to put all of its 
entitlement funding toward the project being funded by the LOI, 
this source provides only about one-quarter of the annual LOI 
funding. Thus, of the $187,600,000 that FAA has committed to 
LOI's during fiscal year 1998, the Committee estimates that 
approximately $142,700,000 will need to come from the AIP's 
discretionary limitation. As shown in the preceding AIP funding 
chart, the Committee recommended level would provide sufficient 
discretionary funding to cover LOI's; however, little 
flexibility is left to fund other high-priority capacity 
projects not included under an LOI. The Committee directs FAA 
to provide a current report to the Senate and House 
Transportation Appropriations Subcommittees by September 1, 
1997, of expected allocations of fiscal year 1998 AIP grant 
funds, broken out by entitlement and discretionary and category 
within discretionary, for existing LOI's.
    Applications are pending for capacity enhancement projects 
which would, if constructed, significantly reduce congestion 
and delay. These projects require multiyear funding 
commitments. The Committee recommends that the FAA enter into 
letters of intent for multiyear funding of such capacity 
enhancement projects.
    Consistent with the constraints outlined above, the 
Committee provides the following guidance to the FAA with 
respect to future LOI's.
    Anchorage International Airport, AK.--The airport has plans 
to develop a new air cargo facility with private funds in 
response to growing domestic and international cargo activity. 
The plans are dependent on other surface improvements at the 
airport. Other improvements are planned to meet expected growth 
in passenger traffic over the next 20 years. The Committee 
urges the FAA to issue an LOI to support these planned 
improvements if requested by the airport sponsor.
    Memphis International Airport, TN.--The Memphis Airport 
serves as a hub of operations for both Federal Express and 
Northwest Airlines, and it serves as both a major employer and 
as an economic center of the region. Reconstruction and 
extension to international runway length of runway 18C/36C is 
planned beginning in the latter half of calendar year 1997 and 
will bring benefits to the whole midsouth region and increase 
fees collected not only by the U.S. Customs, but also the FAA 
and the U.S. Treasury. Of the total project cost, $59,827,500 
is eligible for AIP funding. The Committee urges the FAA to 
issue an LOI for reconstruction and extension of runway 18C/
36C.
    New Orleans International Airport, LA.--The Committee 
reiterates its recommendation from last year that the FAA 
consider signing an LOI for a new parallel north/south runway 
at the New Orleans International Airport [NOIA]. The Committee 
recognizes the present and future traffic demands in the 
Louisiana/Mississippi region and the anticipated increase in 
traffic due to cargo traffic related to international trade 
which the proposed runway would accommodate. The Committee is 
advised that, over the past year, NOIA has moved to complete 
reports required under the National Environmental Policy Act 
and is prepared to move to financing of the project. The 
airport has projected substantial investment savings over the 
30-year life of the runway. The Committee has again recognized 
the substantial savings that would result from the completion 
of this new parallel runway and the importance of NOIA as an 
intermodal center of commerce.
    Philadelphia International Airport, PA.--The Committee 
urges the FAA to issue an LOI for the vital runway construction 
project at Philadelphia International Airport.
    Seattle-Tacoma International Airport, WA.--The Committee 
understands that applications from Seattle-Tacoma International 
Airport are pending at the FAA for capacity enhancement 
projects, which would, if constructed, significantly reduce 
congestion and delay. These projects require multiyear funding 
commitments. The Committee recommends that the FAA enter into 
LOI's for multiyear funding of such capacity enhancement 
projects. The Committee understands that an application for an 
LOI is pending for construction of a new dependent runway for 
Seattle-Tacoma International Airport. The Committee recommends 
the FAA enter into an LOI with the project sponsor for 
construction of the runway project.

                       Grants-in-Aid for Airports

                    (Airport and Airway Trust Fund)

                 (Rescission of Contract Authorization)

    The Committee recommends rescission of $286,000,000 in 
contract authority that is not available due to annual limits 
on obligations.

                           General Provisions

    Debt forgiveness.--The Committee has included a general 
provision (sec. 334) that would forgive the State of Hawaii 
from any obligation to repay $30,000,000 that it had previously 
diverted from airport revenues and paid to the Office of 
Hawaiian Affairs for claims related to native Hawaiian lands.
    The 1959 Federal legislation admitting Hawaii to the United 
States established a public trust, consisting of the lands 
formerly held by the Republic of Hawaii. This trust is to be 
used for the betterment of the conditions of native Hawaiians.
    Substantial portions of Hawaii's airports are built on 
these public trust lands. In furtherance of the trust purposes, 
the State of Hawaii has used a portion of airport revenues for 
programs aimed at the betterment of native Hawaiians.
    Federal aviation law, however, prohibits the diversion of 
airport revenues for nonairport purposes. Recently, the 
Department of Transportation Inspector General identified 
$30,000,000 in past payments to the Office of Hawaiian Affairs 
as illegal diversions of airport revenues. The FAA agreed with 
the OIG's determination. However, it is unclear whether a 
Federal court would agree with the OIG and the FAA should their 
determination be challenged. Given the fact that the State of 
Hawaii owns the lands in trust for the betterment of native 
Hawaiians, it is conceivable that a reviewing court could find 
that the payments of airport revenues were in that nature of 
rent, which is a permissible use of airport revenue.
    To put this issue to rest, the general provision provides 
that the State of Hawaii is forgiven any obligation to repay 
past amounts diverted for trust purposes, in return for a clear 
congressional statement prohibiting any future diversions.
    The original language was broadened at the request of the 
authorizing committee to include forgiveness of past diversions 
previously received by native Hawaiians, native Americans, or 
Native Alaskans in order to afford all parties who are 
similarly situated to have an equal opportunity to be forgiven 
past debts.
    There are instances of airport revenue diversion involving 
the State of Hawaii, in addition to the past payment of airport 
revenues to the Office of Hawaiian Affairs. Regarding one such 
issue, the State has repaid the principal of $64,000,000 to the 
State airport revenue fund. The interest on the $64,000,000, 
however, remains outstanding, and the payment terms remain 
unresolved. The Committee understands that the State of Hawaii, 
the Federal Aviation Administration, and the Department of 
Transportation Office of Inspector General are working together 
to resolve this issue. The Committee encourages these parties 
to continue to work together diligently to develop a repayment 
plan for the State that comports with the applicable statutory 
and regulatory requirements and guidelines that are 
administered by the Federal Aviation Administration.
    Closure of airports.--Richards-Gebaur Memorial Airport, 
located in Kansas City, MO, and Bader Field in Atlantic City, 
NJ, are subject to Surplus Property Act and grant assurance 
restrictions requiring the airports to remain public airports.
    The city of Kansas City expended substantial funds to 
maintain the facility at Richards-Gebaur Memorial Airport and 
to develop and promote that facility for use by a variety of 
aircraft. After many years of such efforts and the expenditure 
of funds, the number of operations at the airport remains 
inadequate to support continued retention of the facility as a 
public airport. The city has determined that the highest and 
best use of the property would be for redevelopment as an 
intermodal transportation facility for freight distribution and 
processing. Conversion of the facility for such transportation 
uses would capitalize on Kansas City's geographic location and 
on the strength of the city's major rail and trucking 
industries, and enhance the growing trade relationships between 
the United States and Mexico under the North American Free 
Trade Agreement. In order to accomplish this redevelopment, 
closure of the airport is required. The Committee finds that 
such closure would benefit civil aviation and would produce an 
equal or greater benefit to the national transportation system 
including the overall air transportation system. The Kansas 
City airport system would be benefited and enhanced by allowing 
the deployment of the city's aviation funds for more productive 
use at its other better-utilized airports. The Committee also 
understands that closure of Richards-Gebaur will have no 
adverse impact on civil aviation by reason of the fact that 
there are 13 airports geographically proximate to Richards-
Gebaur, including 8 airports located within 20 miles of the 
facility which can easily absorb Richards-Gebaur's current and 
projected demand.
    Atlantic City Muni Bader Field Airport, located in Atlantic 
City, NJ, is subject to restrictions imposed by grant 
assurances and memorandums of understanding requiring the 
airport to remain viable and operational until the year 2006, 
or until a mutually agreed upon date and conditions. Despite 
the city's ongoing investments to ensure that the airport is 
well maintained for general aviation use, the airport cannot 
retain an adequate level of operations to justify the continued 
investments. Because the airport is seriously underutilized, 
the city has determined that an airport is not the best use for 
the property and is pursuing other options for economic 
development of the property. The Committee understands that, 
given the proximity of Bader Field to other airports in the 
region, such as Atlantic City International Airport, nearby 
county airports and State-owned airports, civil aviation will 
not be negatively affected.
    The Committee includes a provision (sec. 337) authorizing 
the FAA to: grant requests from Kansas City to close Richards-
Gebaur Memorial Airport and from Atlantic City to close Bader 
Field as public airports; release and cancel any terms, 
conditions, reservations, or restrictions contained in any 
surplus property conveyance/transfer documents and any sponsor 
conditions or assurances contained in any FAA grant agreements 
or orders; and allow closure of the airports and their 
conversion to nonaeronautical uses.
    Seating configuration.--The Committee is including a 
provision (sec. 332) clarifying the definition of ``passenger 
capacity of 56 persons or less,'' under section 29(a)(2) of the 
International Air Transportation Competition Act of 1979 to 
include any operations with any aircraft configured or 
reconfigured with 56 passengers or less except for widebody 
aircraft in excess of 363,000 pounds gross aircraft weight. In 
no event shall the total number of passenger seats installed on 
any aircraft operating under this exemption exceed 56. Nothing 
in this provision should be construed to prohibit the 
operation, or apply to the operation, of regional jets 
originally configured with 56 or less seats out of Love Field. 
The Department of Transportation has stated that regional jets 
may be utilized under section 29(a)(2) of the International Air 
Transportation Competition Act to serve any destination outside 
of Texas and its bordering States. Accordingly, this provision 
confirms that authority to utilize regional jets in scheduled 
service from Love Field to any destination and does not allow 
the Dallas City Council to prohibit such service.

                Aircraft Purchase Loan Guarantee Program

    The bill includes a zero obligation limitation on 
borrowings during fiscal year 1998 under the aircraft purchase 
loan guarantee program. The administration requested authority 
to obligate up to $5,000 to cover administrative costs 
associated with outstanding loans. The bill, instead, provides 
authority within the operations account to use up to $5,000 for 
such expenses.

                     FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

                  Summary of Fiscal Year 1998 Program

    The principal missions of the Federal Highway 
Administration are: administration, in cooperation with the 
States, of the Federal-aid Highway Construction Program, 
including the Interstate, National Highway System, bridge, and 
surface transportation programs; regulation and enforcement of 
Federal requirements relating to the safety of operation and 
equipment of commercial motor carriers engaged in interstate or 
foreign commerce; and governing the safety in movement over the 
Nation's highways of dangerous cargoes such as explosives, 
flammables, and other hazardous material.
    Under the Committee recommendation, a total program level 
of $23,582,900,000 would be provided for the activities of the 
Federal Highway Administration for fiscal year 1998.
    The following table summarizes the fiscal year 1997 program 
levels, the fiscal year 1998 budget estimates, the House 
allowance, and the Committee's recommendations:

                                            [In thousands of dollars]                                           
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   Fiscal year     Fiscal year                  
                            Program                               1997 program     1998 budget      Committee   
                                                                      level         estimate     recommendations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Limitation on general operating expenses \1\...................       (521,114)       (494,376)        (558,440)
Appalachian development highway system \2\.....................  ..............  ..............         300,000 
Federal-aid highways \3\.......................................     18,933,630      20,170,000       21,800,000 
Exempt Federal-aid obligations.................................      2,023,000       1,510,331        1,390,600 
Emergency relief appropriation.................................    650,000,000   ..............  ...............
State infrastructure banks.....................................        150,000         150,000   ...............
Infrastructure credit..........................................  ..............        100,000   ...............
Right-of-way revolving fund....................................  ..............  ..............           8,000 
Motor carrier safety grants \4\................................         78,225         100,000           84,300 
Motor carrier safety \5\.......................................        (49,000)        (52,765)         (51,245)
                                                                ------------------------------------------------
      Total....................................................     21,834,855      22,030,331       23,582,900 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Excludes reductions pursuant to sections 321 and 346 of Public Law 104-205.                                 
\2\ The administration proposed $200,000,000 in contract authority for this program under Federal-aid highways  
  as part of ISTEA reauthorization.                                                                             
\3\ Obligation limitation on contract authority. Also includes estimated additional obligation limitation       
  pursuant to section 1002(f)(1) of Public Law 102-240. Excludes $46,561,000 for research and technology, which 
  is included in exempt obligations.                                                                            
\4\ Obligation limitation on contract authority.                                                                
\5\ Included within limitation on general operating expenses.                                                   

                Limitation on General Operating Expenses

Appropriations, 1997 \1\................................    $521,114,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................     494,376,000
Committee recommendation................................     558,440,000

\1\ Excludes reductions for TASC and awards pursuant to sections 321 and 
346 of Public Law 104-205.

    The limitation on general operating expenses controls 
spending for virtually all the salaries, expenses, and research 
and development programs of the Federal Highway Administration.
    The Committee recommends that a limitation of $558,440,000 
be provided for salaries and expenses of the Federal Highway 
Administration.
    The following table reflects the Committee's recommendation 
and that requested by the administration.

                        [In thousands of dollars]                       
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Fiscal year                
                  Program                    1998 budget     Committee  
                                              estimate    recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Administrative expenses...................       261,258        261,258 
Motor carrier safety......................        52,765         51,245 
Contract programs:                                                      
    Highway research, development, and                                  
     technology...........................        73,903         62,737 
    Intelligent vehicle/highway systems                                 
     research.............................        54,000        125,650 
    Technology assessment and deployment..        14,800         14,800 
    National Highway Institute............  ............  ..............
    Local Technical Assistance Program....  ............          4,100 
    International transportation..........           900          2,300 
    Technical assistance--Russia..........           400  ..............
    Minority business.....................        10,000         10,000 
    R&T technical support.................        10,000         10,000 
    GPS support...........................         2,100          2,100 
    Rehabilitation TFHRC..................         2,000  ..............
    National advanced driver simulator....        12,250         14,250 
Accountwide adjustment....................  ............  ..............
                                           -----------------------------
      Total limitation....................       494,376        558,440 
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                    Motor Carrier Safety Operations

    The Committee recommends $51,245,000 for motor carrier 
safety operations, not including the funding of $7,400,000 for 
research which is included in the research, development, and 
technology line. This is an increase of $2,245,000 above the 
1997 enacted level, but $1,520,000 less than requested. The 
Committee's recommended funding level represents the following 
changes to the administration's request:

Federal/industry training...............................     -$1,220,000
Outreach................................................        -300,000

    Federal/industry training.--The Committee denies funding 
for the new Federal/training initiative and notes that the 
Office of Motor Carriers [OMC] has previously allocated funds 
for various training initiatives within its base programmatic 
funds. FHWA staff formerly of the ICC are available to train 
OMC field staff on regulations issued pursuant to the 
Interstate Commerce Commission Termination Act of 1995. FHWA's 
videoconferencing facilities are also available for this 
training. When final regulations are issued to implement the 
results of the zero-based review, the Committee will reconsider 
the need for additional training materials, especially to 
assist small businesses. The Committee has denied funding for 
industry training because it does not want to duplicate similar 
training activities already conducted by the private sector. 
The Committee directs the Associate Administrator for Motor 
Carriers to ensure that none of the FTE reductions shall be 
taken from the field staff, especially motor carrier safety 
specialist positions. The Committee's allowance includes 
$500,000 for the OMC to expand and improve its no-zone campaign 
and other activities intended to reduce the contribution of the 
public to commercial vehicle crashes.
    Outreach.--The Committee has not included funding for 
reauthorization workshops which can be conducted as part of 
other motor carrier conferences and meetings.

             highway research, development, and technology

    The Committee recommends a total of $62,737,000 to be 
distributed as follows:

                        [In thousands of dollars]                       
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                Budget                  
   Activity/program element       Program     estimate,      Committee  
                                level, 1997      1998     recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Highway research and                                                    
 development:                                                           
    Safety....................        8,650        9,000          9,500 
    Pavements.................       19,731       11,150         11,150 
    Structures................       14,362       15,256         15,256 
    Environment...............        5,443        5,566          5,666 
    Right-of-way..............          322          365            365 
    Policy....................        5,328        8,000          5,400 
    Planning..................        5,889       16,025          8,000 
    Motor carrier.............        7,399        8,541          7,400 
                               -----------------------------------------
      Total, highway research                                           
       and development........       67,124       73,903         62,737 
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Safety.--The Committee recommends $9,500,000 for safety 
research and development. The FHWA request continues safety 
research into a range of areas. The Committee notes the 
increased focus by the FHWA on the interactive highway safety 
design model. Within the driver module that will contain 
profiles of a range of driver types to be combined with various 
design vehicles, the Committee encourages the FHWA to draw on 
the existing outside expertise and provide a demonstration of 
technologies and practices to improve the driving performance 
of elderly drivers and other distinct user groups identified in 
the module. An additional $500,000 has been provided for this 
purpose.
    Pavements.--The Committee recommends $11,150,000 for 
pavements research and development.
    Structures.--The Committee recommends $15,256,000 for 
structures research and development.
    The Committee recognizes that an estimated 42 percent of 
the Nation's bridges are structurally deficient and the cost to 
correct these deficiencies is in excess of $90,000,000,000. The 
Committee directs the Federal Highway Administration to pursue 
research into high performance materials and bridge systems 
which could be applied to improve safety, function, durability, 
and renewability with minimal cost and environmental impact; 
$1,200,000 has been included for this purpose.
    The Committee believes a unique opportunity to conduct 
research exists during the Interstate 15 reconstruction project 
and other transportation projects in the Salt Lake Valley, UT. 
The research performed during the reconstruction of Interstate 
15 and other projects will provide the country with a detailed 
analysis of the success of the design/build process, seismic 
retrofitting, and many other valuable areas of research. The 
Committee strongly recommends that FHWA work with the Utah 
Transportation Center and give priority consideration to 
applying research funds as may be necessary for these purposes.
    Advanced Composites Materials Bridge Demonstration 
Program.--The Committee is aware that the defense industry has 
developed a number of advanced, high performance materials for 
use in various military systems and that civil engineers have 
found practical applications of this technology in 
transportation infrastructure as well.
    These materials proved ideal for aerospace applications 
because the strength-to-weight ratio is 5 to 10 times higher 
than aluminum or steel. The motivation for using these advanced 
composites in bridge systems is their strength and lightweight 
and resistance to corrosion or fatigue. They are particularly 
well suited for seismic protection.
    The Committee directs FHWA to work with an academic and 
industry-led national consortium and fund with available 
balances an advanced composite bridge project to demonstrate 
the applications of an all-composite bridge for civil 
infrastructure purposes.
    Environment.--The Committee is recommending $5,666,000 for 
environment research and development. The San Joaquin Valley of 
California and surrounding regions exceed both State and 
Federal clean air standards for small particulate matter. The 
environment research funds include $100,000 for FHWA's 
participation in the assessment of methodologies needed for 
estimating emissions of particulate matter, the sources and 
composition of particulate matter from roadway construction and 
heavy truck activity.
    Last year the Committee directed the Department to initiate 
a research program to support a comprehensive noise prediction 
model applicable to highway traffic, aircraft, and railroad 
noise. The Committee further directed that a grant of $250,000 
be made available to the National Center for Physical Acoustics 
to identify scientific issues which impede accurate noise 
prediction. The Committee notes that the Department has worked 
with the National Center for Physical Acoustics to define 
research priorities and initiate high-priority research toward 
a multimodal noise prediction model. The Committee directs that 
this cooperative program be continued in fiscal year 1998 at 
the same level.
    Policy.--The Committee recommends $5,400,000 for policy 
research. This funding is adequate to provide the States with 
information and tools. Unnecessary data collection and 
conferences activities should be eliminated.
    Planning.--The Committee recommends $8,000,000 for planning 
research. The Committee has included $2,000,000 for an 
assessment of the Red River corridor transportation 
infrastructure of the five-State area pursuant to the 
recommendations of the Northern Great Plains Rural Development 
Commission established in ISTEA. This assessment will help 
evaluate whether the corridor has the necessary infrastructure 
to deliver good to the global marketplace. The assessment 
should consider the developing trading relationships in the 
region and should be developed collaboratively with the 
region's State departments of transportation, metropolitan 
planning organizations, and representatives of transportation 
and other business interests in the region.
    Motor carrier research.--The Committee recommends 
$7,400,000 for motor carrier research. Within the funds 
provided, the Committee recommends $500,000 for a study to 
obtain an estimate of the prevalence of sleep apnea in 
truckdrivers and to identify and evaluate remedial measures, 
including screening and detection technologies, for use by 
motor carriers. The Committee also directs that $500,000 of the 
funds provided are for an operational test and validation of 
technological aids to improve fatigue management among 
commercial truckdrivers. The Committee directs OMC to work with 
the trucking industry to accomplish these research objectives.

                   intelligent transportation systems

    The Committee recommends a total of $125,650,000 to be 
distributed as follows:

                                            [In thousands of dollars]                                           
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  Program level,      Budget         Committee  
                                                                       1997       estimate, 1998  recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Intelligent vehicle highway systems:                                                                            
    Research and development....................................          28,455          33,000          33,000
    Operational tests...........................................          55,042  ..............          76,650
    Automated highway system....................................          22,000  ..............  ..............
    Architecture and standards..................................           5,000  ..............  ..............
    Evaluation..................................................           2,000           9,000           7,000
    Mainstreaming...............................................  ..............           3,000  ..............
    Model deployment............................................  ..............  ..............  ..............
    Program and systems support.................................           7,861           9,000           9,000
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      Total, ITS................................................         120,358          54,000         125,650
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Research and development.--The Committee recommends a total 
of $33,000,000 for ITS research and development, consistent 
with the budget request.
    The Committee recommends $33,000,000 for continued research 
in intelligent transportation systems. In addition to these 
funds, the Department has requested in its surface 
transportation reauthorization proposal another $196,000,000 in 
contract authority outside the limitation on general operating 
expenses.
    The Committee is aware of recent studies to document the 
benefits of ITS and encourages the Joint Project Office to 
continue this work and to submit a report to the Senate and 
House Committees on Appropriations with the budget 
justification for fiscal year 1999.
    The Committee recommends a total of $76,650,000 for 
operational tests. The funds provided are for the following 
operational tests:

                                                               Committee
                                                          recommendation

Southeast Michigan snow and ice management [SEMSIM].....      $2,300,000
Utah intelligent transportation systems.................       7,000,000
Kansas City, MO, intermodal common communications 
    technology..........................................       2,000,000
Reno, NV, intelligent transportation systems............       3,750,000
Yosemite Valley, CA, intelligent transportation system..         500,000
Bozeman, MT, Western Transportation Institute...........       1,500,000
Barboursville-ONA, WV, traffic management...............      10,000,000
North Dakota State University advanced traffic analysis 
    center..............................................         600,000
North Dakota advanced transportation weather information 
    system..............................................         800,000
Sullivan County, NY, emergency weather system...........       1,000,000
Urban Transportation Safety Systems Center 
    (Philadelphia)......................................         250,000
New York City toll plaza scanners.......................       2,100,000
Cleveland, OH, computer integrated transit maintenance 
    environment project.................................       2,000,000
Santa Teresa, NM, intermodal technology demonstration 
    project \1\.........................................       1,400,000
Operation Respond hazardous materials emergency response 
    software............................................       3,000,000
Washington State radio communication emergency call 
    boxes...............................................         750,000
Washington statewide roadway weather information system.       2,500,000
Texas DOT ITS research..................................         400,000
Milwaukee MONITOR, and Wisconsin rural ITS..............       9,200,000
I-95 multistate corridor coalition......................       2,100,000
Colorado I-25 truck safety improvements.................      12,000,000
Tuscalosa, AL, traffic integration and flow control.....       2,200,000
Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission ITS....................       8,000,000
Alaska cold weather ITS sensing.........................       1,300,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Total.............................................      76,650,000

\1\ To be provided for the ATR Institute.

    Automated highway system.--The budget requested that 
funding provided for the automated highway systems and crash 
avoidance programs be from contract authority rather than funds 
under the limitation on general operating expenses. 
Accordingly, the Committee defers consideration of this request 
to the appropriate legislative committees. The Committee 
supports the action of the Joint Program Office to commission a 
review of the AHS program and the results of that review should 
be incorporated into a revised 5-year plan to be submitted to 
the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations.
    Evaluation.--The Committee recommends $7,000,000 for 
evaluation and program assessment activities.
    Mainstreaming.--The Committee has not provided the request 
of $3,000,000 for mainstreaming. These funds are better spent 
on operational testing and research and development activities. 
The Committee defers consideration of the contract authority 
request to the appropriate legislative committees.
    A limited ITS mainstreaming program, including technical 
assistance and outreach would benefit State and local 
governments. The Department proposes, however, to spend 
$22,000,000 on such activities. Numerous ITS benefits already 
are documented as a result of investing in more than 80 
operational tests and 11 model deployment projects. These 
studies, as well as the visits to ITS facilities by State 
officials already supported by the FHWA, reduce the immediacy 
of the need for a substantial increase in mainstreaming 
activities. In addition, the funding requested for training 
raises questions about the appropriate role of the FHWA vis-a-
vis academic institutions and the proposed scholarships to 
support international travel of non-Federal personnel is not 
warranted.

                  technology assessment and deployment

    The Committee recommends $14,800,000 for technology 
assessment and deployment.

                   local technical assistance program

    The Committee recommends $4,100,000 for the LTAP. These 
funds will serve several purposes, including enhancing the 
participation of the LTAP centers in such areas as improved 
data collection, traffic safety audits, improved traffic and 
sign inventory management, improving the technology transfer 
clearinghouse, facilitating the deployment of proven SHRP 
technology at the local level, and addressing the technology 
gap at the State level as compared to state-of-the-art highway 
technology practices.

                international transportation activities

    The Committees recommends $2,300,000 for the International 
Transportation Activities Program. Within the funds provided, 
the Committee directs that a study be conducted on the 
potential for establishing, the economic impacts, the potential 
trade relationships, and the environmental impacts of 
establishing a roadlink from Wrangell, AK, to the Canadian 
border along a proposed Bradfield Road alignment. The Committee 
encourages FHWA to redouble its efforts to find supplemental 
funding to help accomplish the objectives of this program. The 
Committee has merged the technical assistance-Russia into the 
international programs so the Russian program will compete for 
resources.

               national advanced driver simulator [nads]

    The Committee recommends $14,250,000 for NADS.

                     Highway-Related Safety Grants

                (liquidation of contract authorization)

                          (Highway trust fund)

Appropriations, 1997....................................    ($2,049,000)
Budget estimate, 1998...................................     (4,000,000)
Committee recommendation................................     (4,000,000)

    The Highway Related Safety Grant Program assists States and 
localities in implementing highway safety standards 
administered by the Federal Highway Administration. These 
standards cover traffic control devices, highway surveillance, 
and highway-related aspects of pedestrian safety.

                 Appalachian Development Highway System

    The Committee is recommending $300,000,000 for construction 
of unfinished segments of the Appalachian development highway 
system [ADHS]. The ADHS connects largely rural, underdeveloped 
areas in 13 States. Its completion is critical to the economic 
development of these often-ignored areas. In many cases, the 
unfinished segments of the ADHS are high-accident locations in 
the Appalachian States, so the Committee believes continued 
construction will have a high payoff in highway safety 
benefits.
    The Committee intends that the fiscal year 1998 funding for 
the ADHS will be distributed among the States with unfinished 
ADHS segments in proportion to each State's share of the 
remaining cost-to-complete the system as determined by the 
Appalachian Regional Commission [ARC]. However, the Committee 
is concerned that this distribution may not necessarily result 
in construction on the segments with the highest accident 
experience first. Therefore, the Committee directs the ARC to 
prepare a report on highway crash experience on the unfinished 
segments of the ADHS, the extent to which completion of 
unfinished segments would be likely to lower crash rates, and 
options for distributing ADHS funds among Appalachian States 
that might result in a faster reduction of highway-related 
crashes in these States.
    The Committee is aware that legislation has been introduced 
in the Senate and reported to the Committee on Environment and 
Public Works that would provide sufficient contract authority 
over the life of the next surface transportation bill to 
complete the unfinished segments of the ADHS. The Committee on 
Environment and Public Works also has before it the 
administration's proposed ISTEA reauthorization legislation, 
and other legislative proposals, which would provide between 
$2,000,000,000 and $3,000,000,000 in contract authority over 
the next 6 years to assist in the completion of the system. The 
Committee stands in strong support of efforts to include the 
sums necessary to complete the ADHS as a categorical program to 
receive contract authority through the reauthorization of 
ISTEA. The $300,000,000 provided in this bill for the ADHS 
should be viewed as an effort to expedite the completion of the 
system and not as a substitute for sums appropriated in the 
Energy and Water Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 1998 or as 
a substitute for sums which should be made available as 
contract authority in upcoming ISTEA reauthorization 
legislation.

