[House Report 109-153]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
109th Congress Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
1st Session 109-153
======================================================================
DEPARTMENTS OF TRANSPORTATION, TREASURY, AND HOUSING AND URBAN
DEVELOPMENT, THE JUDICIARY, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, AND INDEPENDENT
AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2006
_______
June 24, 2005.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Knollenberg, from the Committee on Appropriations, submitted the
following
R E P O R T
together with
ADDITIONAL VIEWS
[To accompany H.R. 3058]
The Committee on Appropriations submits the following
report in explanation of the accomopanying bill making
appropriations for the Departments of Transportation, Treasury,
and Housing and Urban Development, the Judiciary, District of
Columbia, and independent agencies for the fiscal year ending
September 30, 2006.
INDEX TO BILL AND REPORT
Page number
Bill Report
Operating plan and reprogramming procedures................
2
Relationship with budget offices...........................
3
The effect of guaranteed spending..........................
3
Tabular summary............................................
4
Committee hearings.........................................
4
Program, project, and activity.............................
4
Title I--Department of Transportation...................... 2
5
Title II--Department of the Treasury....................... 47
66
Title III--Department of Housing and Urban Development..... 63
81
Title IV--The Judiciary.................................... 109
111
Title V--District of Columbia.............................. 116
117
Title VI--Executive Office of the President and Funds:
Appropriated to the President...................... 149
133
Title VII--Independent Agencies:
Architectural and Transportation Barriers
Compliance Board............................... 160
142
Consumer Product Safety Commission................. 160
142
Election Assistance Commission..................... 161
143
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.............. 161
144
Federal Election Commission........................ 161
144
Federal Labor Relations Authority.................. 162
145
Federal Maritime Commission........................ 162
145
General Services Administration.................... 163
146
Merit Systems Protection Board..................... 175
153
Morris K. Udall Foundation......................... 175
153
National Archives and Records Administration....... 176
154
National Credit Union Administration............... 178
156
National Transportation Safety Board............... 178
157
Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation.............. 179
158
Office of Government Ethics........................ 179
158
Office of Personnel Management..................... 180
159
Office of Special Counsel.......................... 183
162
Selective Service System........................... 184
163
United States Interagency Council on Homelessness.. 185
163
United States Postal Service....................... 185
164
United States Tax Court............................ 186
165
Title VIII--General Provisions--This Act................... 186
165
Title IX--General Provisions: Departments, Agencies, and
Corporations........................................... 194
167
House of Representatives Report Requirements:
170
Constitutional authority...........................
170
Appropriations not authorized by law...............
170
Transfers of funds.................................
173
Statement of general performance goals and
objectives.....................................
175
Compliance with rule XIII, clause 3(e) (Ramseyer
rule)..........................................
176
Changes in the application of existing law.........
180
Comparison with the budget resolution..............
200
Five-year outlay projections.......................
200
Financial assistance to state and local governments
200
Rescissions........................................
202
Full Committee votes...............................
203
Tabular summary of the bill........................
209
Operating Plan and Reprogramming Procedures
The Committee continues to have a particular interest in
being informed of reprogrammings which, although they may not
change either the total amount available in an account or any
of the purposes for which the appropriation is legally
available, represent a significant departure from budget plans
presented to the Committee in an agency's budget justifications
and supporting documents, the basis of this appropriations Act.
Consequently, the Committee directs the departments,
agencies, boards, commissions, corporations and offices funded
at or in excess of $100,000,000 in this bill, to consult with
the Committee prior to each change from the approved budget
levels in excess of $500,000 between programs, activities,
object classifications or elements unless otherwise provided
for in the Committee report accompanying this bill. For
agencies, boards, commissions, corporations and offices funded
at less than $100,000,000 in this bill, the reprogramming
threshold shall be $250,000 between programs, activities,
initiatives object classifications or elements unless otherwise
provided for in the Committee report accompanying this bill.
Additionally, the Committee expects to be promptly notified of
all reprogramming actions which involve less than the above-
mentioned amounts. If such actions would have the effect of
significantly changing an agency's funding requirements in
future years, or if programs or projects specifically cited in
the Committee's reports are affected by the reprogramming, the
reprogramming must be approved by the Committee regardless of
the amount proposed to be moved. Furthermore, the Committee
wishes to be consulted regarding reorganizations of offices,
programs, and activities prior to the planned implementation of
such reorganizations.
