[House Report 106-20]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]





106th Congress                                                   Report
  1st Session           HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES                 106-20

=======================================================================



 
      HIRAM H. WARD FEDERAL BUILDING AND UNITED STATES COURTHOUSE

                                _______
                                

 February 23, 1999.--Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 
                                printed

                                _______


 Mr. Shuster, from the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, 
                        submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                         [To accompany H.R. 92]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, to whom 
was referred the bill (H.R. 92) to designate the Federal 
building and United States courthouse located at 251 North Main 
Street in Winston-Salem, North Carolina, as the ``Hiram H. Ward 
Federal Building and United States Courthouse'', having 
considered the same, report favorably thereon without amendment 
and recommend that the bill do pass.
    Hiram H. Ward was born in Thomasville, North Carolina on 
April 29, 1923. He served as a Lieutenant Colonel Pilot, in the 
United States Army Air Force, Civil Air Patrol from 1940 until 
1945. For his efforts during World War II, Judge Ward received 
an Air Medal and Purple Heart.
    Upon his return from the war, Judge Ward attended Wake 
Forest University, with the initial intent of pursuing a career 
in journalism. However, he turned his sights to law and 
graduated with honors from Wake Forest School of Law in 1950. 
Later that same year Judge Ward was admitted to the North 
Carolina Bar Association.
    Judge Ward began his career in the private sector, where he 
practiced for twenty years and became a partner in a private 
law firm in Lexington, North Carolina. In 1972, President Nixon 
appointed Judge Ward to the Federal bench for the Middle 
District of North Carolina. He served the Middle District from 
1972, achieving the status of Chief Judge in 1982, until 1988. 
In 1988, Judge Ward elected to take senior status, retaining 
all of his pending cases, and continued to sit for an 
additional six years with the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals.

                    HEARINGS AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

    H.R. 92 was introduced on January 6, 1999. The Committee 
did not hold hearings on the reported legislation.

                        COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

    On February 11, 1999, the Committee met in open session and 
ordered reported H.R. 92, to designate the Federal building 
located at 251 North Main Street, Winston-Salem, North 
Carolina, as the ``Hiram H. Ward Federal Building and United 
States Courthouse,'' discharged the Subcommittee on Economic 
Development, Public Buildings, Hazardous Materials and Pipeline 
Transportation, without an amendment, by voice vote with a 
quorum present. There were no recorded votes taken during 
Committee consideration of H.R. 92.

                              RECORD VOTES

    Clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the House of Representatives 
requires each committee report to include the total number of 
votes cast for and against on each record vote on a motion to 
report and on any amendment offered to the measure or matter, 
and the names of those members voting for and against. There 
were no recorded votes taken in connection with ordering H.R. 
92 reported. A motion by Mr. Franks to order H.R. 92 favorably 
reported to the House, without amendment, was agreed to by 
voice vote, a quorum being present.

                      COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS

    With respect to the requirements of clause 3(c)(1) of rule 
XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the 
Committee's oversight findings and recommendations are 
reflected in this report.

                        COST OF THE LEGISLATION

    Clause 3(d)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives does not apply where a cost estimate and 
comparison prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget 
Office under section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 
1974 has been timely submitted prior to the filing of the 
report and is included in the report. Such a cost estimate is 
included in this report.

                    COMPLIANCE WITH HOUSE RULE XIII

    1. With respect to the requirement of clause 3(c)(2) of 
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, and 
section 308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the 
Committee references the report of the Congressional Budget 
Office below.
    2. With respect to the requirement of clause 3(c)(4) of 
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the 
Committee has received no report of oversight findings and 
recommendations from the Committee on Government Reform on the 
subject of H.R. 92.
    3. With respect to the requirement of clause 3(c)(3) of 
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and 
section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the 
Committee has received the following cost estimate for H.R. 92 
from the Director of the Congressional Budget Office.

                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                 Washington, DC, February 18, 1999.
Hon. Bud Shuster,
Chairman, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, House of 
        Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
reviewed the following bills, which were ordered reported by 
the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure on 
February 11, 1999. CBO estimates that their enactment would 
have no significant impact on the federal budget, and would not 
affect direct spending or receipts; therefore, pay-as-you-go 
procedures would not apply. The bills contain no 
intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the 
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and would impose no costs on 
state, local, or tribal governments. The bills reviewed are:
          H.R. 92, a bill to designate the federal building and 
        United States courthouse located at 251 North Main 
        Street in Winston-Salem, North Carolina, as the ``Hiram 
        H. Ward Federal Building and United States 
        Courthouse;''
          H.R. 158, a bill to designate the United States 
        courthouse located at 316 North 26th Street in 
        Billings, Montana, as the ``James F. Battin United 
        States Courthouse;''
          H.R. 233, a bill to designate the federal building 
        located at 700 East San Antonio Street in El Paso, 
        Texas, as the ``Richard C. White Federal Building;'' 
        and
          H.R. 396, a bill to designate the federal building 
        located at 1301 Clay Street in Oakland, California, as 
        the ``Ronald V. Dellums Federal Building.''
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is John R. 
Righter.
            Sincerely,
                                          Dan L. Crippen, Director.

                APPLICABILITY TO THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH

    The Committee finds that the legislation does not relate to 
the terms and conditions of employment or access to public 
services or accommodations within the meaning of section 
102(b)(3) of the Congressional Accountability Act (Public Law 
104-1).

                       FEDERAL MANDATES STATEMENT

    The Committee adopts as its own the estimate of the Federal 
mandates prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget 
Office pursuant to section 423 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform 
Act (Public Law 104-4).

                   CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY STATEMENT

    Pursuant to clause 3(d)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, committee reports on a bill or joint 
resolution of a public character shall include a statement 
citing the specific powers granted to the Congress in the 
Constitution to enact the measure. The Committee on 
Transportation and Infrastructure finds that Congress has the 
authority to enact this measure pursuant to its powers granted 
under article I, section 8 of the Constitution.

                      ADVISORY COMMITTEE STATEMENT

    No Advisory committees within the meaning of section 5(b) 
of the Federal Advisory Committee Act were created by this 
legislation.

         CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED

    H.R. 92 makes no changes in existing law.

                                