                          Federal-Aid Highways

                (Liquidation of Contract Authorization)

                          (Highway Trust Fund)

Appropriations, 1997

                                                         $19,800,000,000

Budget estimate, 1998

                                                          19,800,000,000
Committee recommendation
                                                          20,850,000,000

    This activity comprises the majority of all federally aided 
programs through which the States are financially and 
technically aided to continue a national highway system that 
meets the transportation needs of the Nation in terms of 
capacity and safety.
    All programs included within the Federal-aid account are 
financed from the highway trust fund. Authorizations in the 
form of contract authority are enacted in substantive 
legislation. These authorizations are apportioned and/or 
allocated to the States and generally remain available for 
obligation over a 4-year period. Liquidating cash 
appropriations are subsequently requested to fund outlays 
resulting from obligations incurred under contract authority.
    The Committee recommends a liquidating cash appropriation 
of $20,850,000,000 for the Federal-aid highways program.

                          Federal-Aid Highways

                      (Limitation on Obligations)

                          (Highway Trust Fund)

Appropriations, 1997

                                                     \1\ $18,933,630,000

Budget estimate, 1998

                                                          20,170,000,000

Committee recommendation

                                                          21,800,000,000

\1\ Excludes reductions for TASC and awards pursuant to sections 321 and 
346 of Public Law 104-205. Includes limitation available pursuant to 
section 310 of Public Law 104-205.

    The administration's proposal of $20,170,000,000 includes 
previously appropriated or authorized accounts other than 
emergency relief and minimum allocation.
    In addition to programs covered by the obligation ceiling, 
there are activities that are exempt from the ceiling. Under 
the administration's proposal, it is assumed that 
$1,510,331,000 is outside the limitation which brings the 
administration's program total to $21,680,331,000.
    The Committee recommends an obligation ceiling of 
$21,800,000,000 for the regular Federal-aid formula program. In 
addition, the programs outside the obligation ceiling are 
estimated at $1,390,600,000 for a total program level of 
$23,190,600,000.

  COMPARISON OF FEDERAL HIGHWAY TRUST FUND HIGHWAY ACCOUNT RECEIPTS ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE STATES AND FEDERAL-AID APPORTIONMENTS AND ALLOCATIONS FROM THE  
                                                        HIGHWAY ACCOUNT--FISCAL YEARS 1957-96 \1\                                                       
                                                                 [Dollars in thousands]                                                                 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Payments into the fund \2\    Apportionments and allocations    Ratio of apportionments and 
                                                         --------------------------------        from the fund \3\            allocations to payments   
                                                                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------
                          State                             Fiscal year      Cumulated                       Cumulated                       Cumulated  
                                                               1996        since July 1,    Fiscal year    since July 1,    Fiscal year    since July 1,
                                                                               1956            1996            1956            1996            1956     
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama.................................................        $490,909      $6,298,458        $316,382      $7,012,397             .64            1.11
Alaska..................................................          54,785         651,552         216,054       4,372,965            3,94            6.71
Arizona.................................................         374,857       4,529,518         246,553       5,431,193             .66            1.20
Arkansas \4\............................................         323,475       4,202,837         244,959       4,123,582             .76             .98
California..............................................       2,199,250      32,995,155       1,524,640      31,388,305             .69             .95
Colorado \4\............................................         275,808       4,099,483         227,438       5,433,106             .82            1.33
Connecticut.............................................         225,127       3,741,434         357,783       6,636,912            1.59            1.77
Delaware................................................          64,854         948,933          77,613       1,421,581            1.20            1.50
District of Columbia....................................          28,480         568,788          83,819       2,375,748            2.94            4.18
Florida \4\.............................................       1,152,284      14,265,018         729,920      12,634,505             .63             .89
Georgia.................................................         874,372      10,316,962         484,351       9,525,763             .55             .92
Hawaii..................................................          58,505         822,840         117,986       3,160,606            2.02            3.84
Idaho...................................................         122,978       1,552,901         129,936       2,714,224            1.06            1.75
Illinois \4\............................................         780,121      13,283,342         700,176      14,776,961             .90            1.11
Indiana \4\.............................................         579,993       8,664,317         391,694       7,491,417             .68             .86
Iowa....................................................         240,302       4,324,930         213,998       4,992,745             .89            1.15
Kansas..................................................         257,994       4,030,973         212,340       4,447,606             .82            1.10
Kentucky................................................         430,912       5,519,944         248,566       5,837,444             .58            1.06
Louisiana...............................................         393,851       5,835,556         242,787       7,301,405             .62            1.25
Maine...................................................         117,523       1,742,058         119,283       1,978,394            1.01            1.14
Maryland................................................         376,341       5,584,561         270,851       8,266,776             .72            1.48
Massachusetts \4\.......................................         416,169       6,446,483         667,643      10,993,298            1.60            1.71
Michigan................................................         775,551      11,824,298         486,328      10,580,301             .63             .89
Minnesota...............................................         270,499       5,567,477         292,046       7,141,040            1.08            1.28
Mississippi.............................................         296,925       4,054,149         190,305       4,034,289             .64            1.00
Missouri................................................         573,654       8,287,960         380,213       7,887,481             .66             .95
Montana.................................................         107,069       1,549,726         166,251       3,707,949            1.55            2.39
Nebraska................................................         173,648       2,595,434         138,715       3,000,203             .80            1.16
Nevada \4\..............................................         139,554       1,619,737         133,843       2,526,690             .96            1.56
New Hampshire...........................................          92,132       1,241,184          95,641       1,755,548            1.04            1.41
New Jersey..............................................         583,330       9,309,786         498,402       9,536,603             .85            1.02
New Mexico \4\..........................................         188,498       2,548,442         173,241       3,473,829             .92            1.36
New York................................................         972,730      15,944,304       1,111,112      19,336,458            1.14            1.21
North Carolina..........................................         705,748       9,340,568         453,950       7,940,104             .64             .85
North Dakota............................................          78,695       1,174,634         125,483       2,272,266            1.59            1.93
Ohio....................................................         799,378      14,133,108         611,090      13,044,990             .76             .92
Oklahoma................................................         378,306       5,511,181         245,399       4,721,585             .65             .86
Oregon \4\..............................................         292,450       4,200,078         344,001       5,074,565            1.18            1.21
Pennsylvania............................................         912,823      14,584,905         836,714      16,728,859             .92            1.15
Rhode Island............................................          62,043       1,025,615         107,781       2,284,140            1.74            2.23
South Carolina..........................................         396,711       5,008,927         232,438       4,391,876             .59             .88
South Dakota............................................          74,618       1,239,920         131,593       2,436,921            1.76            1.97
Tennessee...............................................         560,320       7,440,407         329,857       7,361,303             .59             .99
Texas...................................................       1,705,426      24,629,267       1,012,253      20,874,751             .59             .85
Utah....................................................         191,866       2,255,867         135,519       3,686,132             .71            1.63
Vermont.................................................          65,697         795,810          75,435       1,713,797            1.15            2.15
Virginia................................................         639,538       8,187,423         403,234       9,299,282             .63            1.14
Washington..............................................         431,813       5,830,648         438,897       9,174,921            1.02            1.57
West Virginia...........................................         180,544       2,611,755         212,956       5,220,120            1.18            2.00
Wisconsin...............................................         443,212       6,431,327         318,906       5,683,614             .72             .88
Wyoming.................................................         102,198       1,328,479         126,284       2,572,212            1.24            1.94
                                                         -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total.............................................      22,033,866     320,698,459      17,632,659     359,778,762             .80            1.12
American Samoa..........................................  ..............  ..............           4,149          49,163  ..............  ..............
Guam....................................................  ..............  ..............          13,693         134,011  ..............  ..............
Northern Marianas.......................................  ..............  ..............           4,160          33,340  ..............  ..............
Puerto Rico.............................................  ..............  ..............          76,811       1,402,422  ..............  ..............
Virgin Islands..........................................  ..............  ..............          21,810         145,856  ..............  ..............
                                                         -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Grand total.......................................      22,033,866     320,698,459      17,753,282     361,543,554             .81            1.13
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Payments into the fund include only the net tax receipts deposited in the highway account of the Federal highway trust fund. Excluded are motor fuel
  taxes transferred to the ``Mass transit'' account of the highway trust fund (1 cent per gallon from April 1, 1983, through November 30, 1990, 1.5     
  cents per gallon until September 30, 1995, and 2.0 cents per gallon thereafter); the 0.1 cent per gallon tax dedicated to the leaking underground     
  storage tank trust fund beginning January 1, 1987 and ending December 31, 1995; the tax designated for deficit reduction (2.5 cents per gallon from   
  December 1, 1990, through September 30, 1993, 6.8 cents until September 30, 1995, and 4.3 cents thereafter); and the tax from motorboat use of        
  gasoline transferred to the aquatic resources trust fund and the land and water conservation fund.                                                    
\2\ Total Federal highway trust fund receipts are reported by the U.S. Department of the Treasury. Payments into the highway trust fund attributable to 
  highway users in each State are estimated by the Federal Highway Administration. Includes revenues from highway-user taxes only.                      
\3\ Includes all funds apportioned or allocated from the highway trust fund except for the following programs: Indian reservation roads, highway safety 
  information, and local transportation assistance. These programs are either administered by other Federal agencies or are treated as administrative   
  funds and cannot be easily attributed to individual States. Obligations are used to represent allocations for alcohol safety incentive grants and the 
  Woodrow Wilson Bridge.                                                                                                                                
\4\ Data for these States will be revised. Other States may also change, if revised data is provided to FHWA.                                           

                       bridge discretionary funds

    In the past, the Committee has directed the Secretary of 
Transportation to give priority designation, consistent with 
existing criteria, to several bridges that have extremely low 
rating factors and which serve as major links for both 
intrastate and interstate commerce and which directly impact 
the economic development of an area. Current law reserves 
$60,500,000 for discretionary bridge projects.
    The Committee directs FHWA to give priority consideration 
to the bridge over the Missouri River at Yankton, SD; the 
Cooper River bridges in Charleston, SC; bridges on I-15 in 
Utah; and the Kimball and Silver Creek junctions on I-80 in 
Utah; and the Bill Emerson Memorial Bridge in Cape Girardeau, 
MO.

                             timber bridge

    Current law also reserves discretionary highway timber 
research and demonstration program funding. Consistent with the 
criteria established in section 1039 of Public Law 102-240, 
$1,000,000 is available for research grants and information 
transfer and $7,500,000 is available for construction grants. 
The Committee directs that, out of construction grants, 
$2,000,000 be available for the covered bridge restoration 
project in Vermont.

                      discretionary interstate 4-r

    Current law reserves $65,000,000 of national highway system 
funds for discretionary allocation for projects to resurface, 
restore rehabilitative, or reconstruct Interstate highway 
segments. The Committee directs FHWA to give priority 
consideration to widening of I-15 in Nevada from I-215 to SR-
146, I-15 reconstruction from 10800 south to 600 north in Utah, 
the University Avenue/I-15 interchange reconfiguration in 
Provo, UT, and the Sunset Way interchange on I-90 in Issaquah, 
WA.

                     federal lands highway programs

    Consistent with section 204 of title 23 United States Code, 
which authorizes the Federal Lands Highways Program, the 
Committee directs that priority consideration be given the 
following projects: straightening of 18 miles of BIA Route 1281 
(Snake Road) in Florida, upgrading the SR 160/Pahrump Highway 
in Nevada, and construction of an access road in Snowbasin 
within the Wasatch National Forest, UT.
    The Committee is concerned about the fact that the 
distribution of Federal lands funds among the States bears very 
little relationship to the proportion of Federal lands within 
the States or regions of the country.
    The Committee is concerned about responsibility for 
maintaining the 38-mile portion of Beartooth Highway from the 
Montana-Wyoming border to the northeast entrance of Yellowstone 
National Park. The road, which is closed to travel in the 
winter months due to excessive snow conditions, is completely 
surrounded by Custer and Shoshone National Forests. The 
Committee is concerned about responsibility for snow removal in 
the spring. Snow removal is a necessary maintenance requirement 
to open the road prior to Memorial Day each year.
    Although responsibility has historically been assumed by 
the National Park Service, negotiations this year between 
Montana and Wyoming, the Park Service, and the National Forest 
Service indicated that none of the entities has the resources 
to assume snow removal responsibilities. The Committee urges 
FHWA to work to resolve this issue among the parties to ensure 
that this critical road is opened to traffic before Memorial 
Day next year.
    In addition, the Committee urges FHWA to work with the 
Department of the Interior and the State of Montana to ensure 
that snow removal needs on the Going-to-the-Sun Road in Glacier 
National Park, MT, are met.

                        interstate discretionary

    Under the ISTEA highway authorization, the final set-aside 
of funds for the Interstate Discretionary Program occurred in 
fiscal year 1995. As of February 28, 1997, $61,247,428 of these 
funds were available for distribution which is expected to 
occur in fiscal year 1998.

                        ferryboat and facilities

    Current law provides $18,000,000 for ferryboat and 
facilities construction. Within this amount, the Committee 
directs that $6,390,000 be available for the Hollis-Craig-
Ketchikan ferry in light of the fact that the Committee is 
recommending an earlier designation of FTA New Start funds for 
this project be deleted since the project is more appropriately 
funded in this account. The Committee further directs that FHWA 
give priority consideration to the following projects: purchase 
of a ferryboat for Taney County, MO; improvements to the North 
Carolina State ferry system; rehabilitation of the multimodal 
ferry terminal in Clinton, WA; and return to service of the 
Nobska ferry for operation between New Bedford, MA, and 
Martha's Vineyard and Nantucket. With respect to the Nobska 
project, the Committee urges FHWA to reconsider the eligibility 
of the Nobska provided that it remain in service to the public 
and that it remain governed by its previous agreement with the 
Commonwealth.

                         SCENIC BYWAYS PROGRAM

    Current law provides $14,000,000 for planning, design, and 
development of State scenic byway programs. The Committee 
directs FHWA to give priority consideration to the safety 
improvement program on Highway 101 around the Olympic Peninsula 
in Washington State.

                                 OTHER

    Railroad/highway safety project--Lincoln County, MS.--For 
the purpose of constructing an overpass to improve access and 
enhance highway/rail safety and economic development at an 
industrial park site in Brookhaven in Lincoln County, MS, the 
State of Mississippi may use funds previously allocated to it 
under the transportation enhancements program, provided that 
the State would otherwise be unable to use the funds for 
transportation enhancement projects consistent with current 
law.

                      Right-of-Way Revolving Fund

                      (Limitation on Direct Loans)

                          (Highway Trust Fund)

Appropriations, 1996....................................................
Appropriations, 1997....................................................
Committee recommendation................................      $8,000,000

    The Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1968 authorized $300,000,000 
for the establishment of the right-of-way revolving fund. This 
fund is utilized to make cash advances to the States for the 
purpose of purchasing right-of-way parcels in advance of 
highway construction and thereby preventing the inflation of 
land prices from causing a significant increase in construction 
costs. When right-of-way acquisition has been made and highway 
construction is initiated, the State becomes eligible for 
Federal grants under the various Federal-aid highway 
authorizations. At the point when progress payments are made to 
the State for construction, the State in turn reimburses the 
revolving fund for advances made to that State for right-of-way 
acquisition. Utilizing this method of funding, all 
reimbursements made to the revolving fund may be reallocated to 
other States requiring advances.
    The administration requested a prohibition on further 
obligations for 1998. The Committee has included bill language 
to allow for the obligation of net reimbursements, that is when 
repayments exceed other costs. It is estimated that $8,000,000 
is necessary to cover the subsidy costs of the new, net loans.

                      Motor Carrier Safety Grants

                (liquidation of contract authorization)

                          (Highway Trust Fund)

Appropriations, 1997....................................     $74,000,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................      90,000,000
Committee recommendation................................      85,000,000

    This program was first authorized by the Surface 
Transportation Assistance Act of 1982. It provides grants to 
States for improved enforcement of Federal and State motor 
carrier safety rules. It has been shown that added enforcement 
of truck safety rules reduces truck-related accidents and 
fatalities. The major objective of this program is to reduce 
the number and severity of accidents involving commercial motor 
vehicles.
    The Committee recommends a liquidating cash appropriation 
of $85,000,000.

                       limitation on obligations

    The Committee recommends a limitation on obligations of 
$84,300,000 for motor carrier safety grants. This is an 
increase of $6,075,000 over the 1997 enacted level and a 
decrease of $15,700,000 below the budget request. The Committee 
recommends the following changes to the budget request:

Safety performance incentive grants.....................     -$3,500,000
State training and administration.......................        -200,000
Information systems and analysis........................     -12,000,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Net change to the budget request..................     -15,700,000

    Safety performance incentive grants.--The Committee favors 
a performance-based allocation formula for the MCSAP which 
would provide maximum flexibility to the States, while still 
maintaining the safety achievements of the current program. To 
encourage the FHWA and the MCSAP States to complete the 
necessary rulemaking and program changes to achieve this 
objective, the Committee recommends $4,000,000 for safety 
performance incentive grants. The Committee looks forward to 
reviewing a final regulation amending the current allocation 
formula and program structure of the MCSAP.
    State training and administration.--The Committee has 
provided $800,000 for State training and administration, which 
is $200,000 below the administration's request. The Committee 
has increased the basic grants to States, which will allow 
States to assume a larger role in training their officers.
    Information systems and analysis.--The Committee is aware 
that FHWA is finding many examples where its information 
systems are lacking data on crashes involving specific 
commercial motor carriers. This information is of critical 
importance in targeting problem operators and in reducing the 
number of unnecessary audits to compliant carriers. To this 
end, the Committee has provided $1,000,000 to be used by the 
States to improve accident reporting.
    Commercial vehicle information system.--The Committee has 
provided $3,000,000 to help the States implement the commercial 
vehicle information system. The Committee has increased the 
amount provided for this activity to respond to the increased 
number of States that want to participate in this successful 
program. FHWA shall prepare a report to both the House and 
Senate Committees on Appropriations before January 1, 1998, 
detailing the current costs and benefits of investments in the 
CVIS program.
    Driver program initiative.--The Committee has provided 
$1,000,000 to address various driver challenges affecting the 
driver licensing component of commercial vehicle safety. These 
moneys can be used to improve data systems regarding driver 
records, transmission of judicial decisions needed by State 
licensing agencies, and State licensing and testing processes. 
Moneys may also be used to assist the States in meeting CDL 
regulatory requirements, and other program evaluation and 
monitoring activities.

                       State Infrastructure Banks

                          (highway trust fund)

Appropriations, 1997 (general fund).....................    $150,000,000
Budget estimate, 1998 (trust fund)......................     150,000,000
Committee recommendation................................................

    State infrastructure banks are a promising way of 
facilitating needed infrastructure investment, especially when 
all levels of government are facing constrained resources. 
State infrastructure banks are a means of increasing and 
improving both public and private investment in transportation.
    The National Highway System Designation Act of 1995 
modified by the 1997 Department of Transportation 
Appropriations Act authorized States to test State 
infrastructure banks [SIB's] which would provide greater 
flexibility to support the financing of projects by using 
Federal-aid funds for revolving loans and other forms of 
nontraditional financial assistance for both public and private 
entities developing eligible transportation projects. States 
have shown significant interest in exploring the infrastructure 
financing benefits offered by this concept. Thirty-eight States 
are now participating in the SIB pilot program. This program is 
new, and, while the great majority of States have shown 
interest in the program, there is little evidence yet of its 
effectiveness. The Committee does not propose to provide 
additional SIB seed money in fiscal year 1998. If participating 
States find SIB's to be an effective way to increase 
investment, they can use their regularly apportioned Federal-
aid funds to capitalize SIB's further. The Committee proposes a 
major increase in the amount of Federal-aid highway funds that 
would be available for obligation.

                     Infrastructure Credit Program

Appropriations, 1997....................................................
Budget estimate, 1998 (trust fund)......................    $100,000,000
Committee recommendation................................................

                          (Highway Trust Fund)

    The administration proposes $100,000,000 for an 
infrastructure credit enhancement program. This program is 
intended to address the funding gap for large projects of 
national significance that due to their scale and complexity 
cannot be adequately funded through a SIB. This new program 
would supplement existing Federal programs and leverage private 
capital investment.
    This program has not yet been authorized, so the Committee 
proposes no funding for fiscal year 1998.

             NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION

                  Summary of Fiscal Year 1998 Program

    The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration [NHTSA] 
was established as a separate organizational entity in the 
Department of Transportation in March 1970, to reduce the 
mounting number of deaths, injuries, and economic costs 
resulting from traffic crashes on the Nation's highways. The 
National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act provides for the 
establishment and enforcement of Federal safety standards for 
motor vehicles and associated equipment and research, including 
the operation of required testing facilities and the National 
Driver Register. The Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings 
Act initially provided for the establishment of low-speed 
collision bumper standards, consumer information activities, 
diagnostic inspection, and odometer regulations and was later 
amended to incorporate responsibility for the administration of 
Federal automotive fuel economy standards.
    The Highway Safety Act provides for a coordinated highway 
safety grant program to be carried out by the States, together 
with supporting research, development, and demonstration 
programs. Under section 403 of title 23, United States Code, 
technical assistance is provided to the States in the conduct 
of their highway safety programs, and research and 
demonstration projects are conducted to develop and show the 
effectiveness of new techniques and countermeasures to address 
highway safety problems including the Safe Communities Injury 
Control Program initiated in 1996.
    Grants are provided to the States under title 23, United 
States Code, section 402 to assist in the establishment and 
improvement of highway safety programs designed to reduce 
traffic crashes, deaths, and injuries. Grants are funded as 
contract authority and apportioned by formula to the States. 
Alcohol incentive grants are also allocated to the States for 
driver impairment safety programs under title 23, United States 
Code, section 410. In addition, some Federal-aid highway 
apportionments may be transferred, pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 153, 
to States that have not put safety belt use laws into effect.
    The Committee recommends a total program level of 
$333,500,000 for the activities and programs of the National 
Highway Traffic Safety Administration for fiscal year 1998. 
This is $500,000 more than the budget request.
    The following table summarizes the Committee 
recommendations:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  Fiscal year                                   
                            Program                               1997 enacted     Fiscal year      Committee   
                                                                      \1\         1998 estimate   recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Operations and research.......................................    $132,612,000     $147,500,000    $146,500,000 
General funds.................................................     (80,900,000)  ..............     (74,760,000)
Highway trust funds...........................................     (51,712,000)   (147,500,000)     (71,740,000)
Highway traffic safety grants \2\.............................  \3\ 168,100,000  \3\ 185,500,00                 
                                                                                              0  \3\ 187,000,000
                                                               -------------------------------------------------
      Total...................................................  \4\ 300,712,000     333,000,000     333,500,000 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Excludes reductions for TASC and awards pursuant to sections 321 and 346 of Public Law 104-205.             
\2\ Limitation on obligations.                                                                                  
\3\ Includes highway-related safety grants program previously funded in FHWA.                                   
\4\ Excludes $3,000,000 in contract authorization provided in Public Law 105-18.                                

                        Operations and Research

                     (Including Highway Trust Fund)

Appropriations, 1997 \1\................................    $132,612,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................     147,500,000
Committee recommendation................................     146,500,000

\1\ Excludes reduction of $629,812 for TASC and awards pursuant to 
sections 321 and 346 of Public Law 104-205.

    The bill includes an appropriation of $146,500,000 for 
operations and research, which is $1,000,000 less than the 
budget request.
    This level of funding provides for 660 full-time permanent 
positions. The amount appropriated is to be distributed as 
follows:

                                          [Dollar amounts in thousands]                                         
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    Fiscal year                                 
                                                                       1997         Fiscal year      Committee  
                             Program                               appropriation    1998 budget   recommendation
                                                                       level         estimate                   
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Safety performance..............................................         $12,226         $13,124         $13,124
    (Positions).................................................            (95)            (95)            (95)
Safety assurance................................................         $18,966         $19,923         $19,348
    (Positions).................................................           (103)           (103)           (103)
Highway safety..................................................         $44,465         $49,665         $48,920
    (Positions).................................................           (203)           (203)           (199)
Research and analysis...........................................         $50,387         $57,411         $57,411
    (Positions).................................................           (132)           (132)           (132)
Office of the Administrator.....................................          $3,728          $4,116          $4,116
    (Positions).................................................            (41)            (41)            (41)
General administration..........................................          $8,568          $9,419          $9,419
    (Positions).................................................            (90)            (90)            (90)
Grant administration reimbursement..............................         -$6,358         -$6,158         -$5,838
Accountwide adjustments.........................................  ..............                                
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      Total.....................................................        $131,982        $147,500        $146,500
      (Positions)...............................................           (664)           (664)           (660)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Excludes reductions for TASC and awards pursuant to sections 321 and 346 of Public Law 104-205.             

    Adjustments have been made to the administration's 
requested level in the following accounts:

Safety assurance:
    Auto safety hotline.................................       -$500,000
    Odometer fraud......................................         -75,000
Highway safety:
    National occupant protection........................        +413,000
    Alcohol, drugs, and State programs..................      +1,066,000
    Police traffic services.............................        -204,000
    Youth, drugs, and driving initiative................      -2,000,000
    Head injury management..............................        +300,000
    Reduction of four FTE's.............................        -320,000

                      safety performance standards

    Airbag deactivation rule.--While NHTSA estimates that 
thousands of lives have been saved as a result of airbags since 
1990, more than 60 people have been killed by airbags in 
crashes that, without the airbag, were unlikely to cause 
injury. Most of these victims have been small-statured adults 
and children. The Committee is aware of the substantial public 
concern regarding the potential dangers of airbags. Many 
parents are not able to fit all of their children in the back 
seat of a car, and many families carpool, which often requires 
children to ride in the front seat. The Committee directs NHTSA 
by December 31, 1997, to make a determination with regard to 
its pending rulemaking on airbag deactivation. The Committee 
also directs NHTSA to continue to make available to parents and 
other individuals accurate information on the safety benefits 
and risks of airbags and on the correct use of airbags.
    Uniform tire quality grading standards.--The Committee has 
included a prohibition that has been included in previous 
appropriations acts, on any rulemaking which would require that 
passenger car tires be labeled to indicate their low rolling 
resistance, or fuel economy characteristics. The Committee has 
included this provision because the need for such labels has 
not been adequately justified and the additional costs 
associated with this proposal would likely be prohibitive.

                            safety assurance

    Auto safety hotline.--The Committee recommends $953,000 to 
continue present operations of the auto safety hotline. In 
fiscal year 1997, funding for this program increased 125 
percent to $1,483,000. One of the reasons for this dramatic 
increase was to expand computer and telephone equipment to 
handle a greater volume of calls. This equipment upgrade has 
largely been accomplished, and therefore, such a high level of 
funding should not be needed. The Committee's level of $953,000 
represents a 45-percent increase over the fiscal year 1996 
level. Moreover, the Committee urges NHTSA to maximize the use 
of the internet both to improve access to safety reports and 
brochures and to receive information on possible vehicle 
defects.
    Odometer fraud program.--The Committee has provided a total 
of $135,000 for the odometer fraud program, which is $75,000 
more than the fiscal year 1997 level and $75,000 less than the 
administration's request.

                        highway safety programs

    Alcohol, drugs, and State programs.--The Committee has 
provided $10,209,000, the same amount appropriated for fiscal 
year 1997 and $1,066,000 more than the administration's 
request. Alcohol was involved in more than 17,000 traffic 
fatalities in 1996, accounting for more than 41 percent of all 
traffic fatalities. Furthermore, the number of alcohol-related 
traffic fatalities increased in 1996 for the first time in many 
years. To address this challenge, it is important that at least 
the fiscal year 1997 level of alcohol countermeasure funding be 
maintained.
    National Occupant Protection Program.--The Committee has 
provided $7,023,000, which is $413,000 above the 
administration's requested level, in order to enhance NHTSA's 
effort to meet the national goal of 85 percent belt use rate 
throughout the United States. There is overwhelming evidence 
that increased seatbelt use is the most effective mechanism in 
preventing traffic-related injuries and fatalities. Increasing 
belt use to 85 percent is expected to prevent almost 4,200 
fatalities and 102,000 injuries and is estimated to save the 
Nation $6,700,000,000 annually in medical expenses and losses 
in economic productivity. Within the funds provided, the 
Committee has included $1,000,000 in State grants for a new 
pilot program for States to experiment with alternative safety 
restraint bar devices on schoolbuses. The Committee is 
encouraged by new technologies which would improve safety 
restraint usage rates on schoolbuses. NHTSA shall report back 
to the Committee no later than December 31, 1997, on the 
implementation of this program.
    Enforcement and emergency services.--The Committee has 
provided $3,196,000, $811,000 more than the fiscal year 1997 
level and $204,000 less than the administration's request. The 
Committee has not included funding for a new Federal study to 
demonstrate that traffic enforcement can lead to criminal 
apprehension. The link between traffic enforcement and criminal 
activity is apparent and has already been documented by NHTSA, 
and does not necessitate a new Federal study.
    Automatic external defibrillators.--The Committee believes 
that the use of automatic external defibrillators [AED's] by 
emergency responders can significantly improve cardiac arrest 
survival rates. To ensure that training standards for use of 
AED's are not unnecessarily burdensome and are consistent with 
new easy-to-use AED technology, the Committee encourages the 
Secretary to work with State departments of transportation and 
other appropriate State agencies to review their defibrillator 
training requirements and to modify these requirements where 
appropriate.
    Driving, drugs, and youth initiative.--The Committee has 
not provided any funds for this initiative. It is doubtful that 
prelicensor drug testing, which is more of an intelligence test 
than a safety countermeasure, would have any measurable impact 
on teen drug use or on traffic safety problems caused by 
younger drivers. This 4-year demonstration program would cost 
at least $16,000,000 during the next 3 years and would detract 
from the amount of funds available for many critical highway 
safety initiatives, such as reducing alcohol-impaired driving, 
increasing seatbelt use, reducing drug-impaired driving, and 
programs to improve youth driving skills. This initiative is 
designed to be a demonstration program for other States to 
model, but most States will be discouraged from repeating this 
program because of the serious constitutional, legal, and 
privacy issues raised by this program, and the enormous startup 
costs States would incur without Federal assistance. The 
Committee notes that the National Association of Governors' 
Highway Safety Representatives opposes this program.
    Head injury management.--The Committee has included 
$300,000 for the purpose of improving prehospital care for 
head-injured patients. Each year, 500,000 people are 
hospitalized due to head injuries, the majority of which are 
caused by motor vehicle accidents. The economic impact of 
traumatic brain injury is estimated at more than 
$40,000,000,000 annually. The American Association of 
Neurological Surgeons [AANS], the Congress of Neurosurgeons 
[CNS], and the World Health Organization Committee on 
Neurotrauma have recently endorsed a single set of 
scientifically based ``Guidelines for the Management of Severe 
Head Injury.'' In 1996, the guidelines were published and 
distributed to neurosurgeons, neurologists, critical care 
physicians, and emergency room physicians throughout the United 
States. However, although one-third of the guidelines address 
prehospital resuscitation and care, to date no direct effort 
has been made to get the guidelines, and the protocol spelled 
out within them, to the emergency medical service medical 
directors or the emergency medical service personnel in the 
ambulances and helicopters. The Committee has provided $300,000 
so that the scientific guidelines may be translated into a 
useful document for EMS personnel, including the development of 
new patient management protocol, algorithms, and training 
support materials. The Committee encourages NHTSA to work with 
the Aitken Neuroscience Institute to accomplish this objective.
    FTE reduction.--The administration has given States 
considerably more flexibility under the section 402 State 
Highway Safety Grant Program and reduced the level of Federal 
management of this program. NHTSA should not need as many 
employees to administer this program. Therefore, the Committee 
is reducing the FTE level and transferring the corresponding 
funds into the State grant program.