The Committee also directs that the Departments of
Transportation, Treasury and Housing and Urban Development, as
well as the Judiciary, the General Services Administration, and
the Office of Personnel Management, shall submit operating
plans, signed by the respective secretary, administrator, or
agency head, for the Committee's review within 60 days of the
bill's enactment.
Relationship With Budget Offices
Through the years, the Committee has channeled most of its
inquiries and requests for information and assistance through
the budget offices of the various departments, agencies, and
commissions. The Committee has often pointed to the natural
affinity and relationship between these organizations and the
Committee which makes such a relationship workable. The
Committee reiterates its longstanding position that while the
Committee reserves the right to call upon all offices in the
departments, agencies, and commissions, the primary conjunction
between the Committee and these entities must normally be
through the budget offices. The Committee appreciates all the
assistance received from each of the departments, agencies, and
commissions during the past year. The workload generated by the
budget process is large and growing, and therefore, a positive,
responsive relationship between the Committee and the budget
offices is absolutely essential to the appropriations process.
The Effect of Guaranteed Spending
Over the objections of the Appropriations and Budget
Committee, in 1998 the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st
Century (TEA-21) amended the Budget Enforcement Act to provide
two new additional spending categories or ``firewalls'', the
highway category and the mass transit category. The Wendell H.
Ford Aviation Investment and Reform Act for the 21st Century
(AIR-21) provided a similar treatment for certain aviation
programs. Although using different procedures, each of these
Acts produced the same results: they significantly raised
spending, and they have had the effect of prohibiting the
Appropriations Committee from reducing those spending levels in
the annual appropriations process. As the Committee noted
during deliberations on these bills, the Acts essentially
created mandatory spending programs within the discretionary
caps. This undermines Congressional flexibility to fund other
equally important programs not protected by funding guarantees
and to address emerging priorities, such as homeland security
and overseas military requirements, within projected budget
totals. The reorganization of the Committee in the 108th
Congress posed additional challenges in this regard, because
funding guarantees for selected transportation programs compete
in the budget process against funding for non-transportation
agencies such as the Department of Housing and Urban
Development, Office of National Drug Control Policy,
enforcement of anti-terrorism and money laundering activities
in the Treasury Department, the Internal Revenue Service, and
the General Services Administration as well as the Judiciary.
As in past years, the Committee has done all in its power,
considering this environment, to produce a balanced bill
providing adequately for all modes of transportation as well as
all non-transportation programs under the jurisdiction of this
bill.
Although the funding guarantees in AIR-21 were extended in
the Vision-100 Century of Aviation Reauthorization Act last
year, the guarantees of TEA-21 expired on September 30, 2003.
The Committee's recommendations were developed based on the
very generous funding levels in H.R. 3, the Transportation
Equity Act, A Legacy for Users. As reauthorization of our
surface transportation programs continues to be debated during
the current session of Congress, the Committee wants to make
clear that the continued use of spending guarantees to ``wall-
off'' parts of the discretionary budget for particular
constituencies could cause both transportation and non-
transportation programs across the government to be under more
severe budget pressure, in order to keep the overall budget in
balance. The effect of maintaining and enforcing these
guarantees would leave its mark on non-covered programs and
activities in this bill, since they must compete for leftover
funding. The Committee continues to believe that funding
guarantees skew transportation priorities inappropriately, by
providing increases to highway, transit, and airport spending
while leaving safety-related operations in the FAA and FRA, as
well as critical housing financial, and judicial programs, to
scramble for the remaining resources.
Tabular Summary
A table summarizing the amounts provided for fiscal year
2005 and the amounts recommended in the bill for fiscal year
2006 compared with the budget estimates is included at the end
of this report.
Committee Hearings
The Committee has conducted extensive hearings on the
programs and projects provided for in this bill. Pursuant to
House rules, each of these hearings was open to the public. The
Committee received testimony from cabinet officers, agency
heads, inspectors general, and other officials of the executive
branch in areas under the bill's jurisdiction. In addition, the
Committee has considered written material submitted for the
hearing record by Members of Congress, private citizens, local
government entities, and private organizations. The bill
recommendations for fiscal year 2006 have been developed after
careful consideration of all the information available to the
Committee.
Program, Project, and Activity
During fiscal year 2006, 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 an appropriations Act (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 capital investment grants,
Federal Transit Administration. In addition, the percentage
reductions made pursuant to a sequestration order to funds
appropriated for facilities and equipment, Federal Aviation
Administration 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.