                         research and analysis

    Special crash investigations.--The Committee has provided 
the requested increase in funding to analyze airbag-related 
crashes which involve serious injuries or fatalities. Following 
the March 1997 NHTSA rule which allows automobile manufacturers 
to depower their airbags, many manufacturers have announced 
that all, or most, of their 1998 model year vehicles will 
incorporate depowered bags. Therefore, the Committee directs 
NHTSA to ensure that sufficient emphasis is placed on 
quantifying the safety benefits and costs associated with 
depowering airbags. Specifically, NHTSA should investigate 
crashes involving vehicles with depowered airbags in which 
there was a front-seat occupant fatality or serious injury and 
compare the effectiveness of depowered airbags with that of 
full-powered airbags for: (1) vulnerable occupants such as 
small-statured adults and children; (2) all unbelted occupants; 
and (3) fatalities and injuries for all occupants.
    Biomechanics.--The Committee recommends $10,587,000, the 
amount requested in the budget. This appropriation continues 
funding for hospital-based, indepth crash injury studies at 
four trauma centers. Currently, these centers are located at 
the William Lehman Injury Research Center at Jackson Memorial 
Hospital, Miami; the National Study Center for Trauma and EMS, 
Baltimore; the University of Medicine and Dentistry, New 
Jersey; and the Children's National Medical Center, Washington, 
DC.

                     Highway Traffic Safety Grants

                (Liquidation of Contract Authorization)

                          (Highway Trust Fund)

Appropriations, 1997....................................  ($168,100,000)
Budget estimate, 1998...................................   (185,000,000)
Committee recommendation................................   (186,000,000)

    The budget provides for the continuation of the safety 
formula grant program. Grant allocations are determined on the 
basis of a statutory formula established under 23 U.S.C. 402. 
The budget proposes consolidating grant programs into a State 
and community formula grant program. Individual States use this 
funding in national priority areas established by Congress 
which have the greatest potential for achieving safety 
improvements and reducing traffic crashes, fatalities, and 
injuries. The alcohol incentive grant program encourages States 
to enact stiffer laws and implement stronger programs to detect 
and remove impaired drivers from the roads. The proposed 
occupant protection program encourages States to promote and 
strengthen occupant protection initiatives.
    The Committee recommends an appropriation for liquidation 
of contract authorization of $186,000,000 for the payment of 
obligations incurred in carrying out provisions of the State 
and Community Highway Safety Program (sec. 402) and the 
Impaired Driving Countermeasures Incentive Grant Program (sec. 
410).
    The Committee has included a provision prohibiting the use 
of section 402 funds for construction, rehabilitation or 
remodeling costs, or for office furnishings and fixtures for 
State, local, or private buildings or structures.

                       limitation on obligations

    The bill includes language limiting the obligations to be 
incurred under the various highway traffic safety grants 
programs, as requested in the budget. Separate obligation 
limitations are included in the bill with the following funding 
allocations:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Fiscal year      Fiscal year       Committee   
                                                                 1997 enacted    1998 estimate    recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State and community grants \1\...............................     $140,200,000     $140,200,000     $150,700,000
Alcohol incentive grants.....................................       25,500,000       34,000,000       34,000,000
Occupant protection incentive grants.........................  ...............        9,000,000  ...............
National Driver Register.....................................        2,400,000        2,300,000        2,300,000
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Total..................................................      168,100,000      185,500,000      187,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Merges FHWA's and NHTSA's section 402 formula grant programs.                                               

    The Committee has included an obligation limitation of 
$150,700,000 for the section 402 program, which is $10,500,000 
more than the budget request. This limitation includes 
$138,700,000 for NHTSA's section 402 grant program and 
$12,000,000 for FHWA's section 402 grant program. Language is 
included in the bill limiting funds available for Federal 
grants administration to $4,948,000. A reduction of four FTE's 
of NHTSA personnel in the field is recommended with the savings 
being transferred to the States to help design their own safety 
programs after careful evaluation of their safety problems and 
resources.
    Within the moneys allowed for the section 402 program, the 
Committee has included $9,000,000 to expedite the efforts of 
the States to increase seatbelt use. The Committee intends that 
these funds will be used for occupant protection activities 
beyond the estimated amount that each State spent in this area 
in fiscal year 1997.
    The Committee has provided additional funds beyond the 
amount requested for the basic section 402 program to support 
the States' efforts to prepare performance-based highway safety 
plans. As a result of interim final regulations issued by NHTSA 
and FHWA, all States will be required to prepare performance-
based plans during fiscal year 1998 to receive section 402 
moneys. The preparation of these documents will require 
improved data analysis and information systems and program 
evaluation. To defer these additional costs, the Committee has 
recommended $1,500,000 above the administration's request.

                       FORMULA GRANTS (SEC. 410)

    The Committee proposes a total limitation of $34,000,000 
for obligations to be incurred under the section 410 Alcohol-
Impaired Driving Countermeasures Program authorized under the 
Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991. The 
section 410 program has provided incentives to States to 
implement innovative strategies to reduce drunk and drugged 
driving, and constitutes an essential part of the goal to 
reduce alcohol-related traffic deaths. To receive grants under 
the section 410 program, States must satisfy certain basic 
criteria established by Congress, including prompt license 
suspension, legal blood-alcohol content levels, sobriety 
checkpoints, self-sustaining community alcohol programs, 
mandatory sentencing, and control of access to alcohol by 
youth. Supplemental grant funding is available to States that 
meet additional criteria, including .02 BAC zero tolerance laws 
for drivers under age 21, open container laws, strict drugged 
driving prevention programs, and mandatory BAC testing 
programs. Section 410 grants funds may be used only to support 
programs to reduce impaired driving.
    The bill includes language, as requested, providing that 
$500,000 of the section 410 moneys shall be used for technical 
assistance.

                        national driver register

    The National Driver Register [NDR] is a central repository 
of information on individuals whose licenses to operate a motor 
vehicle have been revoked, suspended, canceled, or denied. As 
authorized by Congress, the NDR is transitioning to an 
electronic problem driver pointer system to facilitate the 
decisionmaking by State driver licensing officials. NHTSA is 
preparing for transfer of certain NDR activities to a non-
Federal entity. The NDR also contains information on persons 
who have been convicted of serious traffic-related violations 
such as driving while impaired by alcohol or other drugs. State 
driver licensing officials query the NDR when individuals apply 
for a license, for the purpose of determining whether driving 
privileges have been withdrawn by other States. Other 
organizations such as the Federal Aviation Administration and 
the Federal Railroad Administration also use NDR license data 
in hiring and certification decisions in overall U.S. 
transportation operations.
    The bill includes an obligation limitation of $2,300,000 
for the NDR, which is the same as the administration's request.

                    FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION

                  Summary of Fiscal Year 1998 Program

    The Federal Railroad Administration [FRA] became an 
operating administration within the Department of 
Transportation on April 1, 1967. It incorporated the Bureau of 
Railroad Safety from the Interstate Commerce Commission, the 
Office of High Speed Ground Transportation from the Department 
of Commerce, and the Alaska Railroad from the Department of the 
Interior. The Federal Railroad Administration is responsible 
for planning, developing, and administering programs to achieve 
safe operating and mechanical practices in the railroad 
industry. Grants to the National Railroad Passenger Corporation 
(Amtrak) and other financial assistance programs to 
rehabilitate and improve the railroad industry's physical plant 
are also administered by the Federal Railroad Administration.
    The Committee recommends new appropriations and obligation 
limitations totaling $618,223,000 for the activities of the 
Federal Railroad Administration for fiscal year 1998. This is 
$278,086,000 less than the budget request.
    The following table summarizes the Committee 
recommendations:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Fiscal year      Fiscal year                    
                           Program                              1997 enacted     1998 budget        Committee   
                                                                    \1\            estimate      recommendation 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office of the Administrator.................................      $16,739,000      $20,559,000      $19,800,000 
Railroad safety.............................................       51,407,000       57,067,000       57,067,000 
Railroad research and development...........................       20,100,000       21,638,000       24,906,000 
Northeast Corridor Improvement Program......................      175,000,000  ...............      273,450,000 
Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Program.............  ...............  ...............  ................
High-speed rail trainsets and facilities....................       80,000,000  ...............  ................
Next generation high-speed rail.............................       24,757,000       19,595,000       26,000,000 
Alaska railroad rehabilitation..............................       10,000,000  ...............       17,000,000 
Rhode Island rail development...............................        7,000,000       10,000,000       10,000,000 
Direct Loan Financing Program...............................       58,680,000  ...............  ................
Grants to National Railroad Passenger Corporation \2\.......      587,950,000  ...............      344,000,000 
Capital grants to National Railroad Passenger Corporation                                                       
 (HTF)......................................................  ...............       445,450,00  ................
Operating grants to National Railroad Passenger Corporation                                                     
 (HTF)......................................................  ...............      344,000,000  ................
                                                             ---------------------------------------------------
    Total...................................................    1,031,633,000      918,309,000      722,223,000 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Excludes reductions for TASC and awards pursuant to sections 321 and 346 of Public Law 104-205; also        
  excludes $18,900,000 in emergency railroad rehabilitation and repair.                                         
\2\ Includes mandatory passenger rail service payments.                                                         

                      Office of the Administrator

Appropriations, 1997 \1\................................     $16,739,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................      20,559,000
Committee recommendation................................      19,800,000

\1\ Excludes reductions for TASC and awards pursuant to sections 321 and 
346 of Public Law 104-205.

    The Office of the Administrator provides support and 
guidance on issues concerning the railroad industry and the 
day-to-day operations of the Federal Railroad Administration. 
The appropriation includes budget activities related to 
executive direction and administration and policy support aimed 
at resolving problems facing the railroad industry. For the 
Office of the Administrator, the Committee provides 
$19,800,000. The amount provided is $759,000 less than the 
administration's request.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends the following adjustments to the 
budget request:

Limit growth in technical assistance and policy support.......  -$50,000
Limit growth in support services..............................   -85,000
Limit growth in information technology........................  -146,000
Reduce costs for GSA rent.....................................  -442,000
Chief Counsel staffing (-1 FTE)...............................   -36,000

    Technical assistance and policy support.--The Committee 
recommends $50,000 for contract support, which is $50,000 less 
than the amount requested. The additional funds provided will 
allow FRA to improve the analytical tools used by the States to 
decide whether to invest in rail-related projects. The 
Committee has not provided the amount requested because of 
budgetary limitations and the availability of more than 20 
staff in the Office of Policy and Program Development to 
conduct much of the analysis needed to support its mission.
    Support services.--Because of budgetary limitations, the 
Committee is recommending $40,000, which is $85,000 below the 
request. This reduction shall not affect travel in the 
Northeast corridor to maintain adequate Amtrak oversight.
    Information technology.--Because of budgetary limitations 
and the need to reduce the rate of funding increase in this 
area, the Committee is recommending $146,000, which is $146,000 
below the request.
    GSA rent.--The Committee is concerned that FRA is incurring 
higher rental costs at its headquarters offices in downtown 
Washington than it would at the Nassif Building, where other 
departmental agencies are located. The Committee, therefore, 
recommends a GSA rent funding level of $2,513,000, a reduction 
of $442,000 below the administration's request. It is the 
Committee's strong preference that FRA return its headquarters 
staff to the Nassif Building where the agency is more fully 
integrated within the departmental community.
    Chief Counsel staffing.--It is the Committee's opinion that 
the additional position requested to assist the Chief Counsel's 
office with regulatory issues is not necessary at this time.
    Operation Respond.--Operation Respond is a project designed 
to improve information available to first responders at 
hazardous materials and passenger train incidents. Through 
software and training developed by this joint industry/
government partnership, fire and law enforcement dispatch 
centers have increased capability to determine quickly and 
accurately the contents of a hazardous material railcar or 
truck trailer involved in an accident. Currently there are 
approximately 104 installations using this technology in 17 
States. Work has resulted in the development and demonstration 
of a CD-ROM that includes diagrams and photographs of rail 
equipment, suggested extrication points, rescue guidelines, 
emergency/handicapped features of railcars as well as full 
motion video and audio procedures for removal of passenger car 
windows and doors. The Federal investment in this program has 
successfully generated commensurate investments from rail and 
commercial motor vehicle carriers. The Committee sees benefit 
in supporting this program to include regional and shortline 
railroads as well as continuing refinements in the area of 
passenger rail. The Committee's allowance includes $50,000, as 
requested, to support this important program. Additional funds 
for Operation Respond are included in the Intelligent 
Transportation Systems Program within the Federal Highway 
Administration section of this report.

                            Railroad Safety

Appropriations, 1997 \1\................................     $51,407,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................      57,067,000
Committee recommendation................................      57,067,000

\1\ Excludes reductions for TASC and awards pursuant to sections 321 and 
346 of Public Law 104-205.

    This appropriation finances the development, 
administration, and enforcement of programs designed to achieve 
safe operating and mechanical practices in the railroad 
industry.
    The Committee recommends a $57,067,000 program level for 
the Railroad Safety Program, the same amount requested by the 
administration.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends the following adjustments to the 
budget request:

Limit staff increase and associated personnel costs (-2 FTE's)  -$72,000
Limit growth in technology systems............................   -77,000
Rail safety advisory committee................................  -100,000
Administrative reduction......................................   -40,000
Automated track inspection vehicle............................  -111,000
Grade crossing safety activities..............................  +400,000

    FRA-wide technology systems.--Because of budgetary 
limitations, the Committee recommends a reduction of $77,000 
for FRA-wide technology systems. FRA is provided the 
flexibility to find necessary cost savings within the budget of 
the Office of Safety to pay for video conferencing and imaging 
systems.
    Railroad Safety Advisory Committee [RSAC].--The cooperative 
work of rail industry, labor, government, and other concerned 
parties assembled under the auspices of the Railroad Safety 
Advisory Committee, has been rather successful. The quality of 
proposed regulations has improved. Neither rail labor nor 
management have voiced any concerns to the Committee regarding 
this process, and the overall costs of regulatory formulation 
have decreased. The Committee commends this process and praises 
the voluntary contributions of all those individuals involved. 
Because of the success of this effort and the need for 
continued progress in FRA's regulatory process, the Committee 
recommends an increase of $50,000 over the enacted level to 
support the RSAC. Because of budgetary limitations and the 
longstanding interest of reducing expenses of the Department's 
Federal advisory committees, the Committee is unable to provide 
the entire amount requested. The Committee also notes that 
other modal administrations use negotiated rulemaking processes 
without requesting substantial increases in their operating 
budgets.
    Administrative reduction.--The Office of Safety is provided 
the administrative flexibility to find $40,000 in savings from 
travel, permanent change of station costs, bonuses, or other 
administrative expenses.
    Automated track inspection vehicle [ATIP].--The Committee 
strongly supports FRA's efforts to replace the T-10 track 
geometry inspection vehicle. ATIP provides a means of detecting 
geometry defects in track that help direct critical repairs and 
prevent track-related accidents, and also assists FRA safety 
inspectors in planning their inspections based on historical 
trends. The current vehicle is 16 years old, and has become 
more difficult to use due to nonavailability of parts and lack 
of expertise to repair. However, the Committee is confident 
that reducing the $3,000,000 requested funding for ATIP by 
$111,000 will not delay the design, integration, installation, 
and delivery of the new vehicle beyond the 18-month schedule 
estimated by the agency.
    Grade crossing safety.--The Committee recommends that not 
less than $600,000 shall be allocated for activities to improve 
grade crossing safety. This represents an increase of $400,000 
above the base program level of $200,000. FRA's grade crossing 
program will include: encouraging the safe consolidation and 
closing of crossings consistent with State and local 
objectives; working with State and local government safety 
officials to reduce the risk of crashes; promoting the use of 
technology to improve compliance with traffic signals and 
signs; and providing outreach and educational materials to the 
judicial and enforcement community. These funds are in addition 
to those provided for information analysis and collection.
    Significant improvements in grade crossing safety have been 
realized, especially since 1994. Continued reductions in the 
number of grade crossing fatalities and injuries will require 
sustained efforts by the traffic safety community, industry, 
and the FRA. The Committee supports FRA's longstanding 
commitment that its field staff dedicate a portion of their 
time to Operation Lifesaver activities. Unfortunately, FRA's 
commitment to this objective has apparently diminished. 
Although there are other workload demands on FRA's inspectors, 
these demands should be balanced with the need to address the 
major causal factor of death and injury associated with rail 
transportation: namely, failure to comply with grade crossing 
signs and signals and railroad property rights. Consequently, 
the Committee requests the Administrator to reinstitute and 
adhere to the goal of ensuring that most FRA inspectors play a 
definitive role in promoting the public educational aspects of 
grade crossing safety and preventing trespassing on railroad 
properties. The Committee directs FRA to prepare a letter to 
the House and Senate Appropriations Committees detailing 
significantly increased inspector time allocated toward 
Operation Lifesaver activities. The letter, to be submitted by 
May 1, 1998, shall include information of the increased 
frequency of Operation Lifesaver contacts and copies of 
memoranda to the field staff demonstrating FRA's commitment to 
the goal of active FRA participation in Operation Lifesaver 
activities. The Committee encourages FRA to increase the 
percentage of safety inspectors who are certified to be 
Operation Lifesaver presenters from the current level of 60 
percent to 80 percent.

                   Railroad Research and Development

Appropriations, 1997 \1\................................     $20,100,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................      21,638,000
Committee recommendation................................      24,906,000

\1\ Excludes reductions for TASC pursuant to section 321 of Public Law 
104-205.

    The Federal Railroad Administration's Railroad Research and 
Development Program provides for research in the development of 
safety and performance standards for high speed rail and the 
evaluation of their role in the Nation's transportation 
infrastructure. The program also provides support for the 
Deputy Associate Administrator for Technology Development and 
the staff of the Office of Research and Development. The 
Committee recommends an appropriation of $24,906,000 for 
railroad research and development.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends the following changes to the 
administration's budget submission:

Equipment, operations, and hazardous materials..........       +$250,000
Track, structures, and train control....................      +3,500,000
Safety of high-speed ground transportation..............        -600,000
Research and development facilities.....................         -80,000
Administration..........................................        -102,000
Transportation research board study.....................        +300,000

    Equipment, operations, and hazardous materials.--The 
Committee recommends a funding level of $5,759,000 for this 
budget activity, an increase of $250,000 above the requested 
level. Within this funding, the Committee has deleted $100,000 
associated with the diesel multiple units and light rail 
vehicle project element, and a reduction of $50,000 from 
equipment-related research.
    Operation Lifesaver.--Within the equipment, operations, and 
hazardous materials budget activity, the Committee recommends 
$600,000 to support Operation Lifesaver activities, which is 
$200,000 more than requested in the budget. This increase is 
necessary to ensure adequate assistance and support to the 49 
State Operation Lifesaver programs. These moneys will be used 
for: providing appropriate and ongoing training and advisory 
services for State and regional coordinators, trainers, and 
presenters; developing and distributing generic public 
education materials and public service campaign materials for 
radio and print media; supporting State and community outreach, 
including materials for commercial drivers, law enforcement 
personnel, prosecutors and judges, and encouraging development 
of State and community trespass prevention programs.
    1-800 emergency notification system.--The Committee 
maintains that FRA should proceed expeditiously with the 
development and evaluation of computer-based emergency response 
systems that will expedite notification of malfunctioning grade 
crossing signals, or track obstacles, such as trucks that have 
become hung-up on high-profile rail crossings. Such statewide 
systems are recommended by the National Transportation Safety 
Board as a means to warn railroads and local law enforcement of 
such problems, before they contribute to an accident. The 
$200,000 included by the Committee for this initiative within 
the equipment, operations, and hazardous materials budget 
activity will allow FRA to expand this project to allow 
participation of three States. Before the fiscal year 1999 
budget is submitted to Congress, the Administrator shall 
provide the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations a 
research and technology transfer plan with definitive schedules 
delineating the process and timetable that will be used to 
complete this project and promote State investment in this 
approach to improve grade crossing safety.
    Track, structures, and train control.--The Committee has 
provided a funding level of $11,246,000 for the track, 
structures, and train control budget activity, an increase of 
$3,500,000 above the administration's request. The Committee 
has not provided the $500,000 requested for replacement and 
upgrade of the T-6 inspection railcar, but will consider 
without prejudice any proposed reprogramming action to provide 
the necessary funds within FRA's research and development 
office for this new equipment.
    Alaska Railroad positive train control demonstration 
project.--The Committee has provided $4,000,000 for a positive 
train control demonstration [PTC] project on the Alaska 
Railroad. The focus of the project should be on positive train 
separation and the protection of track crews and inspectors, as 
well as improved train performance and eliminating the need for 
construction of additional sidings. The Committee understands 
that the Alaska Railroad presents a uniquely suitable 
demonstration staging area, because it is simpler to implement 
PTC on the Alaska Railroad than on any other American rail 
system. The Alaska Railroad does not have any signaling system 
in place today--only grade crossing signals, and dispatching of 
trains is done exclusively with voice radio transmission of 
track warrants. Consequently, there is no debate on what the 
correct strategy to convert from current conventional signaling 
to PTC signaling. In addition, the Alaska Railroad already has 
a microwave communications system in place, and the State of 
Alaska Highway Department and the railroad have coordinated and 
integrated their respective microwave communications systems so 
that a failure at any one site on either will not interrupt the 
flow of messages. This redundancy increases the reliability of 
both systems and will assist the successful implementation of 
PTC.
    The Alaska Railroad PTC project will be the first 
regionwide installation of positive train control equipment, 
and the Alaska Railroad will be the first railroad totally PTC 
equipped. The project will be more than a demonstration--it 
will be a fully operational PTC system, providing the agency an 
invaluable baseline reference for other national positive train 
control system development projects. The $4,000,000 provided in 
the Senate mark will allow FRA and the railroad to develop and 
install computer-aided dispatching, which is phase 1 of the 
four-phase project.
    Safety of high-speed ground transportation.--This budget 
activity is increased by $50,000 above the fiscal year 1997 
baseline. The Committee has deleted $500,000 associated with 
maglev systems cooperative research and $100,000 associated 
with environmental issues/impact analyses.
    Research and development facilities.--The Committee 
supports the agency's request to restore the FRA Transportation 
Technology Center [TTC] in Pueblo, CO, and has included the 
$350,000 requested to purchase or upgrade heavy equipment, 
laboratory instrumentation, and emergency support equipment at 
the TTC. The $80,000 for preliminary design for a project 
maintenance facility building is not included.
    Administration.--The administrative costs of the research 
and development program have grown significantly during the 
last 2 years. For example, fiscal year 1996 costs were 
$1,695,000; fiscal year 1997 costs are estimated at $2,181,000. 
In order to eliminate further growth in this area, the 
Committee is providing administration funding at the enacted 
level, $2,181,000, which is $102,000 below the amount 
requested.
    Transportation Research Board review.--The Transportation 
Research Board [TRB] Committee for an Assessment of Federal 
High Speed Ground Transportation R&D has provided useful 
recommendations on the Next Generation of High Speed Rail 
Program. Discussions with FRA indicate that TRB's advice has 
been welcome, appreciated, and useful. FRA should continue to 
adjust its budget submission to respond to the recommendations 
of the TRB panel.
    The Committee maintains that it would be beneficial to 
expand the purpose of the current TRB review to include a 
systematic analysis of the entire FRA research and development 
program. A reconstituted panel should also analyze the research 
and development management structure and approach and the 
current direction and allocation of moneys devoted to the 
various program areas. The questions of whether there is an 
appropriate balance of Federal, State, and private sector input 
and cost sharing and whether the directions and objectives 
outlined in FRA's 5-year strategic R&D plan are appropriate 
should be explored. Furthermore, the TRB panel should evaluate 
whether it is of critical importance to establish a Railroad 
Safety Institute, and whether such an institute would be 
duplicative of current research efforts. A focal point of this 
review should be to ascertain how the FRA research and 
development program could better serve the safety mission of 
the agency. The Committee maintains that periodic reports to 
FRA and to the Committee prior to markup would be especially 
useful. The Committee recommends $300,000 to support this 
initiative.

                 Northeast Corridor Improvement Program

Appropriations, 1997....................................    $175,000,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................         ( \1\ )
Committee recommendation................................     273,450,000

\1\ Requested funding of $200,000,000 for NECIP and $23,450,000 for 
Pennsylvania Station redevelopment is included in the proposed capital 
grants to the ``National Railroad Passengers Corporation (highway trust 
fund)'' appropriation.

    Title VII of the Railroad Revitalization and Regulatory 
Reform Act of 1976, as amended, created the Northeast corridor 
improvement project [NECIP] to upgrade and modernize the rail 
corridor between Washington, DC, and Boston, MA, the most 
heavily used rail passenger corridor in the Nation.
    Since 1976, some $3,775,000,000 has been invested by the 
Federal Government in the Northeast corridor. Amtrak is 
responsible for implementing the goals of NECIP, defined as 
regularly scheduled service between New York and Washington in 
under 3 hours and between New York and Boston in 3 hours. Over 
200 million intercity and commuter rail passengers travel on 
some portions of the Northeast corridor rail line each year.
    Since 1991, funding for the project has focused on two 
areas: reduction in trip time between New York and Boston; and 
state-of-good-repair recapitalization of the railroad between 
New York and Washington. The New York-Boston project is 
scheduled to be completed by October 1999, following 
construction of the new electrification system between New 
Haven and Boston and the delivery of the first of 18 new high-
speed trainsets. Many of the infrastructure improvements, 
necessary to permit up to 150-miles-per-hour speeds and 
facilitate increased growth on the rail line, have been 
designed and installed. Electrification construction work began 
on July 1, 1996, and is scheduled to be complete by the end of 
calendar year 1999.
    Amtrak projects that the operation of high-speed rail 
service on the Northeast corridor, made possible through the 
NECIP improvements, will enable it to generate net incremental 
revenues (after expenses and debt service) in excess of 
$168,000,000 in the year 2000. By 2001, Amtrak projects that 
ridership on the Northeast corridor will grow from the current 
level of 11,100,000 passengers per year to 14,700,000 
passengers annually. Amtrak estimates that an additional 
$1,400,000,000 will be needed to finish the high-speed rail 
project between New York and Boston.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee has provided $273,450,000 for the Northeast 
corridor improvement project, which includes $23,450,000 to 
complete the Federal share of funding for the Pennsylvania 
Station redevelopment project in New York City. This is 
$50,000,000 more for corridor improvements than requested by 
the administration.
    Pennsylvania Station redevelopment.--This redevelopment 
project makes safety and service improvements at the existing 
Pennsylvania Station, the Nation's busiest train station; and 
will convert a portion of the James A. Farley Post Office 
Building to be used as an intermodal station. This will greatly 
improve safety and circulation, and will provide significant 
new platform access, which will be necessary for both rail and 
transit passengers when the additional ridership generated by 
the new high-speed service is realized beginning in 1999. City, 
State, and private resources are being utilized in this 
cooperative redevelopment effort. The total cost of the project 
is estimated to be $315,000,000. The $23,450,000 provided by 
the Committee completes the Federal share of $100,000,000.
    On July 10, 1997, the Pennsylvania Station Redevelopment 
Corp.'s [PSRC] board voted unanimously to ratify funding 
agreements with all the project's funding partners: the New 
York City Economic Development Corp.; the New York State 
Department of Transportation; and the Federal Railroad 
Administration. In addition, funding has been provided to the 
PSRC by the Empire State Development Corp. At the PSRC board 
meeting, a revised project budget and schedule was also 
ratified, with construction (of early-action items such as the 
platform underneath the Farley Building) commencing in third 
quarter 1998, and completion of the entire construction project 
scheduled before the end of calendar year 2002. The Committee 
is confident that this new schedule and budget--as well as the 
clear separation of responsibilities between the PSRC, which is 
in charge of work at the Farley Building and Amtrak, which is 
in charge of the work in the existing Penn Station and all 
platform work--will help expedite the completion of the 
Pennsylvania Station redevelopment project.
    High-speed trainset safety and crashworthiness.--The 
Committee assigns the highest priority to passenger and crew 
safety and the crashworthiness of the trains to be used in the 
Northeast corridor high-speed rail project. Accordingly, the 
Committee expects that the equipment placed into service for 
this project meets or exceeds all of the safety and 
crashworthiness specification requirements, explicit or 
implicit.

            Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Program

    Section 511 of Public Law 94-210, as amended authorizes 
obligation guarantees for meeting the long-term capital needs 
of private railroads. Railroads utilize this funding mechanism 
to finance major new facilities and rehabilitation or 
consolidation of current facilities. No appropriations or new 
loan guarantee commitments are proposed in fiscal year 1998 
consistent with the budget request.

                    Next Generation High-Speed Rail

Appropriations, 1997 \1\................................     $24,757,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................      19,595,000
Committee recommendation................................      26,000,000

\1\ Excludes reduction for TASC pursuant to section 321 of Public Law 
104-205.

    The Committee has provided $26,000,000 in general fund 
appropriations for the high-speed ground transportation [HSGT] 
program. The amount provided is $6,405,000 more than the 
administration's request.
    The Committee first provided funding for the Next 
Generation High-Speed Rail Program in fiscal year 1995. The 
program is authorized by section 1036(a) of ISTEA and by the 
Swift Rail Development Act of 1994. The program funds HSGT 
research, development, and technology demonstration programs, 
as well as planning and analysis required to evaluate 
technology proposals under the program.
    The Committee has made the following adjustments to the 
administration's next generation high-speed rail programs:

High-speed positive train control.......................     -$1,250,000
High-speed nonelectric locomotives......................      +4,500,000
Grade crossing and innovative technologies..............      +3,000,000
Track and structure technology..........................        -350,000
Planning technology.....................................        +500,000
Administration..........................................          +5,000

    Within these program levels, the Committee recommends the 
following allocations:
    Flexible block control.--The Committee has reduced the 
administration's request for train control programs using 
flexible block control by $1,250,000, due to concerns that 
these funds might not readily be utilized by any of the 
existing or potential high-speed rail corridors. Much of the 
requested funding was to be used by the State of Illinois on 
the Chicago-St. Louis corridor for flexible block centralized 
control command systems demonstration. Due to recent freight 
rail mergers affecting the original corridor's route, the State 
is now negotiating with Chicago METRA to relocate the 
demonstration project. This may delay the project and the 
obligation of funds.
    ALPS hybrid flywheel-turbine.--The sum of $3,000,000 is 
provided for the design and development of a commercial 
locomotive prototype compatible with the flywheel propulsion 
system. The advanced locomotive propulsion system [ALPS] would 
permit more rapid acceleration of nonelectric locomotives, 
overcoming one of their major shortcomings. The ALPS hybrid 
flywheel-turbine project is a classic public sector research 
and development effort, incorporating the cooperation and 
expertise of the Federal Government, private industry, and 
academia. The project currently has a full-size rotor 
construction underway, and in May 1997, successfully tested a 
one-third scale rotor prototype.
    Prototype nonelectric high-speed locomotive.--The Committee 
recommends that FRA utilize the remaining $4,500,000 in the 
high-speed nonelectric locomotive activity on the design, 
development, and testing of different commercial nonelectric 
locomotive concepts that integrate to the greatest extent 
possible the best technologies currently being developed with 
those technologies under current development in the NGHSR 
Program, such as the flywheel motor/generator and power 
conversion system.
    RTL-3 turbo trains, State of New York.--The sum of 
$5,000,000 is provided to expedite the development, design, 
modernization and testing of next generation high-speed, 
lightweight trainsets for nonelectric corridors. Currently, one 
upgraded turboliner trainset is in revenue service on Amtrak's 
Empire corridor, which runs through the State from New York 
City to Buffalo. New York State DOT is seeking financing of up 
to $40,000,000 to upgrade the remainder of its fleet of seven 
turboliner trains, and the Committee anticipates that the funds 
provided herein will enable the State DOT to successfully 
leverage private financing for the balance of the necessary 
funds. These upgraded trainsets will safely and economically 
provide regular high-speed service at speeds of 110 to 125 
miles per hour.
    Sealed corridor initiative.--Within the $7,500,000 funding 
level for the grade crossing and innovative technology 
activity, $4,000,000 is provided for the sealed corridor 
initiative, an ongoing project addressing the 130 grade 
crossings in the 92-mile Charlotte to Greensboro segment of 
North Carolina's proposed high-speed rail corridor between 
Charlotte and Raleigh. Of the remaining funds, the Committee 
believes that $1,000,000 should go toward the continuation of 
FRA's broad agency announcement approach to solicit a wide 
range of low cost, innovative high-speed rail grade crossing 
technologies.
    Planning technology.--The administration is directed to 
provide $500,000 to a State department of transportation to 
establish a consortium of States and other participants that 
would assist the FRA in advancing high-speed rail. Consistent 
with the recommendation of a panel of the Transportation 
Research Board, this forum would provide the States with a 
mechanism on a continuing basis to: (1) develop a strategic 
plan for research, development, demonstration, and deployment 
of high-speed rail technology; (2) conduct a peer review of the 
FRA's research and development program to provide direction on 
research subject areas and also program and project oversight; 
and (3) provide a means for advancing the States' common 
requirements for compatible and interoperable equipment and 
systems. The consortium should work toward creating a common 
market opportunity to meet the high-speed rail needs of the 
States and coordinating the planning process for high-speed 
rail deployment.

                     Alaska Railroad Rehabilitation

Appropriations, 1997....................................     $10,000,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................................
Committee recommendation................................      17,000,000

    The Committee has included a total of $17,000,000 for rail 
safety and infrastructure improvements benefiting passenger 
operations of the Alaska railroad. This railroad extends 470 
miles from Seward through Anchorage, the largest city in 
Alaska, to the interior town of Fairbanks. It carries both 
passengers and freight, and provides a critical transportation 
link for passengers and cargo traveling through difficult 
terrain and harsh climatic conditions. Within the funds 
provided, $7,000,000 will be utilized to expand and improve the 
Seward Dock, the southernmost terminus of the railroad and an 
important intermodal transfer point on the Alaska Marine 
Highway System. The State of Alaska, the city of Seward, the 
Alaska Railroad, and cruise ship lines that utilize the port 
will provide significant cost-share funding toward completion 
of the project this fiscal year. The remaining $10,000,000 will 
go toward general upgrade and maintenance of the railroad's 
track, equipment, railbed and rolling stock.

                     Rhode Island Rail Development

Appropriations, 1997....................................      $7,000,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................      10,000,000
Committee recommendation................................      10,000,000

    For fiscal year 1997, Congress appropriated $7,000,000 to 
fund construction of a third track on the Northeast corridor 
between Davisville and Central Falls, RI, with sufficient 
clearance to accommodate double stack freight cars. The 
appropriation act stipulated that the State of Rhode Island or 
its designee provide matching funds on a dollar-for-dollar 
basis, and that the Providence & Worcester [P&W] Railroad, 
which would benefit from the third track, enter into an 
agreement with the Secretary to reimburse Amtrak and/or FRA up 
to $13,000,000 for damages stemming from certain potential 
legal actions brought by the P&W.
    For fiscal year 1998, the administration proposes to 
continue funding this project, with a dollar-for-dollar 
matching requirement of the State of Rhode Island or its 
designee and a requirement that the P&W enter into an agreement 
with the Secretary to reimburse Amtrak and/or FRA up to 
$13,000,000 for damages stemming from certain potential legal 
actions brought by the P&W. The Committee is providing 
$10,000,000 to continue the Rhode Island rail development 
project, the same amount as requested by the administration. 
Fiscal year 1998 will be the fourth year that Federal funds are 
appropriated for the Rhode Island rail development project. The 
total amount in Federal funds received thus far is $13,000,000. 
Total cost of the project over the planned 6-year schedule is 
somewhere between $110,000,000 and $120,000,000, with a 
required 50 percent match of Federal funds. In November 1996, 
the State of Rhode Island passed a $62,000,000 bond referendum, 
of which $50,000,000 is guaranteed for the rail redevelopment 
project. The major components of the project include 
rehabilitation/construction of a freight-dedicated third track, 
and modification of bridges and other structures to provide 
sufficient vertical clearance to accommodate modern freight 
equipment, and horizontal clearance to accommodate the freight-
dedicated track.

                     Direct Loan Financing Program

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Loan subsidy      Limitation on  
                                      appropriation       direct loans  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 1997..............  .................        $58,680,000
Budget estimate, 1998.............  .................  .................
Committee recommendation..........  .................  .................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The administration has not requested any funds under 
section 505 of the Rail Revitalization and Regulatory Reform 
Act of 1976 as all funds to complete the project were provided 
in 1997. This project involves the elimination of over 200 at-
grade-highway crossings along a 20-mile rail corridor in order 
to improve access to the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach.

       Grants to National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak)

Appropriations, 1997 \1\................................    $587,950,000
Budget estimate, 1998 \1\............................... \2\ 789,450,000
Committee recommendation................................     344,000,000

\1\ Includes $142,000,000 for mandatory passenger rail payments in 
fiscal year 1997 and $142,000,000 in fiscal year 1998.
\2\ 1998 funding to be derived from the highway trust fund.

    The National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) was 
established in 1971 to preserve and improve the Nation's 
intercity rail passenger system. Since the passage of the Rail 
Passenger Service Act in 1971, Amtrak and Amtrak-related 
accounts have been appropriated $20,305,800,000 in Federal 
funds. Since the beginning, Amtrak has been directed to 
maximize its revenues and minimize Government subsidies. The 
Corporation has consistently reported to Congress that it is 
moving toward self-sufficiency and zero Federal operating 
support. However, in the 26 years Amtrak has been in existence, 
the railroad has never once generated an annual profit. In 
fact, only one route on Amtrak's system--the Metroliner, which 
runs from Union Station in Washington, DC, to Pennsylvania 
Station in New York City--generates more revenue than it costs 
to operate.
    For fiscal year 1998, Amtrak has requested a total of 
$1,138,000,000 in Federal funds. Of this amount, $751,000,000 
is requested for capital expenses (including an unspecified 
amount for the Northeast Corridor Improvement Program), and 
$387,000,000 is requested for operating expenses and railroad 
retirement expenses. Since the railroad received a total of 
$364,500,000 in fiscal year 1997 operating expenses, it is 
difficult for the Committee to understand how this proposed 
increase reflects a step forward on Amtrak's glidepath to self-
sufficiency.
    The administration has requested a total of $789,450,000 
for Amtrak in fiscal year 1998. Of this amount, $445,450,000 is 
requested for capital expenses (including $200,000,000 for the 
Northeast Corridor Improvement Program and $23,450,000 to 
complete the Federal portion of the Pennsylvania Station 
redevelopment project). A discussion of the Committee's funding 
recommendations for NECIP and Penn Station are included under 
the Northeast Corridor Improvement Program header. For 
operating expenses, the administration requests $344,000,000. 
For fiscal year 1998, the administration has requested that 
Amtrak operating and capital funds be appropriated from the 
highway trust fund. There is no current authorization to fund 
Amtrak from the highway trust fund, and the Committee asserts 
that it would not be appropriate to pay for passenger rail 
costs out of a fund which is comprised of automobile gasoline 
tax receipts and other motor vehicle excise taxes.
    The Committee has provided a total funding level of 
$344,000,000 for Amtrak operating expenses, with the assumption 
that capital funding for Amtrak will be provided through a new 
separate account.
    The Committee is concerned that the Amtrak Federal grant 
request and the Federal Railroad Administration's budget 
justification for Amtrak do not provide sufficient information 
for the Committee to have a clear understanding of the 
railroad's budget request. The Committee will work with OMB, 
DOT, Amtrak, and the House Appropriations Committee to develop 
a clearer, more informative, and more accurate depiction of 
Amtrak operating needs for the fiscal year 1999 budget cycle.
    Needed reforms.--Amtrak is struggling under a huge debt 
load. In 1996, the combined debt and capital lease obligations 
for which the company was responsible totaled $986,900,000. 
Servicing this debt is taken off the top of Amtrak's operating 
revenues--in 1996, the interest paid on the Corporation's debts 
was $60,200,000. The Committee is concerned that, as Amtrak 
assumes more debt as the railroad acquires more capital 
equipment, the total debt load and level of interest expense 
will continue to rise dramatically. The Committee is also 
concerned that Amtrak has transferred Federal capital 
appropriations to pay these interest expenses. This practice is 
contrary to accepted financial standards, and appears 
inconsistent with Amtrak's own statements that capital 
investment is of paramount importance to the railroad's future. 
It appears to the Committee that Amtrak is digging a hole for 
itself and the American taxpayers, and the hole is getting 
deeper every year.
    In addition to the problems of the Corporation's solvency 
and the presentation of mandatory passenger rail payments, 
Amtrak is subject to labor provisions that affect only 
railroads and their employees. These legislative labor 
provisions include the Federal Employer's Liability Act, which 
is a fault-based workers' compensation system governing 
compensation for employee on-duty injuries; the Railway Labor 
Act (which also applies to airlines), governing labor relations 
issues of employee representation, dispute resolution, and 
negotiation of contracts; the Railroad Retirement Act, 
governing railroad employee retirement; and Rail Passenger 
Service Act provisions governing employee protective conditions 
and restricting Amtrak's ability to contract out services. It 
is the Committee's strongly held position that, although 
members differ on what reforms should be made, these issues 
must be addressed this year because, according to Amtrak's own 
testimony, it is unlikely that the railroad will survive 
through fiscal year 1998, even if funded at the 
administration's requested level. And even more importantly, 
while we cannot recover the more than $20,000,000,000 in 
appropriated funds that have already been lost while waiting 
for Amtrak to turn itself around, it is imperative that these 
difficult and complex issues be squarely faced now, so that we 
do not further compound the taxpayers' losses.
    There are currently many different legislative proposals to 
reform and restructure Amtrak, and to make the railroad more 
accountable. The House Transportation and Infrastructure 
Committee formed a working group on Amtrak, or a blue ribbon 
panel, that recently announced its recommendations. The Senate 
Commerce Committee reported out its reauthorization bill, 
Senate bill 738, the Amtrak Reform and Accountability Act of 
1997, on June 26. The House Transportation and Infrastructure 
Committee Subcommittee on Railroads is working on its Amtrak 
reauthorization proposal, as well. And the House Appropriations 
Committee included a provision in their fiscal year 1998 
Transportation appropriations bill that establishes an 
independent commission to conduct an economic analysis of the 
entire Amtrak system and make recommendations on route closings 
and realignments.
    The Committee commends the good-faith efforts of the 
Finance, Budget, and authorizing committees in both the House 
and Senate to address the many serious problems facing Amtrak. 
The Committee cannot endorse all of the proposals being put 
forward, but seeks to aggressively pursue real, workable 
solutions for the future of Amtrak that are realistic and make 
economic sense.
    Capital expenses.--The Committee has not provided any funds 
for Amtrak capital expenses. On June 27, 1997, the Senate 
approved a $2,300,000,000 intercity passenger rail reserve fund 
during consideration of Senate bill 949, the Revenue 
Reconciliation Act of 1997. Subtitle L--``Intercity Passenger 
Rail Fund'', in title VII of Senate bill 949 establishes a 
fund, subject to appropriations, that is designed to be 
equivalent to the amount generated by one-half cent of revenues 
from the gasoline tax. If the rail reserve fund mechanism is 
retained through conference and enacted, and the funds are 
subsequently appropriated, the fiscal year 1998 reserve fund 
allocation will be $641,000,000, available for Amtrak capital 
expenses. In light of the strength of the Senate vote on this 
issue, it appears that the Senate conferees have a mandate to 
strenuously advocate retaining the reserve fund in 
reconciliation.
    The Committee has included legislative language that 
provides for the release of these reserve funds to Amtrak, 
contingent upon (1) inclusion of the above-specified intercity 
passenger rail reserve in the enacted version of the Revenue 
Reconciliation Act, and (2) the subsequent increase of the 
transportation subcommittee's discretionary allocation in both 
budget authority and associated outlays for all fiscal year 
1998 costs associated with the $641,000,000 in capital grants. 
The Secretary of Transportation will release these funds to 
Amtrak, whereupon they may be used for capital purposes, 
including: the acquisition of equipment, rolling stock, and 
other capital improvements; the upgrade of maintenance 
facilities; and the maintenance of existing equipment currently 
in intercity passenger rail service. In addition, these capital 
funds may be used for the payment of interest and principal on 
obligations incurred for these new capital investments.

                     FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION

                  Summary of Fiscal Year 1998 Program

    The Federal Transit Administration was established as a 
component of the Department of Transportation by Reorganization 
Plan No. 2 of 1968, effective July 1, 1968, which transferred 
most of the functions and programs under the Federal Transit 
Act of 1964, as amended (78 Stat. 302; 49 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.), 
from the Department of Housing and Urban Development.
    The missions of the Federal Transit Administration are: to 
assist in the development of improved mass transportation 
facilities, equipment, techniques, and methods; to encourage 
the planning and establishment of urban mass transportation 
services needed for economical and desirable urban development; 
to provide mobility for transit dependents; to maximize 
productivity of urban transportation systems; and to provide 
assistance to State and local governments and their 
instrumentalities in financing such services and systems.
    The current authorization for many of the programs funded 
by the Federal Transit Administration is contained in the 
Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act, which expires 
at the end of fiscal year 1997. The Committee's recommendation 
is based on current law. The Committee encourages the 
appropriate legislative committees to reauthorize the transit 
programs before the end of the fiscal year to avoid unnecessary 
interruption in providing assistance to transit systems across 
the Nation.
    Funding for the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit 
Authority is authorized under Public Law 101-551. Direct 
appropriations are required for the Washington Metropolitan 
Area Transit Authority.
    Under the Committee recommendation, a total program level 
of $4,684,747,000 would be provided for the programs of the 
Federal Transit Administration for fiscal year 1998. This is 
$101,429,000 more than the budget request.
    The following table summarizes the Committee's 
recommendations compared to fiscal year 1997 and the 
administration's request:

                                            [In thousands of dollars]                                           
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                   Committee    
                        Program                          1997 enacted \1\     1998 estimate      recommendation 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Administrative expenses................................         \2\ 41,497             47,018             41,497
Formula grants \3\.....................................          2,149,185          3,498,500          2,400,000
Discretionary grants \4\ ..............................          1,900,000            650,000          2,000,000
Transit planning and research..........................             85,500             91,800             77,250
University transportation centers......................              6,000  .................              6,000
Washington Metro.......................................            200,000            200,000            160,000
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
      Total............................................          4,382,182          4,487,318          4,684,747
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Excludes reductions for TASC and awards pursuant to sections 321 and 346 of Public Law 104-205.             
\2\ An additional $780,000 was made available from formula grants balances.                                     
\3\ Includes limitation on obligations of $1,659,185,000 in fiscal year 1997, $3,409,500,000 in fiscal year 1998
  estimate, and $1,910,000,000 in Committee recommendation.                                                     
\4\ Limitation on obligations.                                                                                  

                        Administrative Expenses

Appropriations, 1997.................................... \1\ $41,497,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................      47,018,000
Committee recommendation................................      41,497,000

\1\ Excludes reductions for TASC and awards pursuant to sections 321 and 
346 of Public Law 104-205. An additional $780,000 was made available 
from formula grants balances.

    The Committee recommends a total of $41,497,000 in general 
funds for administrative expenses. The administration's request 
funded administrative expenses from the ``Mass transit'' 
account of the highway trust fund beginning in fiscal year 
1998.
    Project management oversight activities, section 23.--The 
Committee has included bill language that limits to $15,000,000 
the amount of funds that may be withheld from transit capital 
grants to conduct oversight activities in fiscal year 1998. The 
FTA's Project Management Oversight Program is intended to 
inform and assist FTA management and FTA grantees in carrying 
out their individual responsibilities as stewards of public 
funds under the Federal transit law. The Project Management 
Oversight Program encompasses project management oversight of 
major capital projects, and safety, procurement, management, 
and financial compliance reviews and audits of FTA grantees. A 
recent inspector general's audit has revealed, however, that 
the FTA has allocated significant resources of section 23 funds 
for numerous management initiatives which are not eligible for 
section 23 funding. In addition, the inspector general's audit 
determined that available section 23 funds were significantly 
underutilized because FTA annually apportions the maximum 
section 23 funds allowed by law but obligates significantly 
less than the total available funds. The Committee's action to 
limit the amount of withheld project management oversight funds 
to $15,000,000 in fiscal year 1998 will help to ensure that 
section 23 funds are used only for purposes intended by 
Congress. Further, the Committee's action will ensure that 
capital grants are more fully applied to capital, operating, 
and planning assistance while ensuring that critical project 
management oversight and financial reviews of FTA's grantees 
are performed. Further, the Committee directs that the FTA 
submit with its annual budget submission a detailed program 
plan by activity and detailed justification of its oversight 
program, similar to the format of the Department's ITS 
justifications.

        TOTAL FORMULA AND DISCRETIONARY TRANSIT FUNDS, BY STATE

    The following table shows a complete display of formula and 
discretionary transit funds, broken out by State, under the 
Committee's funding recommendations.

                                    FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION FISCAL YEAR 1998 APPORTIONMENTS FOR FORMULA PROGRAMS AND DISCRETIONARY PROGRAMS (BY STATE)                                   
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                          Section 5320                                Section 5338--                            
                                                                      Section 5307      Section 5311       elderly and      Section 5309   ------------------------------------                 
                               State                                 urbanized area     nonurbanized      persons with     fixed guideway     Discretionary     Discretionary         Total     
                                                                         formula           formula        disabilities      modernization    grants bus and      grants--new                    
                                                                      apportionment     apportionment     apportionment     apportionment    bus facilities        systems                      
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama...........................................................       $10,788,162        $3,073,404        $1,050,450  ................       $39,000,000  ................       $53,912,016
Alaska............................................................         1,740,780           458,311           179,394  ................  ................  ................         2,378,485
America Samoa.....................................................  ................            65,324            52,142  ................  ................  ................           117,466
Arizona...........................................................        24,730,174         1,345,455           928,131          $711,445  ................  ................        27,715,205
Arkansas..........................................................         3,837,824         2,457,059           738,975  ................  ................  ................         7,033,858
California........................................................       346,548,067         5,996,879         5,617,284        70,552,284        17,700,000      $105,800,000       552,214,514
Colorado..........................................................        25,907,108         1,280,094           723,634           827,504        11,000,000        32,000,000        71,738,340
Connecticut.......................................................        34,799,726         1,161,166           826,776        32,745,354         7,500,000         2,000,000        79,033,022
Delaware..........................................................         4,382,795           289,683           262,309           351,119  ................  ................         5,285,905
District of Columbia..............................................        20,723,986  ................           260,487        19,324,579         4,000,000  ................        44,309,052
Florida...........................................................       107,021,219         3,855,059         3,795,947         5,939,122        14,000,000        43,800,000       178,411,347
Georgia...........................................................        38,843,522         4,493,643         1,357,175         7,991,349         5,000,000        44,600,000       102,285,690
Guam..............................................................  ................           185,961           132,123  ................  ................  ................           318,084
Hawaii............................................................        18,425,436           504,343           329,148           284,897        10,000,000  ................        29,543,824
Idaho.............................................................         2,277,192         1,017,497           336,450  ................  ................  ................         3,631,139
Illinois..........................................................       156,418,110         4,122,667         2,459,693        99,427,493  ................        30,000,000       292,427,964
Indiana...........................................................        24,528,307         3,982,403         1,298,444         6,673,769         4,000,000         7,500,000        47,982,923
Iowa..............................................................         6,472,783         2,561,521           793,176  ................         8,000,000  ................        17,827,480
Kansas............................................................         6,012,057         2,037,609           667,649  ................         2,000,000  ................        10,717,315
Kentucky..........................................................        12,242,080         3,363,647         1,007,405  ................  ................  ................        16,613,132
Louisiana.........................................................        20,420,754         2,781,979         1,010,609         2,158,866         8,000,000  ................        34,372,208
Maine.............................................................         1,633,570         1,342,414           416,501  ................  ................  ................         3,392,485
Maryland..........................................................        57,315,126         1,675,939         1,015,310        16,121,771        10,000,000        35,000,000       121,128,145
Massachusetts.....................................................        83,983,722         1,796,097         1,455,067        53,675,525         4,000,000        48,200,000       193,110,411
Michigan..........................................................        45,575,278         4,864,138         2,106,852           144,843  ................  ................        52,691,111
Minnesota.........................................................        21,753,220         2,799,031         1,029,391         2,042,096         3,000,000  ................        30,623,738
Mississippi.......................................................         3,510,335         2,731,491           718,402  ................         4,000,000         3,000,000        13,960,228
Missouri..........................................................        25,168,250         3,260,150         1,316,530         1,410,305        32,000,000           500,000        63,655,235
Montana...........................................................         1,723,154           824,253           310,060  ................  ................  ................         2,857,467
Nebraska..........................................................         6,241,561         1,243,693           475,643  ................  ................  ................         7,960,897
Nevada............................................................        11,088,102           406,047           358,126  ................         8,000,000         5,000,000        24,852,275
New Hampshire.....................................................         2,414,281         1,075,106           339,246  ................  ................  ................         3,828,633
New Jersey........................................................       131,820,444         1,537,173         1,743,557        68,717,902        12,000,000        91,000,000       306,819,077
New Mexico........................................................         5,167,051         1,208,451           420,326  ................        11,800,000  ................        18,595,828
New York..........................................................       395,861,766         5,411,034         4,018,203       268,706,682        47,050,000        50,500,000       771,547,685
North Carolina....................................................        19,356,066         5,748,117         1,541,198  ................         8,600,000        14,000,000        49,245,381
North Dakota......................................................         1,679,747           609,572           266,417  ................  ................  ................         2,555,736
Northern Marianas.................................................  ................            60,536            51,956  ................  ................  ................           112,492
Ohio..............................................................        63,172,942         5,851,983         2,566,250        12,520,503        12,500,000           800,000        97,411,678
Oklahoma..........................................................         8,224,811         2,501,662           871,636  ................  ................         2,000,000        13,598,109
Oregon............................................................        18,896,137         1,986,342           811,526         1,228,479         2,000,000        63,400,000        88,322,484
Pennsylvania......................................................       108,969,938         6,527,948         3,073,497        89,771,005        15,000,000         8,000,000       231,342,388
Puerto Rico.......................................................        35,234,014         1,950,756           770,699           737,398  ................  ................        38,692,867
Rhode Island......................................................         7,327,945           249,895           372,551         1,006,505  ................  ................         8,956,896
South Carolina....................................................         8,757,317         2,876,961           843,089  ................        11,000,000         3,000,000        26,477,367
South Dakota......................................................         1,211,718           743,020           286,367  ................         4,500,000  ................         6,741,105
Tennessee.........................................................        16,250,512         3,713,828         1,237,314            31,152        15,000,000         1,000,000        37,232,807
Texas.............................................................       115,479,885         7,840,921         3,173,722         2,882,642        23,900,000        70,100,000       223,377,171
Utah..............................................................        15,324,387           563,250           392,833  ................        13,400,000        92,000,000       121,680,470
Vermont...........................................................           608,974           664,324           239,619  ................         4,750,000         8,000,000        14,262,917
Virgin Islands....................................................  ................           142,187           134,045  ................  ................  ................           276,232
Virginia..........................................................        43,600,229         3,292,668         1,286,505           487,388         2,000,000  ................        50,666,790
Washington........................................................        58,118,297         2,307,131         1,155,525         7,409,848        22,000,000        24,000,000       114,990,801
West Virginia.....................................................         2,935,925         1,961,727           620,551  ................        28,000,000  ................        33,518,203
Wisconsin.........................................................        25,336,924         3,389,634         1,179,382           268,174        15,000,000  ................        45,174,114
Wyoming...........................................................           841,417           474,078           206,313  ................  ................  ................         1,521,808
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal....................................................     2,210,703,129       128,665,261        60,631,610       774,150,000       440,000,000       780,000,000     4,399,050,000
Section 23 set-aside..............................................        10,121,004           589,053  ................         5,850,000  ................  ................        16,560,057
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total.......................................................     2,220,824,133       129,254,314        60,631,610       780,000,000       440,000,000       780,000,000     4,415,610,057
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                             Formula Grants

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      Appropriation        Limitation   
                                      (general fund)      (trust fund)  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 1997..............      $490,000,000     $1,659,185,000 
Budget estimate, 1998.............  .................     3,409,500,000 
Committee recommendation..........        90,000,000      2,310,000,000 
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Formula Grant Program has funded sections 5307, 
5310(a)2, 5311, and 5336, providing grants on the basis of a 
formula to State and local agencies for mass transportation 
operating and capital expenses.
    The Committee recommends $2,400,000,000 for continuation of 
the Formula Grant Program including $128,665,261 for the 
section 5311 Nonurban Formula Program; $60,631,610 for the 
section 5310 Elderly and Disabled Program, and $2,210,703,129 
for the section 5307, Urban Formula Grants Program.
    The administration's request proposes to fund formula 
programs from the ``Mass transit'' account of the highway trust 
fund and to combine funding for bus and bus-related activities 
and fixed guideway modernization into formula programs, with 
funds made available for fixed guideway modernization to be 
distributed by the current statutory formula.
    In addition, the administration request would move the 
rural transit assistance program funding to the ``Formula 
programs'' account from the ``Transit planning and research'' 
account.
    Both the Committee's and the administration's requests 
propose to allow preventive maintenance and other activities to 
be funded as a capital expense. Operating assistance would no 
longer be an eligible expense in areas greater than 200,000 in 
population. However, in smaller areas under 200,000 in 
population, all formula assistance could be used for any 
eligible transit purpose, including capital, planning and 
operating costs.
    Paratransit requirements under the Americans with 
Disabilities Act [ADA].--The Americans with Disabilities Act 
[ADA] requires that transit operators offer paratransit 
service, as well as accessible fixed route service, to persons 
with disabilities. The requirement to provide paratransit 
services to those passengers unable to use fixed-route transit 
service becomes effective January 26, 1997.
    The legislative intent of the ADA that fixed route public 
transit operators provide complementary paratransit services 
for eligible persons with disabilities did not assume the 
transfer to public transit operators of the financial burden of 
carrying persons with disabilities whose transportation costs 
have traditionally been funded by Department of Health and 
Human Services [DHHS] programs. Therefore, the Committee has an 
interest in ensuring that the existing human services 
transportation programs funded through DHHS not be eliminated 
or consolidated without an adequate and ongoing financial 
commitment by DHHS to pay for the transportation costs of their 
clients whether such transportation is provided by traditional 
human services transportation networks or by ADA complementary 
paratransit services.
    The Committee reiterates its position that, in order to 
most effectively implement the paratransit requirements of the 
ADA, the Department of Transportation should closely coordinate 
its efforts with those of the Department of Health and Human 
Services. The Committee believes that coordination of 
transportation for persons with disabilities, seniors, and 
others funded by DHHS programs or by public transit operators 
under their ADA complementary paratransit obligations must be 
planned and implemented at the State and regional levels in 
order to ensure cost-effective service delivery and improve 
access to DHHS program services. Federal guidelines to 
facilitate such coordination planning will provide assistance 
to public transit operators, community transportation 
providers, and human service transportation providers to 
achieve coordination objectives. In addition, a uniform cost 
accounting system is key to fostering coordination among the 
myriad Federal programs which fund transportation in order to 
streamline the payment for the administration of services 
funded by each program.
    The Committee directs the Secretary of Transportation, 
working with the Secretary of Health and Human Services through 
the DOT/DHHS Coordinating Council, to develop these guidelines 
for State and regional planning to achieve specific 
transportation coordination objectives including, but not 
limited to: joint identification of human service client 
transportation needs and the appropriate mix of transportation 
services to meet those needs; the expanded use of public 
transit services to deliver human services program 
transportation; and cost-sharing arrangements for DHHS program 
clients transported by ADA paratransit systems based on a 
uniform accounting system.