TITLE I--DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Office of the Secretary
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 \1\................... $86,536,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 87,046,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 84,913,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... -1,623,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. -2,133,000
\1\ Includes across the board reduction of .8 percent.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The bill provides $84,913,000 for the salaries and expenses
of the various offices comprising the office of the secretary.
The following table compares the fiscal year 2005 enacted level
to the fiscal year 2006 budget estimate and the Committee's
recommendation by office:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2005 Fiscal year 2006
enacted \1\ estimate House recommended
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Immediate office of the secretary...................... $2,202,000 $2,198,000 $2,198,000
Office of the deputy secretary......................... 699,000 698,000 698,000
Office of the executive secretariat.................... 1,444,000 1,442,000 1,442,000
Office of the under secretary of transportation for 12,526,000 11,680,000 11,680,000
policy................................................
Board of contract appeals.............................. 698,000 697,000 697,000
Official of small and disadvantaged business 1,268,000 1,265,000 1,265,000
utilization...........................................
Office of the chief information officer................ 11,301,000 11,895,000 11,895,000
Office of the assistant secretary for governmental 2,297,000 2,293,000 2,052,000
affairs...............................................
Office of the general counsel.......................... 15,272,000 15,183,000 15,183,000
Office of the assistant secretary for budget and 8,504,000 9,485,000 7,593,000
programs..............................................
Office of the assistant secretary for administration... 23,249,000 23,139,000 23,139,000
Office of public affairs............................... 1,914,000 1,910,000 1,910,000
Office of intelligence and security.................... 2,037,000 2,033,000 2,033,000
Office of emergency transportation..................... 3,125,000 3,128,000 3,128,000
--------------------------------------------------------
Total............................................ $86,536,000 $87,046,000 $84,913,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Includes across the board reduction of .8 percent.
Funding for individual offices.--The Committee's
recommendations include individual funding for all of the
offices within the office of the secretary, as has been done in
past years, rather than consolidating them as proposed in the
budget request. In each instance, the recommendation provides a
small funding increase over the fiscal year 2005 enacted levels
to fund the estimated fiscal year 2006 civilian pay increase,
inflation, and other mandatory increases as requested, unless
otherwise noted in the sections that follow.
Office of the general counsel.--The Committee recommends
$15,183,000 for the office of the general counsel in fiscal
year 2006. This level should fully fund 104 full time
equivalent staff years (FTEs) as described in the budget
justification, which includes $150,000 as requested for one
additional FTE for the office of emergency transportation's
litigation caseload and three additional FTEs for which no new
funding was requested.
Office of the assistant secretary for governmental
affairs.--The Committee recommends $2,052,000 for the office of
governmental affairs, which represents a cut in funding below
the fiscal year 2005 enacted level.
When there is a legislative issue of importance to the
department, the Committee expects the office of the secretary
to contact the majority and minority staff of both the House
and the Senate Committees on Appropriations.
Additionally, the annual appropriations bill for the
Department of Transportation directs the department to notify
the Committee no less than three full business days before any
grant totaling $1,000,000 is announced. In fiscal year 2005,
due to the fact that funding for some programs was released
incrementally as the result of enactment of a series of
extension acts, the Committee was not notified prior to the
announcement of dozens of grants where the incremental amount
being released at the time was less than $1,000,000, even
though the total amount of the grant was over $1,000,000.
Although the department may feel as though it did not violate
the letter of the law on grant announcements, it most certainly
violated the spirit of this provision. The bill once again
includes a provision that prohibits the Secretary of
Transportation from issuing funds for any grant unless the
House and Senate Committees on Appropriations have been
notified not less than three full business days before any
discretionary grant award, letter of intent, or full funding
grant agreement totaling $1,000,000 or more is announced by the
department or its modal administrations. In addition, due to
the possibility that certain programs may again face
incremental funding in fiscal year 2006, the Committee directs
the department to consider grants based on their full-year
funding level, not just the incremental amount being released,
when complying with this grant announcement provision.
Office of the assistant secretary for budget and
programs.--The Committee's recommendation of $7,593,000 for
fiscal year 2006 is 20% below the request and 11% below the
fiscal year 2005 enacted level. As part of this reduction, the
request for two additional FTEs for oversight of the
department's credit programs is denied due to inadequate
justification. The Committee also denies the department's
request to hire contract support for these credit programs.