                   University Transportation Centers

Appropriations, 1997....................................      $6,000,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................................
Committee recommendation................................       6,000,000

    Section 5317(b) of title 49 U.S.C. provides for the 
university transportation centers program. The purpose of the 
university transportation centers program is to become a 
national resource and focal point for the support and conduct 
of research and training concerning the transportation of 
passengers and property. The administration's request proposes 
to fund university transportation centers under the ``Transit 
planning and research'' account.
    The Committee has approved $6,000,000 for the university 
transportation centers program, the same level as provided in 
fiscal year 1997.

                     Transit Planning and Research

Appropriations, 1997....................................     $85,500,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................      91,800,000
Committee recommendation................................      77,250,000

    The Committee has recommended $77,250,000 for transit 
planning and research. The bill contains language specifying 
that $39,500,000 shall be available for the metropolitan 
planning program; $4,500,000 for the rural transit assistance 
program; $22,000,000 for the national program; $8,250,000 for 
the State program; and $3,000,000 for the National Transit 
Institute. Under the national component of the program, the 
Federal Transit Administration is a catalyst in the research, 
development, and deployment of transportation methods and 
technologies addressing such issues as accessibility for the 
disabled, air quality, and traffic congestion service and 
operational improvements. Funds for the State and local 
component of the program will ensure that all localities have 
sufficient funds to improve the State and local planning 
process and to participate in research efforts with regional 
applications. The administration's request proposes to fund the 
rural transit assistance program under formula programs and 
include university transportation centers under this ``Transit 
planning and research'' account.
    The following table summarizes the Committee 
recommendation:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                               Fiscal year   Fiscal year                
                              1997 program   1998 budget     Committee  
                                  level       estimate    recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Metropolitan planning.......   $39,500,000   $39,500,000    $39,500,000 
Rural transit assistance                                                
 program....................     4,500,000  ............      4,500,000 
State planning and research                                             
 program....................     8,250,000     8,250,000      8,250,000 
Transit cooperative research                                            
 program....................     8,250,000     8,250,000  ..............
National Transit Institute..     3,000,000     3,000,000      3,000,000 
National planning and                                                   
 research program...........    22,000,000    26,800,000     22,000,000 
University transportation                                               
 centers....................  ............     6,000,000  ..............
                             -------------------------------------------
      Total.................    85,500,000    91,800,000     77,250,000 
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Committee has provided funding for a number of 
important initiatives in fiscal year 1997. They are as follows:
    Fuel Cell Transit Bus Program.--The Committee directs the 
FTA to provide $4,000,000 to continue the advancement of the 
Fuel Cell Transit Bus Program.
    Project ACTION.--The Committee provides $2,000,000 to 
continue Project ACTION (accessible community transportation in 
our Nation), which is administered by the National Easter Seal 
Society through a cooperative agreement with the FTA.
    Zinc-air battery.--The Committee provides $2,000,000 for 
zinc-air research and for a demonstration of zinc-air battery 
applications in heavy-duty vehicles.
    Low-speed magnetic levitation.--The Committee directs the 
FTA to provide $1,000,000 for the continued development of low-
speed magnetic levitation technology for a downtown urban area 
shuttle in Pittsburgh, PA.
    Honolulu congestion study.--The Committee is aware of the 
island of Oahu's severe traffic congestion and the urgent need 
to explore transportation alternatives. The Committee supports 
Federal funding for a 2-year effort by the city and county of 
Honolulu to undertake a comprehensive transportation investment 
analysis to develop and evaluate mobility alternatives for 
Honolulu's primary urban corridor from Ewa to east Honolulu.

                  Trust Fund Share of Transit Programs

                (Liquidation of Contract Authorization)

                          (highway trust fund)

Appropriations, 1997....................................($1,920,000,000)
Budget estimate, 1998.................................................. 
Committee recommendation................................ (2,310,000,000)

    Under ISTEA, Public Law 102-240, four transit accounts can 
be funded from the mass transit account of the highway trust 
fund, the general fund, or a mix of the two. Consistent with 
current law, the Committee proposes funding only formula grants 
with both trust and general funds. Administrative expenses, 
university transportation centers, and planning and research 
will be funded only with general funding.

                          Discretionary Grants

                      (Limitation on Obligations)

                          (Highway Trust Fund)

Appropriations, 1997....................................($1,900,000,000)
Budget estimate, 1998...................................   (650,000,000)
Committee recommendation................................ (2,000,000,000)

    Section 5338(b) of 49 U.S.C. authorizes discretionary 
grants or loans to States and local public bodies and agencies 
thereof to be used in financing mass transportation 
investments. Under the Intermodal Surface Transportation 
Efficiency Act of 1991, Public Law 102-240, investments may 
include construction of new fixed guideway systems; extensions 
to existing guideway systems; major bus fleet expansions; and 
fixed guideway expenditures for existing older systems. The 
administration's request proposes to combine the funding for 
bus and bus-related activities and fixed guideway modernization 
with the formula programs. Therefore, only new fixed guideway 
systems or extensions--major capital investments--would be 
funded in this account.
    The Committee recommends a level of $2,000,000,000. The 
following table summarizes the Committee recommendations:

                                            [In thousands of dollars]                                           
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                    Fiscal year                 
                                                                     1997 program   1998 budget     Committee   
                                                                         level       estimate    recommendations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bus and bus facilities.............................................       380,000  ............         440,000 
Fixed guideway modernization.......................................       760,000  ............         780,000 
New systems and new extensions.....................................       760,000       650,000         780,000 
                                                                    --------------------------------------------
      Total........................................................     1,900,000       650,000       2,000,000 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Three-year availability of section 3 discretionary funds.--
The Committee has redistributed unallocated discretionary bus 
and new starts funds from projects which were funded in the 
fiscal year 1995 Transportation appropriations bill (Public Law 
103-331) and previous acts making these funds available for 
reallocation in fiscal year 1998. As in previous years, a 
general provision (sec. 316) is included which limits funding 
availability for these fiscal year 1998 discretionary funds to 
3 years from enactment.

                         bus and bus facilities

    Due to budget constraints, the Committee is unable to fund 
many meritorious bus and bus facilities projects. This action 
was taken without prejudice. The Committee expects to give full 
consideration to all projects mentioned in the House and Senate 
reports during conference committee deliberations on the Fiscal 
Year 1998 Transportation Appropriations Act.
    Alternative fueled buses.--Those transit systems in the 
State of New York receiving section 3 bus discretionary 
allocations in areas over 200,000 population for the express 
purpose of providing fixed-route transit services, are directed 
to purchase alternative fueled buses. Vehicles purchased for 
use in urbanized areas under 200,000 population and for use in 
rural areas and/or for ADA mandated paratransit services would 
be exempted. The Committee further directs that the entire 
amount made available for the State of New Jersey for bus and 
bus facilities under this account shall be used exclusively for 
the purchase of alternative fuel buses.
    The recommended amount includes the following allocations:

                                                               Committee
        State/city and project description                recommendation
Alabama:
    Birmingham/Jefferson County buses...................     $12,000,000
    Huntsville Intermodal Center, phase I...............      10,000,000
    Mobile Southern Market historic intermodal center...       1,000,000
    Mobile Municipal Pier intermodal waterfront access 
      rehabilitation project............................       2,000,000
    Mobile bus replacement..............................       3,000,000
    Birmingham downtown intermodal transportation 
      facility, phase 2.................................       6,000,000
    Montgomery bus replacement..........................       3,000,000
    Tuscaloosa bus replacement..........................       2,000,000
California:
    Riverside County transit vehicle ITS communications.       1,000,000
    Rialto MetroLink depot..............................       2,200,000
    Modesto bus maintenance facility....................       3,500,000
    Foothill bus maintenance facility...................       9,000,000
    ATTB bus project....................................       2,000,000
Colorado: Colorado Association of Transit Agencies, 
    buses and equipment.................................      11,000,000
Connecticut: Bridgeport intermodal center...............       7,500,000
District of Columbia: Fuel cell bus facilities..........       4,000,000
Florida:
    Lakeland transit, buses.............................       1,000,000
    Volusia County buses................................       2,000,000
    Palmtran, Palm Beach County buses...................       2,000,000
    Metro Dade Transit, buses and facilities............       5,000,000
    LYNX Central Florida Regional Transportation 
      Authority buses and bus facilities................       4,000,000
Georgia: Atlanta MARTA compressed natural gas buses.....       5,000,000
Hawaii: Honolulu buses and facility.....................      10,000,000
Indiana: Indianapolis Public Transportation Corp. buses.       4,000,000
Iowa:
    Statewide bus and bus facility projects.............       5,500,000
    Sioux City park and ride facility...................       2,500,000
Kansas: Johnson County bus maintenance/operations 
    facility............................................       2,000,000
Louisiana:
    Statewide bus and bus facility projects.............       5,000,000
    New Orleans RTA central maintenance facility........       3,000,000
Maryland: Mass Transit Administration buses and 
    facilities..........................................      10,000,000
Massachusetts:
    Springfield intermodal center.......................       1,000,000
    Worcester Union Station intermodal center...........       3,000,000
Minnesota: St. Paul, Snelling bus garage................       3,000,000
Mississippi: Jackson bus facility.......................       4,000,000
Missouri:
    Kansas City buses and fare box collection system....       7,000,000
    Kansas City Union Station intermodal center.........       9,000,000
    Statewide rural bus programs........................      16,000,000
Nevada: Las Vegas Citizens Area Transit system, vehicles       8,000,000
New Jersey: NJ Transit alternative fuel buses...........      12,000,000
New Mexico:
    Santa Fe buses and facilities.......................       1,000,000
    Demonstration of universal electric transportation 
      subsystems [DUETS]................................       1,300,000
    Statewide bus and bus facilities projects...........       7,500,000
    Las Cruces, Santa Fe, and Albuquerque park and ride.       1,000,000
    Albuquerque uptown transit center...................       1,000,000
New York:
    Poughkeepsie intermodal facility....................       4,000,000
    Suffolk County buses................................       4,300,000
    Rensselaer County intermodal facility...............       3,750,000
    Westchester County buses............................      10,000,000
    Nassau County natural gas buses.....................      10,000,000
    New York City natural gas buses.....................      15,000,000
North Carolina:
    Chapel Hill University of North Carolina buses......       1,600,000
    Statewide bus and bus facility projects.............       7,000,000
Ohio: Statewide bus and bus facility projects...........      12,500,000
Oregon:
    Salem and Corvallis buses and bus facilities........       1,000,000
    Lane Transit District bus system....................       1,000,000
Pennsylvania:
    Philadelphia Eastwick intermodal center.............       2,000,000
    SEPTA small buses...................................       2,000,000
    Wilkes-Barre intermodal facility....................       3,000,000
    Statewide bus and bus facility projects.............       8,000,000
South Carolina:
    Columbia buses and facility.........................       4,000,000
    Pee Dee Regional Planning Authority buses and 
      facility..........................................       6,000,000
    Virtual Transit Enterprise, integration of transit 
      information processing systems....................       1,000,000
South Dakota: Statewide bus and bus facilities..........       4,500,000
Tennessee: Statewide bus and bus facilities projects....      15,000,000
Texas:
    Galveston Transit alternatively fueled buses........       3,000,000
    Corpus Christi Transit Authority facilities.........       3,900,000
    Brazos Transit Authority, transit facilities and 
      buses.............................................       4,000,000
    Austin Capital Metro buses..........................       6,000,000
    Rural Texas bus replacement program.................       5,000,000
    Fort Worth buses....................................       2,000,000
Utah:
    Utah Transit Authority Olympic park and ride lots...       4,000,000
    Park City Transit buses.............................         400,000
    Utah Transit Authority bus acquisition..............       4,000,000
    Utah Transit Authority Olympic intermodal 
      transportation centers............................       5,000,000
Vermont:
    Burlington multimodal facility......................       3,000,000
    Statewide bus and bus facilities projects...........       1,750,000
Virginia: Richmond multimodal center....................       2,000,000
Washington:
    Chelan-Douglas multimodal center....................       2,000,000
    Community Transit, Kasch Park facility..............       3,000,000
    Olympic Peninsula International Gateway 
      Transportation Center.............................       1,000,000
    Whatcom Transportation Authority, facilities........       3,000,000
    King County metro commuter intermodal connector.....       3,000,000
    King County park and ride lots......................      10,000,000
West Virginia:
    Huntington intermodal facility and buses............       9,500,000
    Statewide buses and bus facilities, communications 
      and computer systems..............................      18,500,000
Wisconsin:
    Milwaukee rail station rehabilitation...............       2,000,000
    Wisconsin Transit System buses......................      13,000,000

                      fixed guideway modernization

    The Committee recommends a total of $780,000,000 for the 
modernization of existing rail transit systems. Under ISTEA all 
of the funds are distributed by formula. The following table 
itemizes the fiscal year 1997 rail modernization allocations by 
State:

Fixed guideway modernization apportionments

              State                                        Apportionment

Arizona.................................................        $711,445
California..............................................      70,552,284
Colorado................................................         827,504
Connecticut.............................................      32,745,354
Delaware................................................         351,119
District of Columbia....................................      19,324,579
Florida.................................................       5,939,122
Georgia.................................................       7,991,349
Hawaii..................................................         284,897
Illinois................................................      99,427,493
Indiana.................................................       6,673,769
Louisiana...............................................       2,158,866
Maryland................................................      16,121,771
Massachusetts...........................................      53,675,525
Michigan................................................         144,843
Minnesota...............................................       2,042,096
Missouri................................................       1,410,305
New Jersey..............................................      68,717,902
New York................................................     268,706,682
Ohio....................................................      12,520,503
Oregon..................................................       1,228,479
Pennsylvania............................................      89,771,005
Puerto Rico.............................................         737,398
Rhode Island............................................       1,006,505
Tennessee...............................................          31,152
Texas...................................................       2,882,642
Virginia................................................         487,388
Washington..............................................       7,409,848
Wisconsin...............................................         268,174
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Total apportionment...............................     774,150,000
Section 23 set-aside....................................       5,850,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Total fixed guideway..............................     780,000,000

                              NEW SYSTEMS

    The bill includes $780,000,000 of new authority for new 
starts. These funds are available for preliminary engineering, 
right-of-way acquisition, project management, oversight, and 
construction for new systems and extensions. According to 
specific project needs, these funds shall also be available for 
preliminary stages of projects named for funding. The funds are 
to be distributed as follows:

Atlanta North Springs...................................     $44,600,000
Austin Capital Metro....................................       1,000,000
BART San Francisco Airport and San Jose Tasman 
    extensions..........................................      34,500,000
Boston piers (MOS-2) project............................      46,200,000
Boston urban ring.......................................       2,000,000
Burlington-Essex, VT, commuter rail.....................       8,000,000
Canton-Akron-Cleveland commuter rail project............         800,000
Charleston monobeam rail project........................       3,000,000
Cincinnati Northeast/Northern Kentucky Rail Line project         500,000
Clark County, NV, RTC fixed guideway....................       5,000,000
DART north central light rail extension.................      14,000,000
Denver southwest corridor LRT...........................      30,000,000
East Side access project, New York......................      50,000,000
Florida tricounty commuter rail.........................      12,000,000
Galveston rail trolley system...........................       4,000,000
Griffin light rail project, Hartford, CT................       2,000,000
Hollis to Ketchikan ferry...............................      -6,345,000
Houston METRO regional bus plan.........................      51,100,000
Indianapolis northeast corridor.........................       1,500,000
Jackson, MS, intermodal corridor........................       3,000,000
Los Angeles Metro Rail MOS-3............................      51,000,000
MARC commuter rail......................................      35,000,000
Memphis regional rail plan..............................       1,000,000
Nassau hub rail link EIS................................         500,000
New Jersey urban core:
    Hudson-Bergen LRT...................................      64,000,000
    Secaucus............................................      27,000,000
New Orleans Canal Street corridor project...............       4,000,000
North Carolina Research Triangle Park...................      14,000,000
Northern Indiana South Shore commuter rail..............       6,000,000
Oklahoma City MAPS corridor transit system..............       2,000,000
Orlando Lynx light rail project.........................      31,800,000
Pittsburgh busway projects..............................       8,000,000
Portland Westside LRT project...........................      63,400,000
Roaring Fork Valley rail................................       2,000,000
Sacramento LRT extension................................      20,300,000
Salt Lake City:
    South LRT...........................................      84,000,000
    Regional commuter system............................       8,000,000
Seattle-Tacoma light rail and commuter rail.............      24,000,000
Springfield-Branson, MO commuter rail...................         500,000
St. Louis METRO Link/St. Clair extension project........      30,000,000