Through the years, the Committee has channeled most of its
inquiries and requests for information and assistance through
the budget offices of the various modal administrations. The
Committee has often pointed to the natural affinity and
relationship between these offices and the Committee which
makes such a relationship workable. The Committee reiterates
its longstanding position that, while the Committee reserves
the right to call upon all offices within the department, the
primary communication between the Committee and the department
must normally be through the budget offices. As such, the
Committee expects to have uninhibited access to the budget
officers in the modal administrations, especially when
questions arise or when additional information is needed
pertaining to the budget justifications. The Committee will not
tolerate continued interference by the office of the secretary
in these matters. The Committee appreciates all the assistance
received from each of the offices within the department and the
modal administrations during the past year. The workload
generated by the budget process is large and growing, and
therefore, a positive, responsive relationship between the
Committee and the budget offices is absolutely essential to the
appropriations process.
Congressional budget justifications.--The past few years,
the Committee has urged the department to improve the quality
of the budget submissions. However, once again, there were
significant inconsistencies in the quality and type of
information provided in the department's budget documents. The
Committee expects the office of the assistant secretary for
budget and programs to take a stronger role in ensuring that
the same quality of information is supplied by each of the
modal administrations within the department. Similarly, the
Committee has had numerous discussions with departmental staff
regarding the type of information and the level of detail that
should be provided in the Congressional justification
materials. In fact, in last year's report, the Committee
directed the department to include the same level of detail
that was provided in the Congressional justifications presented
in fiscal year 2003. Yet, many of the budget documents
submitted for fiscal year 2006 did not adhere to that standard.
Therefore, the Committee once again directs the department to
submit its fiscal year 2007 Congressional justification
materials at the same level of detail provided in the
Congressional justifications presented in fiscal year 2003.
Further, the department is directed to include in the budget
justification funding levels for the prior year, current year,
and budget year for all programs, activities, initiatives, and
program elements. Each budget submitted by the department must
also include detailed justification for the incremental funding
increases and additional FTEs being requested above the enacted
level, by program, activity, or program element.
Operating plan.--The Committee directs the department to
submit an operating plan for fiscal year 2006, signed by the
secretary for review by the Committees on Appropriations of
both the House and Senate within 60 days of the bill's
enactment. The operating plan should include funding levels for
the various offices, programs and initiatives detailed down to
the object class or program element covered in the budget
justification and supporting documents or referenced in the
House and Senate appropriations reports, and the statement of
the managers.
Form M.--The Committee is concerned that the Department of
Transportation allowed the motor carriers financial and
operating statistics survey (Form M data) to lapse in March of
2005 despite direction to the contrary in the statement of
managers accompanying the Transportation, Treasury, Independent
Agencies, and General Government Appropriations Act, 2005. The
fiscal year 2005 statement of managers denied the request to
transfer responsibility and funding for the Form M data from
the Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS) to FMCSA but it
was not the Conferees intent to let the collection and
reporting of survey data lapse. In fact, the report
accompanying the fiscal year 2005 Senate transportation
appropriations bill stated, ``these activities should remain
within the province of the BTS, which receives sufficient
funding to continue these activities.'' Collection of this data
is important because it provides safety-related information on
motor carriers and is widely used by the industry. The
Secretary of Transportation is directed to immediately resume
the motor carrier financial and operating statistics survey.
The secretary is directed to provide a report within 30 days of
the bill's enactment to the Committees on Appropriations of
both the House and Senate that identifies the agency
responsible for the survey and the funds to be allocated to
this priority during fiscal year 2006.
Bill language.--Language prohibiting funding for the
assistant secretary for public affairs position has been
retained from last year. Also, the bill continues language that
permits up to $2,500,000 of fees to be credited to the office
of the secretary for salaries and expenses.
OFFICE OF CIVIL RIGHTS
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 \1\................... $8,630,400
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 8,550,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 8,550,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... -80,400
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. ................
\1\ Includes across the board reduction of .8 percent.
The office of civil rights is responsible for advising the
secretary on civil rights and equal opportunity matters and
ensuring full implementation of civil rights opportunity
precepts in all of the department's official actions and
programs. This office is responsible for enforcing laws and
regulations that prohibit discrimination in federally operated
and federally assisted transportation programs. This office
also handles all civil rights cases related to department of
Transportation employees. The recommendation provides
$8,550,000 for the office of civil rights, the same as the
budget request.
TRANSPORTATION PLANNING, RESEARCH, AND DEVELOPMENT
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 \1\................... $19,840,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 9,030,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 40,613,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +20,773,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. +31,583,000
\1\ Includes across the board reduction of .8 percent.
This appropriation finances those research activities and
studies concerned with planning, analysis, and information
development needed to support the secretary's responsibilities
in the formulation of national transportation policies. It also
finances the staff necessary to conduct these efforts. The
overall program is carried out primarily through contracts with
other federal agencies, educational institutions, nonprofit
research organizations, and private firms.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $40,613,000
for transportation planning, research and development, an
increase of $20,773,000 above the fiscal year 2005 enacted
level and $31,583,000 above the budget request. Within the
funds provided, the Committee directs the secretary to provide
$10,000,000 to support the orderly discontinuation of Amtrak's
mail and express service; and $20,000,000 to be held in
reserve, which may be transferred to the Surface Transportation
Board in order to carry out directed service should Amtrak
cease operations.
WORKING CAPITAL FUND
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... ($129,002,000)
Budget request, fiscal year 2006 \1\.................. ................
Recommended in the bill............................... (120,014,000)
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... (-8,988,000)
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. (+120,014,000)
\1\ Proposed without limitation.
The working capital fund (WCF) was created to provide
common administrative services to the various modes and outside
entities that desire those services for economy and efficiency.
The fund is financed through negotiated agreements with the
department's operating administrations and other governmental
elements requiring the center's capabilities.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends a limitation of $120,014,000 on
the working capital fund. The budget request proposed a
limitless program level for the fund in fiscal year 2006. The
Committee's recommendation is appropriate considering the
funding levels of the operations and administrative accounts.
Modal usage of WCF.--Consistent with past practice, the
Committee directs the department, in its fiscal year 2007
Congressional justifications for each of the modal
administrations, to account for increases or decreases in WCF
billings based on planned usage requested or anticipated by the
modes rather than anticipated by WCF managers.
MINORITY BUSINESS RESOURCE CENTER PROGRAM
Limitation on
Appropriation guaranteed loans
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005..... $892,800 ($18,367,000)
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.... 900,000 (18,367,000)
Recommended in the bill............. 900,000 (18,367,000)
Bill compared to:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005. +7,200 (.........)
Budget request, fiscal year 2006 ................ (.........)
The minority business resource center of the office of
small and disadvantaged business utilization provides
assistance in obtaining short-term working capital and bonding
for disadvantaged, minority, and women-owned businesses. The
program enables qualified businesses to obtain loans at prime
interest rates for transportation-related projects.
The recommendation fully funds the budget request of
$500,000 to cover the subsidy costs for the loans, not to
exceed $18,367,000, and $400,000 for administrative expenses to
carry out the guaranteed loan program.
MINORITY BUSINESS OUTREACH
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 \1\................... $2,976,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 3,000,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 3,000,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +24,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. ................
\1\ Includes across the board reduction of .8 percent.
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 grants and
contract assistance that serves DOT-wide goals. The Committee
has provided $3,000,000 for this program, $24,000 above the
fiscal year 2005 funding level and equal to the budget request.
NEW HEADQUARTERS BUILDING
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 \1\................... $67,456,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 100,000,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 100,000,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +32,544,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. ................
\1\ Includes across the board reduction of .8 percent.
This appropriation finances fiscal year 2006 costs for the
new Department of Transportation headquarters building, which
would consolidate all of the department's headquarters
operating administration functions (except the Federal Aviation
Administration) from various locations around the Washington,
D.C. metropolitan area into a leased building within the
central employment area of the District of Columbia.
The Committee's recommendation includes $100,000,000 in
fiscal year 2006 for the new headquarters building, $32,544,000
above the fiscal year 2005 funding level and equal to the
budget request. The Committee commends the department for its
efforts to adequately answer all of the questions raised
regarding the funding of this building.
PAYMENTS TO AIR CARRIERS
(AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 \1\................... $51,584,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... ................
Recommended in the bill............................... 54,000,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +2,416,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. +54,000,000
\1\ Includes across the board reduction of .8 percent.
The Essential Air Service (EAS) program was originally
created by the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978 as a temporary
measure to continue air service to communities that had
received federally mandated air service prior to deregulation.
The program currently provides subsidies to air carriers
serving small communities that meet certain criteria.