                          PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS

    Atlanta-MARTA North Line extension.--The Committee 
recommends $44,600,000 for the Atlanta-MARTA North Line 
extension project. This 1.9-mile, two-station extension from 
the Dunwoody Station to North Springs is part of the larger 9 
mile, five station North Line extension to the MARTA heavy rail 
rapid transit system. The segment from Buckhead to Dunwoody 
opened in June 1996. The North Line extension will serve the 
rapidly growing area north of Atlanta, and will connect this 
area with the rest of the region by providing better transit 
service for both commuters and inner-city residents. The local 
share commitment for the federally funded portion of this 
extension is 20 percent. The cost-effectiveness index is $5 per 
new passenger trip. FTA has determined that the grantee has the 
financial capacity to build and operate this project. An FFGA 
for the Dunwoody to North Springs segment was issued in 
December 1994 which fulfilled the requirements of section 
3035(tt) of ISTEA. The FFGA provides for $305,000,000 in new 
starts funds, including $52,110,000 in fiscal year 1998. 
However, $44,600,000 has been requested by the administration 
in fiscal year 1998, with the remaining $96,720,000 of the FFGA 
to be provided over fiscal years 1999-2001. To date, 
$99,730,000 has been obligated to the entire project with only 
the fiscal year 1997 appropriation remaining unobligated. The 
1.9-mile federally funded segment of the North Line extension 
(Medical Center to North Springs) received an ISTEA earmark of 
$318,760,000.
    Austin Capital Metro.--The Committee recommends $1,000,000 
for Austin Capital Metro for planning and design work on the 
proposed light rail project in north Austin, to serve the 
central business district, the State capitol, and the rapidly 
growing population and employment centers of the city. Capital 
Metro and the Texas Department of Transportation have recently 
completed a major investment study which identifies the highest 
priority corridor for fixed guideway transit development, and 
are attempting to determine the locally preferred transit 
strategy.
    San Francisco Bart extension to the airport project/San 
Jose Tasman LRT project.--Local officials in the San Francisco 
area have proposed a four-station, 6.4-mile extension of the 
bay area transit [BART] system from Colma to an intermodal 
station serving the San Francisco International Airport. The 
proposed route would serve the cities of south San Francisco 
and San Bruno, connect with the airport, and continue to 
Millbrae. The majority of the proposed route is to follow a 
combination of existing and abandoned railroad rights-of-way. 
To date, Congress has provided $83,923,000 for the project. The 
Committees on Appropriations have expressed concern about this 
project in the past and continue to be concerned about the cost 
of the project in excess of the ISTEA authorization, the high 
cost per new trip, the apparently shifting support for the 
project in some of the communities to be served by the project, 
and the action of the administration in signing the BART FFGA 
without having requested sufficient funds in the budget process 
(or in subsequent budget amendments) to support the FFGA. The 
Committee has been informed that the San Francisco Board of 
Supervisors recently authorized a study of the possibility of 
extending CalTrain from the San Francisco International Airport 
to Market Street in downtown San Francisco. Proponents of the 
study indicate that the service would cost a fraction of the 
BART extension and would arrive in San Francisco 20 minutes 
faster than a BART train leaving the airport at the same time.
    The Tasman phase I west extension project consists of 7.6 
miles of surface LRT from the northern terminus of the 
Guadalupe LRT in Santa Clara, west through Sunnyvale, to the 
CalTrain commuter rail station in Mountain View. The project 
will include 11 stations and will be double tracked except for 
partial single tracking between Mountain View and Lockheed 
station. The west extension is estimated to cost $325,000,000. 
To date appropriations for the project have totaled 
$102,750,000.
    The Committee recommends $34,500,000. Of these funds, 
$21,400,000 are available only for the San Jose Tasman LRT 
project and the remaining funds are available for either the 
San Jose Tasman LRT project or the BART extension to the 
airport project. The Committee is unwilling at this time to 
commit additional funds to the BART project without greater 
budgetary support for the existing stream of FFGA's by the 
administration, greater certainty that there is not a more 
efficient and less costly alternative, that the project has 
overcome the significant local opposition, and that the high 
cost per new trip cannot be reduced.
    Boston-South Boston Piers Transitway MOS-2.--The Committee 
recommends $46,200,000 for the South Boston Piers Transitway 
project. This project consists of a 1-mile bus tunnel 
connecting South Station to the World Trade Center and Fan 
Pier. The tunnel will be used by electric trolleybuses and its 
construction is timed to coincide with the central artery/
tunnel highway project now underway. The project is in the 
final design stage. The local share commitment to this project 
is 20 percent. The cost-effectiveness index is $9 per new 
passenger trip. FTA has determined that the grantee has the 
financial capacity to build and operate this project. An FFGA 
was issued in November 1994, in the amount of $330,730,000. The 
project received an appropriation of $30,000,000 in fiscal year 
1997. The FFGA funding schedule provides for $53,990,000 in 
fiscal year 1998. The administration is requesting $46,200,000 
in fiscal year 1998. The remaining $142,320,000,000 would be 
provided over the course of fiscal years 1999-2001. To date, 
$112,410,000 has been obligated to the project with only the 
fiscal year 1997 appropriation remaining unobligated.
    Boston urban ring.--The Committee recommends $2,000,000 for 
developing a preferred alternative for the Massachusetts Bay 
Transportation Authority's planned circumferential corridor 
located just beyond the Boston central core. Alternatives for 
this new service include rail service to new station stops on 
the existing radial system, and enhanced local bus service. 
Initial cost estimates range from $20,000,000 for the bus 
alternative to $1,400,000 for the full build alternative. This 
project has received a total of $1,100,000 in past years' 
appropriations.
    Burlington-Essex Junction commuter rail.--The Committee 
recommends $8,000,000 for the construction of a commuter rail 
line linking Burlington to Essex Junction. The commuter rail 
improvements in this corridor include track, tunnel, signal, 
grade crossing, and drainage improvements. In Burlington, the 
terminus would be the newly developed Main Street Landing/Union 
Station site. Hourly commuter rail service would be provided on 
the New England Central Railway right-of-way. The project 
includes the construction of stations with park-and-ride lots 
and integrated feeder bus service.
    Canton-Akron-Cleveland commuter rail project.--The 
Committee has included $800,000 for the proposed Canton-Akron-
Cleveland commuter rail project. This regional line will 
relieve traffic congestion on Interstate 77 and help with air 
quality issues in nonattainment areas.
    Charleston, SC, monobeam rail project.--The Committee 
recommends $3,000,000 for the construction of a full-scale 
demonstration monobeam rail line linking the Charleston 
International Airport to the Charleston Coliseum/Convention 
Center. This funding will allow completion of the first phase 
of the project, covering the 1.2 miles of the distance between 
the coliseum and the convention center.
    Cincinnati Northeast/Northern Kentucky Rail Line project.--
The corridor extends from the Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky 
International Airport through downtown Cincinnati to King's 
Island Amusement Park in Warren County, OH. This 33-mile 
corridor paralleling I-71 generally runs in a northeasterly 
direction, and so is referred to as the Northeast corridor. The 
capital cost of the rail alternative is $800,000,000. The 
project is currently in the system planning studies phase. For 
fiscal year 1998, the Committee has included $500,000.
    Clark County, NV, RTC fixed guideway.--The Committee 
recommends $5,000,000 for preliminary engineering and design 
for a proposed fixed guideway system in the Las Vegas, NV, 
valley. There are two major components to the proposed fixed 
guideway system: a 15.6-mile core system running south from 
Cashman Field to the Stratosphere Tower, then branching out 
along Sahara Avenue and paralleling Las Vegas Boulevard south 
behind the valley's resorts. In addition, an extension to 
McCarran International Airport is planned. The regional 
transportation commission is currently in the final phase of a 
major investment study for the Las Vegas corridor. FTA has not 
rated the project's financial plan.
    Dallas-DART north central light rail extension project.--
The Committee recommends $14,000,000 for the Dallas-DART north 
central light rail extension project. This project is a 12.5-
mile, eight-station, $347,100,000 LRT extension to Plano. The 
southern 8.5 miles, from Park Lane to Richardson Transit 
Center, would be double tracked. The northern 4 miles would be 
single track initially with limited station development. Dallas 
area rapid transit has completed a major investment study [MIS] 
and the preferred alternative was selected in September 1994. 
The project is now in the preliminary engineering phase. A 
final EIS should be ready for circulation in the spring of 
1997. The local share commitment to this project is 50 percent. 
The cost-effectiveness index is $11 per new passenger trip. FTA 
has assigned a financial rating of high to this project. 
Through fiscal year 1997, Congress has appropriated $16,360,000 
for this project.
    Denver Southwest corridor LRT.--The Committee recommends 
$30,000,000 for the Denver Southwest corridor light rail 
transit [LRT] project. The total FFGA amount for this 8.7-mile 
LRT extension is $120,000,000. The extension will connect with 
the existing Denver central corridor light rail line from the 
I-25/Broadway interchange, and run over an exclusive, grade-
separated right-of-way paralleling Santa Fe Drive, to Mineral 
Avenue in Littleton. The FFGA funding schedule for this project 
provides for $25,000,000 in fiscal year 1998 new starts funds. 
The administration has requested $21,400,000 in fiscal year 
1998. Through fiscal year 1997, $2,830,000 has been provided to 
this project. To date, $1,490,000 has been obligated to the 
project. This project is currently in the final design stage. 
The cost-effectiveness index is $3 per new passenger trip.
    East Side access project, New York.--The Committee has 
provided $50,000,000 for the East Side access project which 
will link the Long Island Railroad to Grand Central Station and 
New York's East Side. The funds provided are for right-of-way 
acquisition, construction management, project management, and 
related costs such as value engineering, constructability 
reviews, and peer review. The 63d Street Tunnel, now used by 
subway trains, has a lower level built for future use by Long 
Island Railroad trains, and this link is expected to reduce the 
need for passengers to backtrack from Penn Station on New 
York's West Side to their destinations on the East Side.
    Florida (Miami) Tri-County commuter rail.--The Committee 
recommends $12,000,000 for the tri-county commuter rail 
project. The Tri-County Commuter Rail Authority [Tri-Rail] 
operates a 70-mile commuter rail system connecting Dade, 
Broward, and Palm Beach Counties. Tri-Rail's short-range 
program includes the addition of a second track and 
rehabilitation of the signal system. These improvements will 
reduce conflicts with Amtrak and CSX freight trains. The 
project is in the final design stage. Through fiscal year 1997, 
Congress has appropriated $43,320,000 in section 5309 new 
starts funds for Tri-Rail improvements. Information concerning 
the local share commitment to the program, cost-effectiveness 
index, and financial plan has not been finalized. The estimated 
total cost of the project is $438,000,000.
    Galveston rail trolley system.--The Committee recommends 
$4,000,000 to expand the existing Galveston Island rail trolley 
system by 3.2 miles, to connect the University of Texas Medical 
Branch, the island's largest employer, to downtown Galveston. 
No appropriations have been previously provided for this 
project.
    Griffin light rail transit line.--The Committee recommends 
$2,000,000 for the planned 16-mile light rail transit line from 
downtown Hartford, CT, to Bradley International Airport. The 
first 12 miles of the project, which would run over rail right-
of-way owned by the State and by Amtrak, as well as an at-grade 
segment in the city of Hartford, is estimated to cost 
$250,000,000. The project has previously received a total of 
$990,000 in Federal funds, toward preliminary engineering and 
developing an environmental impact statement.
    Hollis to Ketchikan, AK, ferry project.--The Committee 
recommends that FTA deobligate the $6,390,000 that was provided 
to the Hollis-Ketchikan ferry in fiscal year 1997. These funds 
shall be reprogrammed to the available fiscal year 1998 new 
fixed guideway systems funds, increasing the total available 
funding in the Committee's recommendation to $786,390,000. 
Further funding of the Hollis-Ketchikan ferry project, which 
includes a new passenger terminal at Hollis and a new 196-foot 
sheltered-deck ferry vessel, will be included under the Federal 
Highway Administration's discretionary ferries program in 
future.
    Houston Metro regional bus plan.--The Committee recommends 
$51,100,000 for the Houston Metro regional bus plan. This 
$625,000,000 plan, developed by Houston Metro, consists of a 
package of major improvements to the region's existing bus 
system. It includes major service expansions in most of the 
region, new and extended HOV (high-occupancy vehicle) 
facilities and ramps, several transit centers and park-and-ride 
lots, and supporting facilities. The individual elements of the 
plan are in various stages of development, from preliminary 
engineering to construction. The local share commitment to this 
project is 20 percent. The cost-effectiveness index is $3 per 
new passenger trip. FTA has determined that the grantee has the 
financial capacity to build and operate this project. An FFGA 
was issued for this project on December 30, 1994, which 
fulfilled the requirements of section 3035(uu) of ISTEA. A 
total of $40,590,000 was provided to this project in FTA's 
fiscal year 1997 appropriation. The FFGA funding schedule for 
this project provides for $59,670,000 in fiscal year 1998 new 
starts funds. The administration has requested $51,070,000 in 
fiscal year 1998. The remaining $121,610,000 needed to complete 
the project shall be provided in fiscal years 1999-2000.
    Indianapolis northeast corridor.--The Committee recommends 
$1,500,000 for a major investment study to determine the 
feasibility of commuter rail service linking downtown 
Indianapolis with northern suburban areas in Marion and 
Hamilton Counties. The primary route for this service would use 
an abandoned rail line linking Noblesville in Hamilton County 
with Union Station in downtown Indianapolis.
    Jackson, MS, intermodal corridor project.--The Committee 
recommends $3,000,000 for preliminary engineering of the 
Jackson, MS, intermodal corridor. The corridor extends from the 
Jackson State University campus through downtown Jackson to the 
Jackson International Airport. The amount of $5,500,000 was 
appropriated for this project in fiscal year 1997.
    Los Angeles, MOS-3 project.--The 23-mile, $5,700,000,000 
Metro Red Line rail project is planned as minimum operable 
segments [MOS's] for funding purposes. ISTEA defined MOS-3 to 
include three Metro Rail extensions including the North 
Hollywood extension, the East Side extension, and the midcity 
extension. A full funding grant agreement has been signed, 
committing $1,416,490,000 in funding. To date, Congress has 
appropriated $510,227,000 including $70,000,000 in fiscal year 
1997.
    The Committee recommends $51,000,000 for the project. None 
of the funds provided to the Los Angeles MOS-3 project shall be 
available until (1) the LACMTA produces an adopted recovery 
plan and a financially constrained long-range transportation 
plan, including compliance with the consent decree entered in 
1996 for enhanced bus service; (2) the FTA conducts a final 
review and accepts the plans; (3) the General Accounting Office 
and the Department of Transportation's inspector general 
conduct an independent analysis of the plans and provide such 
analysis to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations; 
and (4) until after the FTA has reviewed the General Accounting 
Office and inspector general's analyses and certifies to the 
Committees on Appropriations that the fiscal management of the 
project meet or exceed accepted U.S. Government standards.
    Maryland commuter rail [MARC].--The Committee recommends 
$35,000,000 for the MARC commuter rail project. Planned system 
extensions would provide service to Washington, DC, from both 
Waldorf and Frederick, MD. FTA has provided planning funds to 
the Tri-County Council for Southern Maryland for a major 
investment study [MIS] to evaluate transit alternatives in the 
Waldorf area. The MIS is expected to be completed in 1997. The 
extension of MARC service to Frederick consists of a 13.5-mile 
line which will operate on existing CSX transportation rail 
right-of-way. The MARC program also includes new equipment and 
station improvements. The local share commitment to this 
project is 20 percent. FTA has determined that the grantee has 
the financial capacity to build and operate the Frederick 
project and the new equipment and station improvements. An FFGA 
was issued for the Frederick extension and capital improvement 
projects in June 1995 for $105,250,000. Through fiscal year 
1997, Congress has appropriated $56,740,000 applied to the FFGA 
for this project (and $33,250,000 not included in the FFGA). 
The FFGA funding schedule calls for $31,480,000 in new starts 
funding in fiscal year 1998. The administration's request 
includes $26,940,000 for this project with $21,580,000 to be 
provided between fiscal years 1999 and 2000. To date, 
$57,030,000 has been obligated to the project.
    Memphis, TN, Main Street trolley extension.--The Committee 
recommends $1,000,000 for the Memphis Medical Center rail 
extension project. The Memphis Area Transit Authority [MATA] 
currently operates the 2.2-mile Main Street trolley, a vintage 
rail trolley line in downtown Memphis. The Main Street trolley 
extension via the Riverfront loop is now under construction. 
This line will serve existing and proposed developments along 
the Mississippi River and connect with the Main Street trolley, 
Central Station, and North End terminal. The funds provided for 
the rail connection to the medical center will complete the 
downtown rail circulation system. To date, Congress has 
appropriated $4,750,000 for the Memphis regional rail plan.
    Nassau hub rail link EIS.--The Committee recommends 
$500,000 for an environmental impact statement [EIS] for the 
proposed Nassau hub rail link project. This first stage of the 
project is expected to cost around $50,000,000. The Committee 
notes that the Nassau County Legislature has committed 
financing to the project, approving a $500,000 bond to finance 
the preparation of surveys and plans for improvements to 
Memorial Coliseum and for the rail link. The funds provided in 
this bill would help determine the environment impact the 
project would have on the Nassau County region.
    New Jersey urban core.--The Committee recommends 
$91,000,000 for the New Jersey urban core project, and directs 
that $27,000,000 shall go toward the Secaucus transfer and 
$64,000,000 shall go toward the Hudson-Bergen light rail line. 
The urban core project consists of a number of rail 
improvements designed to improve mobility in northern New 
Jersey, and consists of the following segments: Secaucus 
transfer; Kearney connection; Hudson-Bergen line; Newark 
Airport-Elizabeth transit link; Northeast corridor signal 
system; a rail connection between Penn Station, Newark, and 
Broad Street Station, Newark; and improvements to New York Penn 
Station. The local financial commitment is accounted for 
through the ISTEA toll revenue credit provision. ISTEA 
earmarked $634,400,000 for the entire urban core program of 
projects. An FFGA was issued for the Secaucus transfer project 
in December 1994 to provide a total of $444,250,000 through 
fiscal year 1998, including funds provided in prior years. The 
Secaucus transfer project consists of a three-level transfer 
station allowing commuters on the Main line, Bergen County 
line, Pascack Valley line, and Port Jervis line to transfer to 
Northeast corridor commuter trains destined to Penn Station in 
midtown Manhattan or Penn Station in Newark. The project is 
currently under construction. The Secaucus transfer project 
received an appropriation of $105,530,000 in fiscal year 1997. 
The project's FFGA funding schedule calls for $26,990,000 in 
new starts funding in fiscal year 1998, the amount reflected in 
the administration request for fiscal year 1998. The FFGA 
funding schedule for the Hudson-Bergen line includes 
$64,000,000 in fiscal year 1998. The administration request for 
fiscal year 1998 is $54,780,000. The Hudson-Bergen project is a 
20.5-mile, 33-station at-grade LRT line from the Vince Lombardi 
park-and-ride lot through Hoboken and Jersey City to Route 440 
in southwest Jersey City and 34th street in Bayonne. The 10-
mile initial operating segment is in preliminary engineering. 
The $694,000,000 (total cost) Newark-Elizabeth light rail 
project, a 9-mile, 15-station light rail transit line linking 
the cities of Newark and Elizabeth and Newark International 
Airport, is in preliminary engineering. Through fiscal year 
1997, Congress has appropriated a total of $549,930,000 to New 
Jersey urban core projects.
    New Orleans Canal Street corridor project.--The Regional 
Transit Authority [RTA] is developing a 4.4-mile streetcar 
project in downtown New Orleans. The Canal Street corridor 
would extend along the median of Canal Street from the Canal 
Ferry at the Mississippi River in the central business 
district, through the Mid-City neighborhood, to two outer 
termini at N. Anthony and Degado Community College/City Park. 
The capital cost estimate is $92,600,000. The project is 
currently in the preliminary engineering phase. Through fiscal 
year 1997, Congress has appropriated $26,382,000. The Committee 
recommendation includes $8,000,000 for the Canal Street 
corridor in fiscal year 1998.
    Northern Indiana commuter rail (South Shore).--The Northern 
Indiana Commuter Transportation District [NICTD] operates the 
South Shore Line passenger service between South Bend, IN, and 
the Randolph Street Station in Chicago, IL. In order to meet 
the growing demand for commuter rail service in northern 
Indiana, the Committee recommends $6,000,000, to be matched 
with local funds, for the purchase of additional passenger 
train cars.
    Oklahoma City, MAPS corridor transit system.--The Committee 
has provided $2,000,000 for the Oklahoma City metropolitan area 
projects [MAPS] rail trolley system. The system is estimated to 
cost about $21,700,000. Project sponsors propose a 60-percent 
Federal/40-percent local match.
    Orlando-Lynx light rail project.--The Committee recommends 
$31,800,000 for the Orlando, FL, Lynx light rail project. The 
locally preferred alternative, selected in September 1995, 
includes highway improvements along a 75-mile corridor and a 
light rail transit [LRT] component along a 52-mile corridor at 
a capital cost of $2,700,000,000. A 25-mile minimum operating 
segment of the LRT is in preliminary engineering with a capital 
cost of $880,000,000. In fiscal year 1997, Congress 
appropriated $2,000,000 to this project.
    Pittsburgh Airport busway.--The Committee recommends 
$8,000,000 for the airport busway project. The Port Authority 
[PATransit] is constructing a 20-mile busway in the airport 
corridor between downtown Pittsburgh and the Greater Pittsburgh 
International Airport. Phase 1 of the project is a 7-mile 
busway from Carnegie to downtown Pittsburgh. Phase 1 also 
includes a 1.1-mile HOV facility comprised of a rehabilitated 
Wabash Tunnel and a new bridge across the Monongahela River. In 
the remaining 12 miles of the corridor, from Carnegie to the 
airport, buses will operate in mixed traffic on the relatively 
uncongested Parkway West [I-279]. Phase 1 was originally 
estimated to cost $326,800,000. The busway project is presently 
under construction. The local share commitment to the project 
is 21 percent. The cost-effectiveness index is $4 per new 
passenger trip. FTA has determined that the grantee has the 
financial capacity to build and operate this project. An FFGA 
was issued for this project in October 1994. The FFGA commits 
$121,000,000 in section 5309 new start funds. Through fiscal 
year 1997, Congress appropriated $130,930,000 in new start 
funds for the project including $22,700,000 in prior-year 
deobligated funds that were applied to the project in fiscal 
year 1996. The FFGA funding commitment for this project has now 
been completed. New starts funds totaling $130,930,000 have 
been obligated to the project, so no appropriations remain 
unobligated. The Committee encourages the Administrator to work 
with the Port Authority of Allegheny County to resolve 
outstanding issues with the airport busway project submittal.
    Portland Westside LRT project.--The Committee recommends 
$63,400,000 for the Portland Westside LRT project. Tri-County 
Metropolitan Transportation District of Oregon [Tri-Met] is 
building a $963,520,000 (total funding) light rail transit 
extension from downtown Portland, west through Beaverton, to a 
terminus in downtown Hillsboro. In downtown Portland, the 18-
mile extension will connect to the existing Banfield LRT line 
[MAX] that operates between Portland and Gresham. The project 
is now under construction. The local share commitment to this 
project is 27 percent. The cost-effectiveness index is $12 per 
new passenger trip. In September 1992 FTA and Tri-Met entered 
into a full funding grant agreement [FFGA] for the 12-mile 
segment from downtown Portland to 185th Avenue. The section 
5309 new start share for this segment was $515,990,000. The 
FFGA was amended in 1994 to add the 6.2-mile Hillsboro 
extension, bringing the total section 5309 share to 
$590,060,000. An additional $40,000,000 was added to the 
project in fiscal year 1996. Through fiscal year 1997, Congress 
has appropriated $530,280,000 in new start funds. The FFGA 
funding schedule for the Portland Westside LRT project includes 
$74,070,000 in fiscal year 1998. The administration request for 
fiscal year 1998 is $63,390,000. To date, all appropriated 
funds have been obligated with no prior-year appropriations 
remaining unobligated.
    Research Triangle Park regional transit plan.--The 
Committee recommends $14,000,000 for the Research Triangle Park 
transit plan in Raleigh-Durham, NC. In fiscal year 1997, 
Congress appropriated $2,000,000 to this project.
    Sacramento.--The Committee recommends $20,300,000 for the 
Sacramento south corridor project. The Sacramento Regional 
Transit District [RTD] is proposing a 6.3-mile, $220,300,000, 
LRT line on Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way. This will be 
phase 1 of a planned 11.3-mile extension in the south 
Sacramento corridor. The local share commitment to this project 
is 49 percent. The cost-effectiveness index is $6 per new 
passenger trip. FTA has rated the capital finance plan for 
phase 1 as high. The administration has announced plans to 
negotiate an FFGA with Sacramento to provide a commitment of 
$113,200,000 in new starts funds for the 6.3-mile extension. 
Through fiscal year 1997, $9,920,000 has been appropriated for 
this project. To date, $1,980,000 has been obligated to the 
project.
    Roaring Fork Valley rail.--The Committee recommends 
$2,000,000 for the initial development of the Roaring Fork 
Valley rail project, located in the corridor extending from 
Aspen, CO, to Glenwood Springs, CO. This project was created as 
a result of the major feasibility study and environmental 
analysis completed on Highway 82 by the Colorado Department of 
Transportation [CDOT]. State Highway 82 is currently the only 
transportation corridor between Glenwood Springs and Aspen, and 
it is the most congested two-lane highway in Colorado. The 
corridor has been designated as one of the top three priority 
corridors for passenger rail service by CDOT.
    Salt Lake City LRT.--The Committee recommends $84,000,000 
for the Salt Lake City south LRT project. Utah Transit 
Authority [UTA] plans to construct a 15-mile light rail transit 
[LRT] line from downtown Salt Lake City to suburban areas to 
the south. The LRT line would operate at-grade on city streets 
in the downtown and utilize a railroad right-of-way already 
owned by UTA to the south of downtown. The ground-breaking 
ceremony for this project was held in April 1997. The local 
share commitment to this project is 23 percent. The cost-
effectiveness index is $4 per new passenger trip. FTA has 
negotiated an FFGA with UTA committing $237,400,000 in new 
starts funds to the project. Total cost of the project is 
$312,500,000. Through fiscal year 1997, a total of $73,390,000 
has been appropriated by Congress to this project, of which 
$66,790,000 applies toward the FFGA. The Committee notes that 
the designation of Salt Lake City as host of the Winter 
Olympics in 2002 makes urgent the completion of this project. 
The Committee anticipates that the funds provided will be fully 
obligated in fiscal year 1998.
    Salt Lake City regional commuter system.--The Committee 
recommends $8,000,000 to be used for both implementation of an 
interim commuter rail service from Provo to Salt Lake to 
mitigate the impacts to traffic of the I-15 construction and 
for planning for a comprehensive system serving the corridor 
from Brigham City on the north to Payson on the south. The 
implementation costs include station construction, equipment 
transport, insurance, staff training, and maintenance facility 
and parts establishment, as well as operating assistance. The 
planning funds will be used to develop an implementation plan 
for fully implementing commuter rail in the entire study 
corridor. This project is an integral part of the strategy to 
meet the transportation needs of the area as host of the 2002 
Winter Olympics.
    Seattle-Renton-Tacoma light rail project.--The Committee 
recommends $24,000,000 for the Seattle-Renton-Tacoma light rail 
project. The three county Central Puget Sound Regional Transit 
Authority [RTA] Board has adopted a 10-year regional plan. The 
plan, scaled down from a 1995 proposal, is valued at 
$3,900,000,000 in proposed transportation improvements, and 
includes substantial commuter rail service in the region 
(principally between Seattle and Tacoma) as well as LRT and 
expanded bus service. A major investment study is currently 
underway. An appropriation of $2,980,000 was made to the 
project in fiscal year 1997.
    Springfield-Branson, MO, commuter rail line.--The Committee 
recommends $500,000 for the development of the Springfield-
Branson commuter rail line.
    St. Louis Metrolink (St. Clair County, IL) corridor.--The 
Committee recommends $30,000,000 for the St. Clair County 
corridor LRT. The FFGA funding schedule for this St. Louis 
Metrolink project calls for $35,000,000 in fiscal year 1998. 
The administration request for fiscal year 1998 is $29,960,000. 
The East-West Gateway Coordinating Council [EWGCC] has 
completed a major investment study of transit alternatives for 
the corridor between downtown East St. Louis, IL, and the Mid-
America Airport in St. Clair County. The selected alternative 
is a 27-mile LRT extension with a total cost of $431,500,000. 
The FFGA new starts amount for the initial 17 miles of this 
alternative is $243,930,000. The local share commitment to this 
project is 28 percent, and a medium/high rating for financial 
capacity has been assigned by FTA. The cost-effectiveness index 
is $23 per new passenger trip for the full 27-mile project. 
Through fiscal year 1997, $48,190,000 has been allocated to 
this project. Congress appropriated $32,000,000 to this project 
in fiscal year 1997. To date, $48,190,000 has been obligated 
and no money remains unobligated.
    Charlotte transitway.--The Committee is encouraged by 
efforts of the city of Charlotte, NC, to construct a transitway 
system, utilizing abandoned railroad tracks that spoke from the 
suburbs into the center of the city.

                       Mass Transit Capital Fund

                (Liquidation of Contract Authorization)

                          (Highway Trust Fund)

Appropriations, 1997....................................($2,300,000,000)
Budget estimate, 1998................................... (2,350,000,000)
Committee recommendation................................ (2,350,000,000)

    The bill includes $2,350,000,000 to liquidate obligations 
incurred under contract authority provided in section 21 of the 
Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1964, as amended.

         Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority [WMATA]

Appropriations, 1997....................................    $200,000,000
Budget estimate, 1998 (highway trust fund)..............     200,000,000
Committee recommendation................................     160,000,000

    Public Law 96-184 (Stark-Harris legislation) enacted 
January 3, 1980, authorized a total of $1,700,000,000 for 
construction on the Washington Metrorail System. In addition, 
the National Capital Transportation Amendments of 1990, Public 
Law 101-551, authorized another $1,300,000,000 in Federal 
capital assistance. Through fiscal year 1997, $1,049,700,000 
has been appropriated, leaving a balance of $250,300,000.

              ST. LAWRENCE SEAWAY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION

    The St. Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation (the 
Corporation) is a wholly owned Government corporation 
established by the St. Lawrence Seaway Act of May 14, 1954. The 
Corporation is responsible for the operation, maintenance, and 
development of the United States portion of the St. Lawrence 
Seaway between Montreal and Lake Erie. The Corporation's major 
priorities are to control Corporation costs and encourage 
increased use of the Seaway system.

                       Operations and Maintenance

                    (Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund)

Appropriations, 1997 \1\................................    $10,337,000 
Budget estimate, 1998 \2\ (mandatory)...................................
Committee recommendation \2\ (mandatory)................................

\1\ Does not include reductions for TASC and awards pursuant to sections 
321 and 346 of Public Law 104-205.
\2\ Assumes enactment of authorizing legislation to provide mandatory 
payment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

            Performance-based organization [PBO] initiative

    The administration for 1998 has proposed that Government 
agencies restructure themselves as performance-based 
organizations [PBO's]. The St. Lawrence Seaway Development 
Corporation [SLSDC] is one of the nine candidate agencies. (The 
others are Department of Commerce seafood inspection; Patent 
and Trademark Office; National Technical Information Service; 
Defense Commissary Agency; Federal Housing Administration 
mortgage insurance services; Government National Mortgage 
Association; the U.S. Mint; and Federal retirement benefit 
service.) Each candidate agency is coordinating with the 
``National Performance Review,'' Office of Management and 
Budget, and Office of Personnel Management to develop 
authorizing legislation that is customized to meet its unique 
needs.
    It is the Committee's understanding that as a PBO, the 
Corporation would remain part of the Department of 
Transportation, but would be freed of certain departmental 
constraints. For instance, as a PBO the Corporation would be 
allowed to streamline its organization, personnel, and 
procurement rules; would have authority to conduct routine 
negotiations directly with the Canadian Seaway Authority 
regarding seaway operations; would be free to set its own 
policies and directives as they relate to operations; and would 
no longer be required to contribute to certain expenses shared 
by departmental operating expenses, such as the Transportation 
Administrative Service Center and reimbursable agreement costs.
    The administration did not request appropriated funds for 
the Corporation, as financing is proposed to be derived from an 
automatic annual payment from the harbor maintenance trust fund 
[HMTF], based on 5-year average tonnage through the Seaway. The 
PBO proposal includes an automatic annual payment for fiscal 
year 1998 estimated at $11,200,000 from the HMTF, and 
$1,220,000 from non-Federal source revenue collections and the 
Corporation's financial reserve, for a total budget program 
level of $12,420,000 ($11,680,000 to fund operations and 
maintenance and $740,000 for capital improvements).
    Authorizing legislation is necessary to establish the 
Corporation as a PBO and provide the financing mechanism that 
disburses this annual automatic payment. The administration has 
asserted that, while this funding will be derived from a new 
mandatory account, it will not require an amendment to the 
Budget Enforcement Act. In a May 1997 General Accounting Office 
report directed in the 1997 appropriations conference report 
(H. Rept. 104-785), the GAO found the effects of PBO status on 
the Corporation to be mixed. The GAO reported that the proposal 
appears to be a workable mechanism for addressing the 
administration's desires for more predictable funding, an 
incentive-based focus on performance standards and measures, 
and relief from DOT reporting requirements. However, other 
approaches are available to address some of the Corporation's 
stated needs (such as DOT granting waivers from reporting 
requirements), and the Committee has determined--using actual 
historical tonnage figures--that the Corporation's funding 
stream expressed in constant dollars has actually been higher 
since fiscal year 1993 than it would have been under the PBO 
formula.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee bears no prejudice against the 
administration's performance-based organization concept, and is 
willing to allow the authorization process more time before 
making a final decision regarding fiscal year 1998 funding for 
the Corporation. Therefore, no appropriated funds or bill 
language are included.
    In questions for the record submitted to the St. Lawrence 
Seaway Development Corporation, the Committee asked:

          If the authorizing committees fail to enact PBO 
        legislation before the Senate passes its version of the 
        fiscal year 1998 Transportation appropriations bill, 
        will the administration submit a budget amendment 
        requesting an appropriation of $11,200,000 from the 
        harbor maintenance trust fund? If not, and 
        appropriations legislation goes to conference and is 
        passed without including appropriated funds for the 
        Corporation, how will the agency make up the funding 
        shortfall?

    The Corporation's answer was:

          If the PBO legislation is not enacted, we believe the 
        administration will submit a budget amendment; however, 
        we do not have formal confirmation of such action. If 
        not, the Corporation would have no choice but to rely 
        on its available emergency reserves.

    The Committee hopes that, failing timely authorization, the 
administration will step in with a budget amendment requesting 
appropriated funds for the Corporation; and if presented with 
such a request, the Committee would give it every due 
consideration.

              RESEARCH AND SPECIAL PROGRAMS ADMINISTRATION

    The Research and Special Programs Administration [RSPA] was 
established by the Secretary of Transportation's organizational 
changes dated July 20, 1977, and serves as a research, 
analytical, and technical development arm of the Department for 
multimodal research and development, as well as special 
programs. Particular emphasis is given to pipeline 
transportation and the transportation of hazardous cargo by all 
modes. In 1998, resources are requested for the management and 
execution of the Offices of Hazardous Materials Safety, 
Emergency Transportation, Pipeline Safety, program and 
administrative support. Funds are also requested for the 
emergency preparedness grants program. RSPA's two reimbursable 
programs--Transportation Safety Institute [TSI] and the Volpe 
National Transportation Systems Center [VNTSC]--support 
research safety and security programs for all modes of 
transportation.

                     Research and Special Programs

Appropriations, 1997 \1\................................     $29,886,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................      30,102,000
Committee recommendation................................      28,450,000

\1\ Does not reflect reduction of $183,000 for TASC and awards pursuant 
to sections 321 and 346 of Public Law 104-205.

    The Committee has provided a total of $28,450,000 for the 
``Research and special programs'' account, which is $1,652,000 
below the administration's request.
    The following table summarizes the Committee 
recommendations:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    Fiscal year                                 
                                                                   1997 enacted     Fiscal year      Committee  
                                                                        \1\        1998 estimate  recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hazardous materials safety......................................     $15,268,000     $15,492,000     $15,492,000
    (Positions).................................................           (129)           (129)           (129)
Emergency transportation........................................        $993,000        $993,000      $1,443,000
    (Positions).................................................             (7)             (7)             (7)
Research and technology.........................................      $6,580,000      $5,296,000      $3,296,000
    (Positions).................................................            (13)            (13)            (13)
Program and administrative support..............................      $6,862,000      $8,321,000      $8,219,000
    (Positions).................................................            (48)            (48)            (46)
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      Total, research and special programs......................     $29,703,000     $30,102,000     $28,450,000
          (Positions)...........................................           (197)           (197)           (195)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Includes $183,000 reduction for TASC and awards pursuant to sections 321 and 346 of Public Law 104-205.     

                       hazardous materials safety

    The Office of Hazardous Materials Safety [HMS] administers 
a nationwide program of safety regulations to fulfill the 
Secretary's duty to protect the Nation from the risks to life, 
health, and property that are inherent in the transportation of 
hazardous materials by water, air, highway, and railroad.
    HMS plans, implements, and manages the hazardous materials 
transportation program consisting of information systems, 
research and analysis, inspection and enforcement, rulemaking 
support, training and information dissemination, and emergency 
procedures.
    The Committee recommends $15,492,000 for hazardous 
materials safety, which is the amount requested by the 
administration.
    The Committee, for the Office of Hazardous Materials 
Safety, recommends $9,025,000, the amount requested in the 
budget. The Office of Hazardous Materials Transportation Safety 
has continued its longstanding practice of failing to maintain 
its personnel resources at the enacted levels. For example, as 
of June 30, 1997, there were at least 16 positions that were 
not filled. The Committee directs the RSPA personnel office and 
the RSPA Administrator to explore alternative means to comply 
fully with the staffing level that was approved by the 
conferees in the fiscal year 1997 legislative cycle. The 
Administrator shall prepare a letter to be submitted to both 
the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations before 
January 1, 1998, on the steps that will be taken to address 
this problem.

                        Emergency transportation

    Emergency transportation [ET] programs provide support to 
the Secretary of Transportation for his statutory and 
administrative responsibilities in the area of transportation 
civil emergency preparedness and response. This program 
develops and coordinates the Department's policies, plans, and 
programs, in headquarters and the field to provide for 
emergency preparedness.
    ET is responsible for implementing the Transportation 
Department's National Security Program initiatives, including 
an assessment of the transportation implications of the 
changing global threat. The Office is also charged with the 
development of crisis management plans to mitigate disasters 
and the implementation of these plans nationally and regionally 
in an emergency.
    The Committee recommends $1,443,000 for emergency 
transportation, an increase of $450,000 above the amount 
requested by the administration.
    Crisis response management.--The Office of Emergency 
Transportation coordinates civil emergency preparedness and 
response for transportation services during national and 
regional emergencies, across the entire continuum of crises, 
including natural catastrophes such as earthquakes and 
hurricanes, and international and domestic terrorism. However, 
very little transportation-oriented civil emergency 
preparedness work has been done in relation to tornadoes, which 
are a deadly threat to the Southern and Midwestern States most 
prone to these storms. The Committee has provided $450,000 for 
a transportation emergency preparedness and response 
demonstration project, of which $400,000 shall be used to 
assist in the construction and establishment of an underground 
emergency transportation management center utilizing satellite 
communications. The remaining $50,000 shall be used to evaluate 
and report on the demonstration in order to provide other 
communities with information to improve and enhance emergency 
preparedness and response capabilities, and to cover 
administrative and other expenses, such as travel, that may be 
incurred by the Department of Transportation in carrying out 
this demonstration. The center shall be located, in a region 
that is susceptible to tornadoes and at an elevation of over 
1,300 feet above sea level for improved radio and microwave 
signal transmission capability; and be within reasonably close 
proximity to military, space and/or nuclear facilities to 
provide rapid response time (but far enough away to be safe 
from disaster impacts). After an appropriate site is 
determined, the Department of Transportation shall coordinate 
with the State emergency management agency to construct and 
establish emergency management services. The Committee does not 
intend for the Department of Transportation to provide ongoing 
consulting or other services for the center.