The Federal Aviation Administration Reauthorization Act of
1996 (Public Law 104-264) authorized the collection of user
fees for services provided by the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) to aircraft that neither take off from,
nor land in the United States, commonly known as overflight
fees. In addition, the Act permanently appropriated these fees
for authorized expenses of the FAA and stipulated that the
first $50,000,000 of annual fee collections must be used to
finance the EAS program. In the event of a shortfall in fees,
the law requires FAA to make up the difference from other funds
available to the agency.
The fiscal year 2006 budget proposes to fund the EAS
program at a total of $50,000,000, solely from new overflight
fee collections credited to the Airport and Airway Trust Fund.
The Committee finds the budget proposal unrealistic considering
that in fiscal year 2005 the department came to the Committee
seeking additional funding for the EAS program as several
communities were in jeopardy of losing air service.
The Committee recommends a total program level of EAS in
fiscal year 2006 of $104,000,000, roughly a $2,000,000 increase
above the level provided in fiscal year 2005. This funding
consists of an appropriation of $54,000,000 and $50,000,000 to
be derived from new overflight fee collections.
The Committee includes language to ensure prompt
availability of funds for obligation to air carriers providing
service under the EAS program. The language removes an
unintended penalty whereby if $50,000,000 is made immediately
available by the FAA to the EAS program at the beginning of
each fiscal year, the FAA must take that amount from its
appropriations, without the ability to credit back amounts
transferred from the FAA once sufficient overflight fees are
available. Without this language, the result would be a
permanent reduction in the appropriations to the FAA. The
Committee has also included language that allows the secretary
to take into consideration the subsidy requirements of carriers
when selecting between carriers competing to provide service to
a community.
The bill includes a provision (sec. 182) prohibiting the
use of funds to implement the essential air service local
participation program.
The Committee is concerned that the Department of
Transportation has yet to implement the code-sharing pilot
program required under section 406 of the Vision 100--Century
of Aviation Reauthorization Act (49 Stat. 41731 note; 117 Stat.
2545). The implementation of this pilot program will increase
the number of viable transportation options available to small
communities by giving communities more options and fostering
competition among non-aligned commuter carriers. The Committee
feels that this pilot program has the potential to improve air
service in rural communities, leading to decreased dependency
on Essential Air Service and other government subsidies. The
Committee strongly recommends that the Department implement
this pilot program.
Federal Aviation Administration
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is responsible
for the safety and development of civil aviation and the
evolution of a national system of airports. The Federal
Government's regulatory role in civil aviation began with the
creation of an Aeronautics Branch within the department of
Commerce pursuant to the Air Commerce Act of 1926. This Act
instructed the Secretary of Commerce to foster air commerce;
designate and establish airways; establish, operate, and
maintain aids to navigation; arrange for research and
development to improve such aids; issue airworthiness
certificates for aircraft and major aircraft components; and
investigate civil aviation accidents. In the Civil Aeronautics
Act of 1938, these activities were subsumed into a new,
independent agency named the Civil Aeronautics Authority.
After further administrative reorganizations, Congress
streamlined regulatory oversight in 1957 with the creation of
two separate agencies, the Federal Aviation Agency and the
Civil Aeronautics Board. When the Department of Transportation
began its operations on April 1, 1967, the Federal Aviation
Agency was renamed the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)
and became one of several modal administrations within the
department. The Civil Aeronautics Board was later phased out
with enactment of the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978, and
ceased to exist at the end of 1984. FAA's mission expanded in
1995 with the transfer of the Office of Commercial Space
Transportation from the Office of the Secretary, and decreased
in December 2001 with the transfer of civil aviation security
activities to the new Transportation Security Administration.
OPERATIONS
(AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $7,712,800,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 8,201,000,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 8,192,920,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +480,120,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. -8,077,000
This appropriation provides funds for the operation,
maintenance, communications, and logistical support of the air
traffic control and air navigation systems. It also covers
administrative and managerial costs for the FAA's regulatory,
international, medical, engineering and development programs as
well as policy oversight and overall management functions.
The operations appropriation includes the following major
activities: (1) operation on a 24-hour daily basis of a
national air traffic system; (2) establishment and maintenance
of a national system of aids to navigation; (3) establishment
and surveillance of civil air regulations to assure safety in
aviation; (4) development of standards, rules and regulations
governing the physical fitness of airmen as well as the
administration of an aviation medical research program; (5)
administration of the acquisition, research and development
programs; (6) headquarters, administration and other staff
offices; and (7) development, printing, and distribution of
aeronautical charts used by the flying public.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends $8,192,920,000 for FAA operations,
an increase of $480,120,000 (6.2 percent) above the level
provided in fiscal year 2005, and $8,077,000 below the budget
request. Within the funds provided, the Committee includes
$150,000,000 for competitive sourcing for flight service
stations transition costs.