                        Research and technology

    The Committee supports a modest departmental effort to 
create a strategic planning process that: (1) provides a 
framework for Federal transportation research and development 
based on national needs; (2) specifies Federal transportation 
research and development priorities; (3) identifies 
opportunities for collaboration among Federal agencies, DOT 
operating administrations, and other research performers in 
academia and the private sector; and (4) assesses, over time, 
the impact of transportation research and development 
investments on the Nation's transportation system. The 
Committee also supports a limited research and development 
program aimed at addressing cross-cutting areas of concern that 
pertain to the missions of more than one of the Department's 
modal administrations. To further these objectives, the 
Committee recommends $1,900,000 for research and technology, a 
reduction of $2,000,000 below the requested contract program 
level. As requested, $350,000 has been provided for strategic 
research and development programs, which will assist the 
Departmentwide efforts in biomechanics, human factors, and 
other cross-cutting research efforts. The Committee denies 
funds for university programs because the administrative 
takedown provided under the contract authority program is 
sufficient to meet this need. The Committee also limits the 
amount of funds that may be provided for international 
technology systems assessment or scanning to $100,000, because 
of possible overlap with other scanning activities conducted by 
the FHWA.
    The Committee directs that the Deputy Secretary and the 
RSPA Administrator institute the appropriate mechanisms to 
ensure that the Department's research and development 
management and strategic planning process is broadened to 
include more input from the States, the private sector, and the 
public in general. Appropriate meetings of the various research 
coordinating committees and council should be open to the 
public with opportunities for comment. Departmentwide plans and 
strategies need to be more closely linked to, and depend more 
heavily on, similar plans and strategies of the modal 
administrations, and there needs to be evidence of a clear 
integration of DOT's research and development program with 
those of other Departments. The Committee is also concerned 
that almost all of the funds provided for research and 
technology are being allocated to the Volpe Center or to the 
Transportation Research Board. Potential contributions from 
other resources should be explored.
    In view of the uncertainty this year regarding the possible 
authorization of contract funds that could duplicate some of 
the moneys recommended herein, the Committee directs the 
Department to obtain the approval of both the House and Senate 
Committees on Appropriations before obligating any of these 
appropriated funds.
    Simultaneous vehicle and infrastructure design [SVID].--The 
Committee directs the RSPA Administrator to submit a letter to 
the Committees on Appropriations by January 30, 1998, on the 
concept of simultaneous vehicle and infrastructure design. The 
Department of Energy national laboratories have proposed a 
systems engineering concept in which various components of 
transportation infrastructure and users are viewed as an 
overall system, and transportation infrastructure, vehicles, 
and other systems are designed and developed in this integrated 
environment. Automobile manufacturers, State and Federal 
highway departments, transportation construction 
representatives, universities, and the national labs would 
create a common test facility to review new vehicle designs, 
infrastructure developments, and user habits. The Committee 
encourages coordinated research activities, and looks forward 
to RSPA's review of the SVID concept.

                   Program and administrative support

    The program support function provides legal, financial, 
management, and administrative support to the operating offices 
within RSPA. These support activities include executive 
direction (Office of the Administrator), program and policy 
support, civil rights and special programs, legal services and 
support, and management and administration.
    The Committee has provided $8,219,000, a reduction of 
$102,000 below the requested level, and has made a reduction of 
two associated positions in the Office of Policy and Program 
Support. RSPA shall not transfer on a temporary or permanent 
detail personnel from other offices to the Office of Policy and 
Program Support.
    Administration of the university transportation centers 
programs.--The Committee encourages RSPA to give favorable 
consideration to requests for university transportation centers 
grants from the National Center for Advanced Transportation 
Technology [NCATT], at the University of Idaho. The NCATT is a 
multidisciplinary research center that allows University of 
Idaho faculty, students, and engineers work together to 
identify, develop, and test technologies that will reduce the 
dependency on fossil fuels for transportation systems. The 
NCATT focuses its research on vehicle technology, including 
biodiesel fuels, hybrid electric vehicles and battery 
technology, turbine motor technology, and vehicle frame 
materials and manufacturing. In addition, the center performs 
research involving traffic systems technology, including video-
based traffic monitoring, traffic control, and transportation 
system design and operation. The Committee encourages the 
Department to consider including the University of Alabama 
among the institutions participating in this program.

                            Pipeline Safety

                         (Pipeline Safety Fund)

Appropriations, 1997 \1\................................     $28,460,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................      30,660,000
Committee recommendation................................  \2\ 30,000,000

\1\ Does not reflect reduction of $102,042 for TASC and awards pursuant 
to sections 321 and 346 of Public Law 104-205.
\2\ An additional $2,000,000 from pipeline user fees collected in 
previous years is included in this total.

    The Research and Special Programs Administration is also 
responsible for the Department's Pipeline Safety Program. This 
activity is entirely financed by user fees assessed to the 
pipeline operators and by fees paid to the oilspill liability 
trust fund [OSLTF]. The Pipeline Safety Program promotes the 
safe, reliable, and environmentally sound transportation of 
natural gas and hazardous liquids by pipeline. This national 
program regulates the design, construction, operation, 
maintenance, and emergency response procedures pertaining to 
gas and hazardous liquids pipeline systems and liquefied 
natural gas facilities. Also included is research and 
development to support the Pipeline Safety Program and grants-
in-aid to State agencies that conduct a Pipeline Safety 
Program.
    The following table summarizes the Committee 
recommendations:

                                            [In thousands of dollars]                                           
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                           Fiscal year--                        
                             Program                             --------------------------------    Committee  
                                                                   1997 enacted    1998 estimate  recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Operating expenses..............................................         10,300          11,800          11,480 
Information systems.............................................          1,200           1,200           1,200 
Risk assessment/technical studies...............................          1,800           1,200           1,200 
Compliance......................................................            300             300             300 
Training and information dissemination..........................            860             821             820 
Emergency notification..........................................            100             100             100 
Public education................................................            200             200             400 
Environmental indexing..........................................  ..............  ..............  ..............
Research and development........................................          1,500           1,339           1,300 
State grants....................................................         12,000          13,500          13,000 
Risk management grants..........................................            200             200             200 
One-call grants.................................................     \1\ (1,000)     \1\ (1,000)     \1\ (1,500)
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      Totals....................................................         28,460          30,660          30,000 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Funded from uncommitted balances in the reserve fund. In 1998, the Committee recommendation includes an     
  additional $500,000 in OPS contract program costs also derived from these balances.                           

    Operating expenses.--The Committee recommends $11,480,000 
for Office of Pipeline Safety [OPS] operating expenses, a 
reduction of $320,000 below the administration request. The 
Committee suggests that this reduction be taken from travel and 
transportation costs and permanent change of station costs.
    One-call systems public education.--The Committee 
recommends $400,000 for public education, technical assistance, 
and outreach regarding one-call systems. Third-party damage 
continues to be the major single cause of releases from 
pipelines. The Committee directs the RSPA Administrator to 
increase the priority that the OPS assigns to underground 
damage prevention and effective one-call public outreach 
efforts, and to review carefully each of the NTSB 
recommendations and results of the NTSB public meeting on one-
call systems. The OPS and its damage prevention quality team 
needs to accelerate its efforts to assist States in advancing 
one-call systems, and should expand the scope of its efforts 
toward a more systematic approach to the one-call challenge.
    Working cooperatively with the States, industry, and 
various public agencies, OPS is directed to explore ways to 
increase the participation of operators of underground 
facilities as members of notification systems. OPS should also 
redouble its efforts to work with excavators who should call to 
have lines located before commencing digging. OPS should 
implement plans with other appropriate parties to improve 
communication technologies and linking for one-call systems, to 
outreach to the law enforcement and judicial community, to 
identify best practices and highlight and analyze successful 
State programs, and to help develop model programs, and to 
provide other technical assistance and guidance to the States 
to improve their underground damage prevention programs. Before 
April 1, 1998, the RSPA Administrator shall submit a detailed 
report specifying the progress made in response to these 
directives and detailing a 5-year strategic plan to help guide 
further progress.
    Pipeline grant program.--The Committee recommends 
$13,000,000 for the natural gas and hazardous liquid pipeline 
safety grants.
    One-call grants to States.--The Committee recommends that 
$1,500,000 be made available for grants to States and other 
entities for the development and establishment of one-call 
notification systems. The Committee notes that each year the 
States request significantly increased amounts of funding that 
exceed the amounts that have previously been made available. 
The Committee maintains that these funds will be of critical 
importance to helping the States make many improvements in one-
call systems that they have judged to be of critical 
importance.
    Pipeline safety reserve fund.--The Committee's bill 
includes language to draw down $1,500,000 of the reserve in the 
pipeline trust fund to support one-call notification systems 
grants, and an additional $500,000 from the reserve fund to 
support general pipeline safety programs. RSPA has documented 
that there is currently a balance of over $19,000,000 in the 
reserve fund, and has informed the Committee that they believe 
a fund balance of $11,000,000 would be sufficient to maintain 
the integrity of the pipeline safety program. Utilizing these 
excess reserve funds will enable the fiscal year 1998 user fee 
collections from the gas and liquid pipeline transmission 
industry to remain within the $28,000,000 limit set in the 
Public Law 104-304, the Accountable Pipline Safety and 
Partnership Act of 1996.
    Research and development.--The Committee directs the RSPA 
Administrator to provide the Committees on Appropriations, by 
November 30, 1997, a letter detailing the current and potential 
use of hydraulic and pneumatic capsule pipeline transportation 
systems, with a particular emphasis on coal log pipeline 
technology. Coal log pipelines use only one-third of the water 
used for coal slurry pipelines, and show promise of cleaner, 
more efficient transport of coal. RSPA shall confer with the 
Capsule Pipeline Research Center, which is jointly sponsored by 
the National Science Foundation, Missouri Department of 
Economic Development, and 14 private companies, in preparing 
this status report for the Committees.

                            Pipeline Safety

                    (Oilspill Liability Trust Fund)

Appropriations, 1997....................................      $2,528,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................       2,328,000
Committee recommendation................................       3,000,000

    The Committee recommends $3,000,000 to be derived from the 
oilspill liability trust fund for implementation of the Office 
of Pipeline Safety [OPS] responsibilities under the Oil 
Pollution Act of 1990 [OPA]. RSPA has provided the Committee 
documentation of increased environmental program costs, 
including data analysis, compliance and spill monitoring, 
pipeline mapping, environmental indexing, and the State grants 
for hazardous liquids program. In fiscal year 1998, the total 
expenses associated with these efforts will exceed the level of 
OPA trust funds requested by the administration. The Committee 
finds it reasonable to increase the level of funding derived 
from the oilspill liability trust fund to support these 
activities.

                     Emergency Preparedness Grants

                     (Emergency Preparedness Fund)

Appropriations, 1997....................................        $200,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................         200,000
Committee recommendation................................         200,000

    The Committee recommends $200,000 for the training 
curriculum activities authorized under existing law.
    The Hazardous Materials Transportation Uniform Safety Act 
of 1990 [HMTUSA] requires RSPA to: (1) develop and implement a 
reimbursable emergency preparedness grants program; (2) monitor 
public sector emergency response training and planning and 
provide technical assistance to States, political subdivisions, 
and Indian tribes; and (3) develop and update periodically a 
national training curriculum for emergency responders. These 
activities are financed by receipts received from the hazardous 
materials shipper and carrier registration fees, which are 
placed in the emergency preparedness fund. RSPA estimates that 
receipts in fiscal year 1998 will be essentially the same as 
the actual fiscal year 1996 receipts, which were $6,900,000.
    The HMTUSA provides permanent appropriations for the 
emergency preparedness fund for planning and training grants, 
monitoring and technical assistance, and for administrative 
expenses. Appropriations, also from the emergency preparedness 
fund, provide for the training curriculum for emergency 
responders. The following table is for illustrative purposes 
only, based on RSPA's estimates for fiscal year 1998 activity.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Fiscal year                     
                                                                Fiscal year     1998 budget        Committee    
                                                               1997 enacted    estimate \1\   recommendation \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Grants......................................................      $5,810,000      $6,110,000        $6,110,000  
Technical assistance........................................         300,000         300,000           300,000  
Administrative costs........................................         300,000         300,000           300,000  
Emergency response guidebook................................         300,000  ..............  ..................
Training curriculum.........................................         200,000         200,000           200,000  
                                                             ---------------------------------------------------
      Total.................................................       6,910,000       6,910,000         6,910,000  
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Estimated levels.                                                                                           

                      OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

                         Salaries and Expenses

Appropriations, 1997 \1\................................     $37,900,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................      40,889,000
Committee recommendation................................      38,900,000

\1\ Does not include reductions for TASC and awards pursuant to sections 
321 and 346 of Public Law 104-205.

    The Inspector General Act of 1978 established the Office of 
Inspector General [OIG] as an independent and objective 
organization, with a mission to: (1) conduct and supervise 
audits and investigations relating to the programs and 
operations of the Department; (2) provide leadership and 
recommend policies designed to promote economy, efficiency, and 
effectiveness in the administration of programs and operations; 
(3) prevent and detect fraud, waste, and abuse; and (4) keep 
the Secretary and Congress currently informed regarding 
problems and deficiencies.
    OIG is divided into three major functional units: Office of 
Assistant Inspector General for Auditing, Office of Assistant 
Inspector General for Evaluations, and Office of Assistant 
Inspector General for Investigations. The assistant inspectors 
general for auditing and investigations are supported by 
headquarters and regional staff.
    The Committee recommends $38,900,000, which is $1,989,000 
below the administration's request. The recommended level 
includes funding for the inspector general to conduct two 
studies. First, the inspector general is directed to conduct a 
study of the Transportation Administrative Service Center 
[TASC] and report to the Committee by April 1, 1998, on the 
cost effectiveness of TASC for the modal agencies and whether 
the entrepreneurial, self-sufficient, and competitive business 
service approach is meeting its customers' and the Department's 
needs. Second, the Committee directs that, not later than 180 
days after the date of enactment of this act, the inspector 
general shall conduct an investigation and submit a report to 
the Subcommittee on Transportation and Related Agencies of the 
Committee on Appropriations on the procurement of computers and 
related equipment and materials for the advanced automation 
system for air traffic control. The report shall include the 
following items: (1) a detailed examination of the contracts of 
each contractor and subcontractor relating to the procurement 
of computers and related equipment and materials for the 
advanced automation system for air traffic control; and (2) a 
detailed accounting of the costs (including losses and waste) 
to the United States as a result of each contract. This report 
should be transmitted to the Secretary and the Secretary is 
directed to provide the Committee on Appropriations a written 
determination of whether or not any such contractor or 
subcontractor is potentially liable to the United States under 
any theory of liability with respect to such a contract; and, 
if the Secretary makes a determination of potential liability, 
the identity of the contractor or subcontractor, the basis of 
liability and the potential amount of liability.

                  BUREAU OF TRANSPORTATION STATISTICS

Appropriations, 1997....................................................
    (By transfer, highway trust fund) \1\...............   ($25,000,000)
Budget estimate, 1998...................................................
    (By transfer, highway trust fund)...................    (31,000,000)
Committee recommendation................................................
    (By transfer, highway trust fund)...................    (25,000,000)

\1\ Does not include reductions for TASC and awards pursuant to sections 
321 and 346 of Public Law 104-205.

    The Bureau of Transportation Statistics [BTS] was 
established in section 6006 of the Intermodal Surface 
Transportation Efficiency Act [ISTEA], to compile, analyze, and 
make accessible information on the Nation's transportation 
systems, collect information on intermodal transportation, and 
enhance the quality and effectiveness of the statistical 
programs of the Department of Transportation. Financing of BTS 
operations is authorized as contract authority out of the 
highway trust fund, by transfer from the Federal-aid highways 
program, and is subject to the obligations limitation on that 
program. For fiscal year 1998, a funding level of $31,000,000 
is proposed for BTS programs in the administration's NEXTEA 
reauthorization proposal.
    The Committee recommends a transfer of $25,000,000 from 
Federal Highway Administration highway trust funds, for 
continued BTS program activities at the fiscal year 1997 
enacted level. BTS offices include the Director, Statistical 
Programs and Services, Transportation Studies, and the Office 
of Aviation Information [OAI]. In addition, effective January 
1, 1996, the responsibility to collect motor carrier financial 
data was transferred to the BTS after the sunset of the 
Interstate Commerce Commission.
    The Office of Aviation Information collects and compiles 
financial and traffic (passenger and cargo) data. This 
information provides the Government with uniform and 
comprehensive economic and market data on individual airline 
operations. This program includes a small field office located 
in Anchorage, AK, which provides consumers and the Government 
with airline data related to essential air service and the 
intra-Alaskan mail rate program. The statistical aviation data 
compiled by OAI includes: airline passenger traffic statistics, 
ontime performance data by carrier, financial performance and 
certification data, fuel purchase and consumption, and other 
business and consumer directed statistics. These statistics are 
vitally important to the Federal Government and the aviation 
industry. In some cases, it is statutorily required that these 
statistics be used by the Federal Aviation Administration and 
the Office of the Secretary of Transportation in allocation of 
trust funds, aviation bilateral negotiations, and other Federal 
transportation policy decisionmaking. Earlier in this report, 
the Office of the Secretary is directed to tender BTS $300,000 
in the first quarter of 1998 in reimbursement for OAI 
statistical support.
    Reauthorization issues.--The Committee encourages the BTS 
Director to identify potential fiscal year 1998 carryover 
funds, in order to ensure continued Bureau operations in the 
event that there is no enacted ISTEA reauthorization before the 
new fiscal year begins.

                      SURFACE TRANSPORTATION BOARD

                         Salaries and Expenses

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           Offsetting   
                                        Appropriation      collections  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 1997................   \1\ $12,344,000        $3,000,000
Budget estimate, 1998...............  ................        14,300,000
Committee recommendation............        12,300,000         3,100,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Excludes reduction of $100,000 pursuant to section 346 of Public Law
  104-205.                                                              

    The Surface Transportation Board was created on January 1, 
1996, by Public Law 104-88, the ICC Termination Act of 1995. 
Consistent with the continued trend toward less regulation of 
the surface transportation industry, the act abolished the ICC, 
eliminated certain functions that had previously been 
implemented by the ICC, transferred core rail and certain other 
functions to the Board, and transferred motor licensing and 
certain other motor functions to the FHWA. The Board is 
specifically responsible for the regulation of the rail and 
pipeline industries and certain nonlicensing regulation of 
motor carriers and water carriers. Moreover, the Board, through 
its exemption authority, is able to promote deregulation 
administratively on a case-by-case basis. Rail reforms made by 
the Staggers Rail Act of 1980 also have been continued.
    The administration's fiscal year 1998 program request is 
$14,300,000 to perform key functions under the ICCTA, including 
rail rate reasonableness oversight; the processing of rail 
consolidations, abandonments, and other restructuring 
proposals; and the resolution of motor carrier undercharge 
matters. Under the administration's proposal this amount would 
be derived solely from user fees collected pursuant to 31 
U.S.C. 9701 from the beneficiaries of the Board's activities. 
However, the Committee is convinced that fully fee financing 
the ICC successor is not a viable option for fiscal year 1998. 
Such a proposal would require enactment of legislation and 
promulgation of new rules that are unlikely to be in place in 
time to ensure undisrupted funding for the Board. A possible 
legislative vehicle for such a user fee-based structure would 
be the reauthorization legislation which the authorizing 
committees plan to take up in the second session of the 105th 
Congress.
    The Committee has provided $12,300,000 for activities of 
the Board, including statutory liability for severance 
payments. This amount will be augmented by the collection of 
user fees as provided under current law. The Board has informed 
the Committee that it anticipates collecting up to $3,100,000 
from these funds. Bill language has been included to assure 
that fees received in excess of $3,100,000 shall remain 
available to the Board but shall not be available for 
obligation until October 1, 1998.

                       TITLE II--RELATED AGENCIES

       ARCHITECTURAL AND TRANSPORTATION BARRIERS COMPLIANCE BOARD

                         Salaries and Expenses

Appropriations, 1997....................................      $3,540,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................       3,640,000
Committee recommendation................................       3,640,000

    The Committee recommends $3,640,000 for the operations of 
the Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board, 
the same funding level requested by the administration.
    The Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance 
Board (the Access Board) is the lead Federal Agency promoting 
accessibility for all handicapped persons. The Access Board was 
reauthorized in the Rehabilitation Act Amendments of 1992, 
Public Law 102-569. Under this authorization, the Access 
Board's functions are to ensure compliance with the 
Architectural Barriers Act of 1968, and to develop guidelines 
for and technical assistance to individuals and entities with 
rights or duties under titles II and III of the Americans with 
Disabilities Act. The Access Board establishes minimum 
accessibility guidelines and requirements for public 
accommodations and commercial facilities, transit facilities 
and vehicles, State and local government facilities, children's 
environments, and recreational facilities. The Access Board 
also provides technical assistance to Government agencies, 
public and private organizations, individuals, and businesses 
on the removal of accessibility barriers.

                  NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD

                         Salaries and Expenses

Appropriations, 1997 \1\................................     $42,407,000
Budget estimate, 1998 \2\...............................      40,000,000
Committee recommendation................................      49,700,000

\1\ Excludes $6,000,000 in emergency appropriations.
\2\ The President's budget request also included an appropriation of 
$6,000,000 in user fees.

    The Independent Safety Board Act of 1974 established the 
National Transportation Safety Board [NTSB] as an independent 
Federal agency to promote transportation safety by conducting 
independent accident investigations. In addition, the act 
authorizes the Board to make safety recommendations, conduct 
safety studies, and oversee safety activities of other 
Government agencies involved in transportation. The Board also 
reviews appeals of adverse actions by the Department of 
Transportation with respect to airmen and seamen certificates 
and licenses.
    The Board has no regulatory authority over the 
transportation industry. Thus, its effectiveness depends on its 
reputation for impartial and accurate accident reports, 
realistic and feasible safety recommendations, and on public 
confidence in its commitment to improving transportation 
safety.
    The bill includes an appropriation of $49,700,000, which is 
$9,700,000 above the administration's budget request. The 
following table incorporates the NTSB's internal realignment of 
administrative functions and provides for salaries and expenses 
to be distributed as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Budget    
                                           Staff (FTE)      authority   
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Policy and direction...................              59      $7,762,000 
Aviation safety........................             139      16,957,000 
Surface transportation safety..........             107      13,234,000 
Research and engineering...............              65       7,594,000 
Administration.........................              29       2,796,000 
Administrative law judges..............              10       1,357,000 
                                        --------------------------------
      Total............................             409      49,700,000 
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Staff hiring.--The Committee notes that many of the Board's 
reports and safety recommendations have been unnecessarily 
delayed due to a shortage of investigative and technical staff 
and due to an increase in the number and complexity of major 
accidents. This delay has serious implications for the safety 
of the traveling public. The Committee also recognizes that the 
necessary increase in the Board's participation in foreign 
accidents, which has safety implications for American citizens, 
places additional demands on the technical and investigative 
staff and contributes to the delay in issuing safety 
recommendations. Finally, the Committee notes that according to 
projections prepared by Boeing, the Federal Aviation 
Administration, and the International Civil Aviation 
Organization, international civil aviation will continue to 
grow at about 6 percent per year over the next decade. As a 
result of these projections, if the current airline accident 
rates for hull losses and fatal accidents are maintained, the 
total numbers of major accidents will increase, so that by the 
year 2006, one major aviation accident will occur each week 
somewhere in the world. In order to address this situation and 
to help expedite the safety recommendations made by the Board, 
the Committee has included an additional $3,229,000 and 25 
additional FTE positions, over the fiscal 1997 level, for 
investigative and technical staff. The Committee urges the 
Board to hire these additional staff as quickly as possible. 
The Committee has also provided an additional $782,000 (seven 
FTE's) for the 24-hour communication center, and an additional 
$733,000 (seven FTE's) for the family assistance program.
    User fees.--The Committee has denied the request to collect 
$6,000,000 in user fees. This request was based on the 
assumption that legislation authorizing a commercial aviation 
accident investigation fee would be enacted, and upon 
enactment, the fee would become available for expenditure. The 
Committee does not have the jurisdiction to authorize the 
collection of this fee and is opposed to such a fee because it 
makes certain transportation sectors (that is, the aviation 
industry) responsible for paying accident investigation costs 
while other sectors (that is, rail, highway, marine, et cetera) 
would not be responsible for these costs. In addition, such 
fees do not appear to meet existing definitions of user fees, 
and might upon further analysis, be defined as new taxes.

                             Emergency Fund

Appropriations, 1997 \1\................................      $1,000,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................       1,000,000
Committee recommendation................................       1,000,000

\1\ Contained in the Omnibus Consolidated Appropriations Act of 1997 as 
an emergency appropriation.

    The bill includes an appropriation of $1,000,000 for the 
emergency fund to remain available until expended. Under Public 
Law 97-257 (Supplemental Appropriations Act, 1982), Congress 
provided a $1,000,000 emergency fund to be used for accident 
investigation expenses when investigations would otherwise have 
been hampered by lack of funding. The Committee notes that the 
Board has had to use the fund three times in the last 2 years. 
The Committee's recommendation doubles the size of the 
emergency fund to $2,000,000. At this level, sufficient funds 
should be available for unanticipated or unusually expensive 
accident investigations.

                     TITLE III--GENERAL PROVISIONS

    The Committee concurs with the general provisions that 
apply to the Department of Transportation and related agencies 
as proposed in the budget, with some changes, deletions, and 
additions. These are noted below:
    Sec. 305. Includes a provision that prohibits political and 
Presidential personnel to be assigned on temporary detail 
outside the Department of Transportation.
    Sec. 310. This provision is continued with modifications. 
The Committee does not delete 310(c)(3) as requested by the 
administration regarding administrative takedown nor include 
the administration's suggested language; nor does the Committee 
delete section 310(e) regarding first quarter obligations.
    Sec. 315. Prohibits the use of funds to award multiyear 
contracts for production end items that include certain 
specified provisions.
    Sec. 316. Allows funds provided under the Federal Transit 
Administration's Formula Grant Program to be used for purposes 
consistent with the administration's request for fiscal year 
1998.
    Sec. 317. Allows funds for discretionary grants of the 
Federal Transit Administration for specific projects, except 
for fixed guideway modernization projects, not obligated by 
September 30, 2000, to be used for other projects under 49 
U.S.C. 5309.
    Sec. 322. Prohibits the use of funds in this act for 
activities designed to influence Congress on legislation or 
appropriations except through proper, official channels.
    Sec. 323. Limits the amount available for advisory 
committees to $1,000,000.
    Sec. 325. Provides that no funds other than appropriations 
or collected fees shall be available for conducting Surface 
Transportation Board activities.
    Sec. 326. Includes provision relating to compliance with 
the Buy American Act.
    Sec. 328. Directs FAA to provide weather observers at Dutch 
Harbor, AK.
    Sec. 332. Includes language clarifying the definition of 
``passenger capacity of 56 persons or less,'' under section 
29(a)(2) of the International Air Transportation Competition 
Act of 1979.
    Sec. 333. Includes language regarding rebates, refunds, 
incentive payments, and minor fees received by the Department 
from travel management centers, charge card programs, and other 
miscellaneous sources.
    Sec. 334. Includes language directing the transfer of an 
inactive Navy vessel to the Coast Guard.
    Sec. 335. Clarifies treatment of airport revenues in the 
State of Hawaii.
    Sec. 336. Continues provision in Fiscal Year 1997 
Transportation Appropriations Act relating to the 
transportation of edible oils.
    Sec. 337. Authorizes the Secretary to repurchase preferred 
stock.
    Sec. 338. Authorizes FAA to close airports in Kansas City, 
MO, and Atlantic City, NJ.

  COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7, RULE XVI, OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE 
                                 SENATE

    Paragraph 7 of rule XVI requires that Committee reports on 
general appropriations bills identify each Committee amendment 
to the House bill ``which proposes an item of appropriation 
which is not made to carry out the provisions of an existing 
law, a treaty stipulation, or an act or resolution previously 
passed by the Senate during that session.''

United States Coast Guard:
    Operating expenses.................................. $2,431,700,000 
    Acquisition, construction, and improvements.........    403,300,000 
    Environmental compliance and restoration............     21,000,000 
    Alteration of bridges...............................     26,000,000 
    Retired pay.........................................    653,196,000 
    Reserve training....................................     65,535,000 
    Research, development, test, and evaluation.........     20,000,000 
    Boat safety.........................................     35,000,000 
Federal Highway Administration:
    Federal-aid highways................................(21,800,000,000)
    Motor carrier safety grants.........................     84,300,000 
    Right-of-way revolving fund.........................      8,000,000 
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration:
    Operations and research.............................    146,500,000 
    Highway traffic safety grants.......................   (187,000,000)
Federal Railroad Administration:
    Northeast corridor improvement project..............    273,450,000 
    Next generation high speed rail.....................     26,000,000 
    Alaska railroad rehabilitation......................     17,000,000 
    Rhode Island rail development.......................     10,000,000 
    Grants to the National Railroad Passenger 
      Corporation.......................................    344,000,000 
Federal Transit Administration:
    Administrative expenses.............................     41,497,000 
    Formula grants...................................... (2,400,000,000)
    University transportation centers...................      6,000,000 
    Transit planning and research.......................     77,250,000 
Research and Special Programs Administration: Research 
    and special programs, hazardous materials safety....     15,492,000 
Bureau of Transportation Statistics (drawdown from 
    Federal-aid highways)...............................    (25,000,000)

COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7(C), RULE XXVI OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE 
                                 SENATE

    Pursuant to paragraph 7(c) of rule XXVI, the Committee 
ordered reported en bloc H.R. 2107, the Interior appropriations 
bill, 1998, and S. 1048, an original Transportation 
appropriations bill, 1998, subject to amendment and subject to 
appropriate scoring, by a recorded vote of 28-0, a quorum being 
present. The vote was as follows:
        Yeas                          Nays
Chairman Stevens
Mr. Cochran
Mr. Specter
Mr. Domenici
Mr. Bond
Mr. Gorton
Mr. McConnell
Mr. Burns
Mr. Shelby
Mr. Gregg
Mr. Bennett
Mr. Campbell
Mr. Craig
Mr. Faircloth
Mrs. Hutchison
Mr. Byrd
Mr. Inouye
Mr. Hollings
Mr. Leahy
Mr. Bumpers
Mr. Lautenberg
Mr. Harkin
Ms. Mikulski
Mr. Reid
Mr. Kohl
Mrs. Murray
Mr. Dorgan
Mrs. Boxer

 COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 12, RULE XXVI OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE 
                                 SENATE

    Paragraph 12 of rule XXVI requires that Committee reports 
on a bill or joint resolution repealing or amending any statute 
or part of any statute include ``(a) the text of the statute or 
part thereof which is proposed to be repealed; and (b) a 
comparative print of that part of the bill or joint resolution 
making the amendment and of the statute or part thereof 
proposed to be amended, showing by stricken-through type and 
italics, parallel columns, or other appropriate typographical 
devices the omissions and insertions which would be made by the 
bill or joint resolution if enacted in the form recommended by 
the committee.''
    In compliance with this rule, the following changes in 
existing law proposed to be made by the bill are shown as 
follows: existing law to be omitted is enclosed in black 
brackets; new matter is printed in italic; and existing law in 
which no change is proposed is shown in roman.
    The bill does not include any such provisions.

                                            BUDGETARY IMPACT OF BILL                                            
  PREPARED IN CONSULTATION WITH THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE PURSUANT TO SEC. 308(a), PUBLIC LAW 93-344, AS  
                                                     AMENDED                                                    
                                            [In millions of dollars]                                            
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  Budget authority               Outlays        
                                                             ---------------------------------------------------
                                                               Committee    Amount of    Committee    Amount of 
                                                               allocation      bill      allocation      bill   
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comparison of amounts in the bill with Committee allocations                                                    
 to its subcommittees of amounts in the First Concurrent                                                        
 Resolution for 1998: Subcommittee on Transportation and                                                        
 Related Agencies:                                                                                              
    Defense discretionary...................................  ...........  ...........           59       \1\ 59
    Nondefense discretionary................................       12,057       11,957       36,893       36,891
    Violent crime reduction fund............................  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........
    Mandatory...............................................          698          698          665          665
Projections of outlays associated with the recommendation:                                                      
    1998....................................................  ...........  ...........  ...........   \2\ 13,231
    1999....................................................  ...........  ...........  ...........       15,515
    2000....................................................  ...........  ...........  ...........        5,513
    2001....................................................  ...........  ...........  ...........        2,465
    2002 and future year....................................  ...........  ...........  ...........        4,502
Financial assistance to State and local governments for 1998                                                    
 in bill....................................................           NA          379           NA        4,488
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Includes outlays from prior-year budget authority.                                                          
\2\ Excludes outlays from prior-year budget authority.                                                          
                                                                                                                
NA: Not applicable.                                                                                             


  COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 1997 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR FISCAL 
                                                                        YEAR 1998                                                                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                      Senate Committee recommendation   
                                                                                                   Committee              compared with (+ or -)        
                        Item                          1997 appropriation    Budget estimate     recommendation   ---------------------------------------
                                                                                                                  1997 appropriation    Budget estimate 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                                                        
        TITLE I--DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                                        
               Office of the Secretary                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                                        
Salaries and expenses...............................        $52,966,000         $56,136,000         $66,703,000        +$13,737,000        +$10,567,000 
Office of Civil Rights..............................          5,574,000           5,574,000           5,574,000   ..................  ..................
Transportation planning, research, and development..          3,000,000           6,008,000           4,400,000          +1,400,000          -1,608,000 
Transportation Administrative Service Center........       (124,812,000)  ..................  ..................      (-124,812,000)  ..................
Payments to air carriers (Airport and Airway Trust                                                                                                      
 Fund):                                                                                                                                                 
    (Liquidation of contract authorization).........        (25,900,000)  ..................  ..................       (-25,900,000)  ..................
    (Limitation on obligations).....................        (25,900,000)  ..................  ..................       (-25,900,000)  ..................
    Rescission of contract authorization............       (-12,700,000)       (-38,600,000)       (-38,600,000)       (-25,900,000)  ..................
    Rescission......................................        (-1,133,000)  ..................  ..................        (+1,133,000)  ..................
Rental payments.....................................        127,447,000          10,567,000   ..................       -127,447,000         -10,567,000 
Minority business resource center program...........          1,900,000           1,900,000           1,900,000   ..................  ..................
    (Limitation on direct loans)....................        (15,000,000)        (15,000,000)        (15,000,000)  ..................  ..................
Minority business outreach..........................          2,900,000           2,900,000           2,900,000   ..................  ..................
                                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Office of the Secretary................        193,787,000          83,085,000          81,477,000        -112,310,000          -1,608,000 
          (Limitations on obligations)..............        (25,900,000)  ..................  ..................       (-25,900,000)  ..................
                                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Total budgetary resources...............       (219,687,000)        (83,085,000)        (81,477,000)      (-138,210,000)        (-1,608,000)
                                                                                                                                                        
                     Coast Guard                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                                        
Operating expenses..................................      2,319,725,000       2,440,000,000       2,431,700,000        +111,975,000          -8,300,000 
    Defense function (050)..........................  ..................        300,000,000   ..................  ..................       -300,000,000 
    (Transfer from DOD).............................       (300,000,000)  ..................       (300,000,000)  ..................      (+300,000,000)
    Supplemental (Public Law 105-18)................          1,600,000   ..................  ..................         -1,600,000   ..................
Acquisition, construction, and improvements:                                                                                                            
    Offsetting collections..........................  ..................         -9,000,000          -9,000,000          -9,000,000   ..................
    Vessels.........................................        216,500,000         186,900,000         214,700,000          -1,800,000         +27,800,000 
    Aircraft........................................         18,040,000          26,400,000          26,400,000          +8,360,000   ..................
    Other equipment.................................         41,700,000          49,700,000          51,200,000          +9,500,000          +1,500,000 
    Shore facilities and aids to navigation                                                                                                             
     facilities.....................................         52,350,000          69,000,000          73,000,000         +20,650,000          +4,000,000 
    Personnel and related support...................         46,250,000          47,000,000          47,000,000            +750,000   ..................
                                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, AC&I appropriations.................        374,840,000         370,000,000         403,300,000         +28,460,000         +33,300,000 
Environmental compliance and restoration............         22,000,000          21,000,000          21,000,000          -1,000,000   ..................
Port Safety Development.............................          5,000,000   ..................  ..................         -5,000,000   ..................
Alteration of bridges...............................         16,000,000   ..................         26,000,000         +10,000,000         +26,000,000 
Retired pay.........................................        608,084,000         645,696,000         653,196,000         +45,112,000          +7,500,000 
    Supplemental (Public Law 105-18)................          9,200,000   ..................  ..................         -9,200,000   ..................
Reserve training....................................         65,890,000          65,000,000          65,535,000            -355,000            +535,000 
Research, development, test, and evaluation.........         19,200,000          19,000,000          20,000,000            +800,000          +1,000,000 
Boat safety (Aquatic Resources Trust Fund)..........         35,000,000          50,000,000          35,000,000   ..................        -15,000,000 
                                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Coast Guard............................      3,476,539,000       3,910,696,000       3,655,731,000        +179,192,000        -254,965,000 
                                                                                                                                                        
           Federal Aviation Administration                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                                        
Operations..........................................      4,957,900,000       5,036,100,000       5,325,900,000        +368,000,000        +289,800,000 
    Appropriation of user fees......................  ..................        300,000,000   ..................  ..................       -300,000,000 
    Offsetting Collections..........................        -75,000,000   ..................  ..................        +75,000,000   ..................
    Emergency appropriations........................        (32,400,000)  ..................  ..................       (-32,400,000)  ..................
Facilities and equipment (Airport and Airway Trust                                                                                                      
 Fund)..............................................      1,793,500,000       1,875,000,000       1,889,004,883         +95,504,883         +14,004,883 
    Emergency appropriations........................       (144,200,000)  ..................  ..................      (-144,200,000)  ..................
Research, engineering, and development (Airport and                                                                                                     
 Airway Trust Fund).................................        187,412,000         200,000,000         214,250,000         +26,838,000         +14,250,000 
    Emergency appropriations........................        (21,000,000)  ..................  ..................       (-21,000,000)  ..................
Grants-in-aid for airports (Airport and Airway Trust                                                                                                    
 Fund):                                                                                                                                                 
    (Liquidation of contract authorization).........     (1,500,000,000)     (1,500,000,000)     (1,600,000,000)      (+100,000,000)      (+100,000,000)
    (Limitation on obligations).....................     (1,460,000,000)     (1,000,000,000)     (1,700,000,000)      (+240,000,000)      (+700,000,000)
    Rescission of contract authorization............      (-800,000,000)  ..................      (-286,000,000)      (+514,000,000)      (-286,000,000)
                                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Federal Aviation Administration........      6,863,812,000       7,411,100,000       7,429,154,883        +565,342,883         +18,054,883 
          (Limitations on obligations)..............     (1,460,000,000)     (1,000,000,000)     (1,700,000,000)      (+240,000,000)      (+700,000,000)
                                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Total budgetary resources...............     (8,323,812,000)     (8,411,100,000)     (9,129,154,883)      (+805,342,883)      (+718,054,883)
                                                                                                                                                        
           Federal Highway Administration                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                                        
Limitation on general operating expenses............       (521,114,000)       (494,376,000)       (558,440,000)       (+37,326,000)       (+64,064,000)
Highway-related safety grants (Highway Trust Fund):                                                                                                     
    (Liquidation of contract authorization).........         (2,049,000)         (4,000,000)         (4,000,000)        (+1,951,000)  ..................
    Rescission of contract authority................        (-9,100,000)  ..................  ..................        (+9,100,000)  ..................
Appalachian Development Highway system..............  ..................  ..................        300,000,000        +300,000,000        +300,000,000 
Federal-aid highways (Highway Trust Fund):                                                                                                              
    (Limitation on obligations).....................    (18,000,000,000)    (20,170,000,000)    (21,800,000,000)    (+3,800,000,000)    (+1,630,000,000)
    Supplemental obligation authority (Public Law                                                                                                       
     105-18)........................................       (694,810,534)  ..................  ..................      (-694,810,534)  ..................
    (Exempt obligations) (sec. 310).................     (2,023,000,000)     (1,510,331,000)     (1,390,600,000)      (-632,400,000)      (-119,731,000)
    (Liquidation of contract authorization).........    (19,800,000,000)    (19,800,000,000)    (20,850,000,000)    (+1,050,000,000)    (+1,050,000,000)
    Emergency appropriations........................        (82,000,000)  ..................  ..................       (-82,000,000)  ..................
    Emergency relief program (Public Law 105-18)....       (650,000,000)  ..................  ..................      (-650,000,000)  ..................
Right-of-way revolving fund.........................  ..................  ..................          8,000,000          +8,000,000          +8,000,000 
Motor carrier safety grants (Highway Trust Fund):                                                                                                       
    (Liquidation of contract authorization).........        (74,000,000)        (90,000,000)        (85,000,000)       (+11,000,000)        (-5,000,000)
    (Limitation on obligations).....................        (78,225,000)       (100,000,000)        (84,300,000)        (+6,075,000)       (-15,700,000)
    Rescission of contract authorization............       (-12,300,000)  ..................  ..................       (+12,300,000)  ..................
State infrastructure banks..........................        150,000,000   ..................  ..................       -150,000,000   ..................
State infrastructure banks (Highway Trust Fund).....  ..................        150,000,000   ..................  ..................       -150,000,000 
Transportation infrastructure credit program                                                                                                            
 (Highway Trust Fund)...............................  ..................        100,000,000   ..................  ..................       -100,000,000 
                                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Federal Highway Administration.........        150,000,000         250,000,000         308,000,000        +158,000,000         +58,000,000 
          (Limitations on obligations)..............    (18,773,035,534)    (20,270,000,000)    (21,884,300,000)    (+3,111,264,466)    (+1,614,300,000)
          (Exempt obligations)......................     (2,023,000,000)     (1,510,331,000)     (1,390,600,000)      (-632,400,000)      (-119,731,000)
                                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Total budgetary resources...............    (20,946,035,534)    (22,030,331,000)    (23,582,900,000)    (+2,636,864,466)    (+1,552,569,000)
                                                                                                                                                        
   National Highway Traffic Safety Administration                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                                        
Operations and research.............................         80,900,000   ..................         74,760,000          -6,140,000         +74,760,000 
Operations and research (Highway Trust Fund)........         51,712,000         147,500,000          71,740,000         +20,028,000         -75,760,000 
                                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Operations and research.............        132,612,000         147,500,000         146,500,000         +13,888,000          -1,000,000 
Highway traffic safety grants (Highway Trust Fund):                                                                                                     
    (Liquidation of contract authorization).........       (168,100,000)       (185,000,000)       (186,000,000)       (+17,900,000)        (+1,000,000)
    State and community highway safety grants (Sec.                                                                                                     
     402) (limitation on obligations)...............       (128,700,000)       (140,200,000)       (150,700,000)       (+22,000,000)       (+10,500,000)
    National Driver Register (Sec. 402) (limitation                                                                                                     
     on obligations)................................         (2,400,000)         (2,300,000)         (2,300,000)          (-100,000)  ..................
        Contract authorization (Public Law 105-18)..          2,500,000   ..................  ..................         -2,500,000   ..................
    Highway safety grants (Sec. 1003(a)(7))                                                                                                             
     (limitation on obligations)....................        (11,500,000)  ..................  ..................       (-11,500,000)  ..................
    Occupant protection incentive grants (limitation                                                                                                    
     on obligations)................................  ..................         (9,000,000)  ..................  ..................        (-9,000,000)
    Alcohol-impaired driving countermeasures                                                                                                            
     programs (Sec. 410) (limitation on obligations)        (25,500,000)        (34,000,000)        (34,000,000)        (+8,500,000)  ..................
        Contract authorization (Public Law 105-18)..            500,000   ..................  ..................           -500,000   ..................
    Rescission of contract authorization............       (-24,800,000)  ..................  ..................       (+24,800,000)  ..................
                                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, National Highway Traffic Safety Admin..        135,612,000         147,500,000         146,500,000         +10,888,000          -1,000,000 
          (Limitations on obligations)..............       (168,100,000)       (185,500,000)       (187,000,000)       (+18,900,000)        (+1,500,000)
                                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Total budgetary resources...............       (303,712,000)       (333,000,000)       (333,500,000)       (+29,788,000)          (+500,000)
                                                                                                                                                        
           Federal Railroad Administration                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                                        
Office of the Administrator.........................         16,739,000          20,559,000          19,800,000          +3,061,000            -759,000 
Railroad safety.....................................         51,407,000          57,067,000          57,067,000          +5,660,000   ..................
Railroad research and development...................         20,100,000          21,638,000          24,906,000          +4,806,000          +3,268,000 
Northeast corridor improvement program..............        175,000,000   ..................        273,450,000         +98,450,000        +273,450,000 
High-speed rail trainsets and facilities............         80,000,000   ..................  ..................        -80,000,000   ..................
Next generation high speed rail.....................         24,757,000          19,595,000          26,000,000          +1,243,000          +6,405,000 
Trust fund share of next generation high-speed rail                                                                                                     
 (Highway Trust Fund): (Liquidation of contract                                                                                                         
 authorization).....................................         (2,855,000)  ..................  ..................        (-2,855,000)  ..................
Alaska Railroad rehabilitation......................         10,000,000   ..................         17,000,000          +7,000,000         +17,000,000 
Rhode Island Rail Development.......................          7,000,000          10,000,000          10,000,000          +3,000,000   ..................
Direct loan financing program.......................         58,680,000   ..................  ..................        -58,680,000   ..................
Direct loan financing program limitation............       (400,000,000)  ..................  ..................      (-400,000,000)  ..................
Grants to the National Railroad Passenger                                                                                                               
 Corporation:                                                                                                                                           
    Operations......................................        364,500,000   ..................        344,000,000         -20,500,000        +344,000,000 
    Capital.........................................        223,450,000   ..................  ..................       -223,450,000   ..................
Capital grants to the National Railroad Passenger                                                                                                       
 Corporation (Highway Trust Fund)...................  ..................        445,450,000   ..................  ..................       -445,450,000 
      (Northeast corridor improvements).............  ..................       (200,000,000)  ..................  ..................      (-200,000,000)
      (Pennsylvania Station Redevelopment Project)..  ..................        (23,450,000)  ..................  ..................       (-23,450,000)
Operating grants to the National Railroad Passenger                                                                                                     
 Corporation (Highway Trust Fund)...................  ..................        344,000,000   ..................  ..................       -344,000,000 
Emergency railroad rehabilitation and repair:                                                                                                           
 Emergency funding (Public Law 105-18)..............        (18,900,000)  ..................  ..................       (-18,900,000)  ..................
                                                     ===================================================================================================
      Total, Federal Railroad Administration........      1,031,633,000         918,309,000         772,223,000        -259,410,000        -146,086,000 
                                                                                                                                                        
           Federal Transit Administration                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                                        
Administrative expenses.............................         41,497,000   ..................         41,497,000   ..................        +41,497,000 
Administrative expenses (Highway Trust Fund, Mass                                                                                                       
 Transit Account)...................................  ..................         47,018,000   ..................  ..................        -47,018,000 
Formula grants......................................        490,000,000   ..................         90,000,000        -400,000,000         +90,000,000 
Formula grants (Highway Trust Fund):                                                                                                                    
    (Limitation on obligations).....................     (1,659,185,000)  ..................     (2,310,000,000)      (+650,815,000)    (+2,310,000,000)
    Operating assistance grants.....................       (400,000,000)  ..................  ..................      (-400,000,000)  ..................
                                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Formula grants......................     (2,149,185,000)  ..................     (2,400,000,000)      (+250,815,000)    (+2,400,000,000)
Formula programs (Highway Trust Fund, Mass Transit                                                                                                      
 Account):                                                                                                                                              
    (Limitation on obligations).....................  ..................     (3,498,500,000)  ..................  ..................    (-3,498,500,000)
    (Liquidation of contract authorization).........  ..................     (1,500,000,000)     (2,310,000,000)    (+2,310,000,000)      (+810,000,000)
University transportation centers...................          6,000,000   ..................          6,000,000   ..................         +6,000,000 
Transit planning and research.......................         85,500,000   ..................         77,250,000          -8,250,000         +77,250,000 
    Metropolitan planning...........................        (39,500,000)  ..................        (39,500,000)  ..................       (+39,500,000)
    Rural transit assistance........................         (4,500,000)  ..................         (4,500,000)  ..................        (+4,500,000)
    Transit cooperative research....................         (8,250,000)  ..................  ..................        (-8,250,000)  ..................
    National planning and research..................        (22,000,000)  ..................        (22,000,000)  ..................       (+22,000,000)
    State planning and research.....................         (8,250,000)  ..................         (8,250,000)  ..................        (+8,250,000)
    National transit institute......................         (3,000,000)  ..................         (3,000,000)  ..................        (+3,000,000)
                                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Transit planning and research.......        (85,500,000)  ..................        (77,250,000)        (-8,250,000)       (+77,250,000)
Transit planning and research (Highway Trust Fund,                                                                                                      
 Mass Transit Account)..............................  ..................         91,800,000   ..................  ..................        -91,800,000 
    Metropolitan planning...........................  ..................        (39,500,000)  ..................  ..................       (-39,500,000)
    Transit cooperative research....................  ..................         (8,250,000)  ..................  ..................        (-8,250,000)
    Statewide planning..............................  ..................         (8,250,000)  ..................  ..................        (-8,250,000)
    National planning and research..................  ..................        (16,800,000)  ..................  ..................       (-16,800,000)
    National mass transportation institute..........  ..................         (3,000,000)  ..................  ..................        (-3,000,000)
    University transportation centers...............  ..................         (6,000,000)  ..................  ..................        (-6,000,000)
    Advanced Technology Transit Bus.................  ..................        (10,000,000)  ..................  ..................       (-10,000,000)
                                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Transit planning and research.......  ..................        (91,800,000)  ..................  ..................       (-91,800,000)
Trust fund share of expenses (Highway Trust Fund)                                                                                                       
 (liquidation of contract authorization)............     (1,920,000,000)  ..................     (2,310,000,000)      (+390,000,000)    (+2,310,000,000)
    Rescission of contract authorization............      (-271,000,000)  ..................  ..................      (+271,000,000)  ..................
Discretionary grants (Highway Trust Fund)                                                                                                               
 (limitation on obligations):                                                                                                                           
    Fixed guideway modernization....................       (760,000,000)  ..................       (780,000,000)       (+20,000,000)      (+780,000,000)
    Bus and bus-related facilities..................       (380,000,000)  ..................       (440,000,000)       (+60,000,000)      (+440,000,000)
    New starts......................................       (760,000,000)  ..................       (780,000,000)       (+20,000,000)      (+780,000,000)
                                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Discretionary grants................     (1,900,000,000)  ..................     (2,000,000,000)      (+100,000,000)    (+2,000,000,000)
    Rescission of contract authorization............      (-588,000,000)  ..................  ..................      (+588,000,000)  ..................
Major capital investments (Highway Trust Fund, Mass                                                                                                     
 Transit Account) (limitation on obligations).......  ..................       (650,000,000)  ..................  ..................      (-650,000,000)
Mass capital investments (Highway Trust Fund, Mass                                                                                                      
 Transit Account) (liquidation of contract                                                                                                              
 authority).........................................  ..................     (2,350,000,000)  ..................  ..................    (-2,350,000,000)
Mass transit capital fund (Highway Trust Fund)                                                                                                          
 (liquidation of contract authorization)............     (2,300,000,000)  ..................     (2,350,000,000)       (+50,000,000)    (+2,350,000,000)
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority......        200,000,000   ..................        160,000,000         -40,000,000        +160,000,000 
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority                                                                                                          
 (Highway Trust Fund, Mass Transit Account).........  ..................        200,000,000   ..................  ..................       -200,000,000 
                                                     ===================================================================================================
      Total, Federal Transit Administration.........        822,997,000         338,818,000         374,747,000        -448,250,000         +35,929,000 
          (Limitations on obligations)..............     (3,559,185,000)     (4,148,500,000)     (4,310,000,000)      (+750,815,000)      (+161,500,000)
                                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Total budgetary resources...............     (4,382,182,000)     (4,487,318,000)     (4,684,747,000)      (+302,565,000)      (+197,429,000)
                                                                                                                                                        
    Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                                        
Operations and maintenance (Harbor Maintenance Trust                                                                                                    
 Fund)..............................................         10,337,000   ..................  ..................        -10,337,000   ..................
                                                                                                                                                        
    Research and Special Programs Administration                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                                        
Research and special programs.......................         26,886,000          30,102,000          28,450,000          +1,564,000          -1,652,000 
    Hazardous materials safety......................        (15,472,000)  ..................        (15,492,000)           (+20,000)       (+15,492,000)
    Emergency transportation........................           (993,000)  ..................         (1,443,000)          (+450,000)        (+1,443,000)
    Research and technology.........................         (3,580,000)  ..................         (3,296,000)          (-284,000)        (+3,296,000)
    Program and administrative support..............         (6,841,000)  ..................         (8,219,000)        (+1,378,000)        (+8,219,000)
                                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, research and special programs.......        (26,886,000)  ..................        (28,450,000)        (+1,564,000)       (+28,450,000)
    Emergency appropriations........................         (3,000,000)  ..................  ..................        (-3,000,000)  ..................
Pipeline safety (Pipeline Safety Fund)..............         28,460,000          30,660,000          28,000,000            -460,000          -2,660,000 
Pipeline safety (Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund)....          2,528,000           2,328,000           3,000,000            +472,000            +672,000 
                                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Pipeline safety.....................         30,988,000          32,988,000          31,000,000             +12,000          -1,988,000 
Emergency preparedness grants: Emergency                                                                                                                
 preparedness fund..................................            200,000             200,000             200,000   ..................  ..................
                                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Research and Special Programs Admin....         58,074,000          63,290,000          59,650,000          +1,576,000          -3,640,000 
                                                                                                                                                        
             Office of Inspector General                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                                        
Salaries and expenses...............................         37,900,000          40,889,000          38,900,000          +1,000,000          -1,989,000 
                                                                                                                                                        
            Surface Transportation Board                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                                        
Salaries and expenses...............................         12,344,000          14,300,000          12,300,000             -44,000          -2,000,000 
    Offsetting collections..........................  ..................        -14,300,000   ..................  ..................        +14,300,000 
                                                                                                                                                        
                 General Provisions                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                                        
Bureau of Transportation Statistics (transfer from                                                                                                      
 Federal-aid Highways)..............................        (25,000,000)        (31,000,000)        (25,000,000)  ..................        (-6,000,000)
Transportation Administrative Service Center                                                                                                            
 reduction..........................................        -10,000,000   ..................  ..................        +10,000,000   ..................
Railroad safety offsetting collections..............  ..................        -60,000,000   ..................  ..................        +60,000,000 
                                                     ===================================================================================================
      Net total, title I, Dept of Transportation....     12,015,502,000      13,065,087,000      12,554,082,883        +538,580,883        -511,004,117 
          Appropriations............................    (12,783,035,000)    (13,103,687,000)    (12,878,682,883)       (+95,647,883)      (-225,004,117)
          Rescissions...............................    (-1,719,033,000)       (-38,600,000)      (-324,600,000)    (+1,394,433,000)      (-286,000,000)
          Emergency appropriations..................       (951,500,000)  ..................  ..................      (-951,500,000)  ..................
      (Limitations on obligations)..................    (23,986,220,534)    (25,604,000,000)    (28,081,300,000)    (+4,095,079,466)    (+2,477,300,000)
      (Exempt obligations)..........................     (2,023,000,000)     (1,510,331,000)     (1,390,600,000)      (-632,400,000)      (-119,731,000)
                                                     ===================================================================================================
        Net total budgetary resources...............    (38,024,722,534)    (40,179,418,000)    (42,025,982,883)    (+4,001,260,349)    (+1,846,564,883)
                                                                                                                                                        
             TITLE II--RELATED AGENCIES                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                                        
Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance                                                                                                    
                        Board                                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                                        
Salaries and expenses...............................          3,540,000           3,640,000           3,640,000            +100,000   ..................
                                                                                                                                                        
        National Transportation Safety Board                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                                        
Salaries and expenses...............................         42,407,000          40,000,000          49,700,000          +7,293,000          +9,700,000 
    Appropriation of user fees......................  ..................          6,000,000   ..................  ..................         -6,000,000 
    Emergency appropriations........................         (6,000,000)  ..................  ..................        (-6,000,000)  ..................
    Emergency funding (Public Law 105-18)...........        (29,859,000)  ..................  ..................       (-29,859,000)  ..................
Emergency fund......................................  ..................          1,000,000           1,000,000          +1,000,000   ..................
Emergency fund (emergency appropriations)...........         (1,000,000)  ..................  ..................        (-1,000,000)  ..................
                                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, National Transportation Safety Board...         42,407,000          47,000,000          50,700,000          +8,293,000          +3,700,000 
                                                     ===================================================================================================
      Total, title II, Related Agencies.............         82,806,000          50,640,000          54,340,000         -28,466,000          +3,700,000 
          Appropriations............................        (45,947,000)        (50,640,000)        (54,340,000)        (+8,393,000)        (+3,700,000)
          Emergency appropriations..................        (36,859,000)  ..................  ..................       (-36,859,000)  ..................
                                                                                                                                                        
            TITLE III--GENERAL PROVISIONS                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                                        
National Civil Aviation Review Commission...........          2,400,000   ..................  ..................         -2,400,000   ..................
Amtrak route closure and realignment commission.....  ..................  ..................  ..................  ..................  ..................
                                                     ===================================================================================================
      Net total appropriations......................     12,100,708,000      13,115,727,000      12,608,422,883        +507,714,883        -507,304,117 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