A comparison of the fiscal year 2006 budget estimate to the
Committee recommendation by budget activity is as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Budget activity FY06 estimate FY06 recommended
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air traffic organization.......... $6,647,305,000 $6,424,229,000
Research and acquisition.......... (1) 222,171,000
Flight Service Stations A-76...... 150,000,000 150,000,000
Aviation safety................... 941,742,000 951,042,000
Commercial space transportation... 11,759,000 11,759,000
Financial services................ (2) 50,583,000
Human resources................... (2) 69,943,000
Region and center operations...... (2) 150,744,000
Staff offices..................... 450,191,000 140,337,000
Information services.............. (2) 36,612,000
Account-wide adjustments.......... -14,500,000
-------------------------------------
Total....................... 8,200,997,000 8,192,920,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Estimate includes $222,171,000 under ``Air traffic organization''.
\2\ Estimate includes such funds under ``Staff offices'', as follows:
Financial services, $50,983,000; Human resources, $69,943,000; Region
and center operations coordination, $150,744,000; Office of
information services, $36,612,000.
TRUST FUND SHARE OF FAA BUDGET
The bill derives $11,769,000,000 of the total appropriation
from the airport and airway trust fund. The balance of the
appropriation ($3,206,920,000) will be drawn from the general
fund of the Treasury. Under these provisions, 79.3 percent of
the FAA's operating costs will be borne by air travelers and
industries using those services. The remaining 21.6 percent
will be borne by the general taxpayer, regardless of whether
they directly utilize FAA services.
STATE OF THE AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND
According to Administration estimates, fiscal year 2006
will continue the recent trend where necessary outlays for FAA
programs outstrip the revenues from aviation users deposited
into the airport and airway trust fund. The following table
compares trust fund revenue to trust fund outlays for the past
three fiscal years. As the table indicates, under current
estimates the Federal Government is not only spending all the
revenues coming into the trust fund, it is going beyond that,
and spending down the cash balance. The Administration
estimates that, at the end of fiscal year 2006, the uncommitted
cash balance in the trust fund will be approximately
$1,195,000,000. This represents a drop of 51 percent from the
figure two years before.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2004 Fiscal year 2005 Fiscal year 2006
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Trust fund revenue \1\................................. $9,687,000,000 $11,092,000,000 $11,921,000,000
Trust fund outlays..................................... 10,415,000,000 11,165,000,000 12,660,000,000
Difference............................................. -728,000,000 -73,000,000 -739,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Includes excise taxes, offsetting collections, and interest on trust fund cash balance.
It is imperative for the agency to lower its operating
costs and find ways to be more efficient in all its operations.
For several years, the Committee has indicated that improvement
was needed in the area of personnel costs. Although the
Committee did not receive timely information on the average
full-time equivalent (FTE) workyear cost for fiscal year 2006,
the fiscal year 2005 level was $130,957. FAA's workyear costs
have historically been among the highest of all federal
agencies, and increased 22 percent over the four year period
covering fiscal years 2001 through 2005. Average sick leave
costs historically have been 20 percent higher than the
government average, raising the agency's staffing costs. The
current average yearly sick leave consumed is 11.23 days per
FAA employee. In addition, special pays will cost the agency
$364,015,000 in fiscal year 2006, an increase of 3 percent over
the previous year.
Given the severe budget constraints facing the nation, the
Committee directs FAA to continue focusing on ways to reduce
sick leave, to improve productivity and lessen the need for
additional staffing resources in future years.
The Committee notes that the agency has made some progress
in the area of the memoranda of understanding (MOU) entered
into with different bargaining units at the regional, local and
national level, outside the national collective bargaining
agreement. FAA has begun to track the number of MOUs in a
recently established database, and has implemented a process to
accept new or renegotiate existing MOUs. The FAA indicates it
will renegotiate those that infringe on management's reserved
rights under federal labor laws, are too costly, or make no
business sense. Currently, there are 3,238 MOUs in the
database. In fiscal year 2005, 37 new MOUs were signed, and 49
are pending review. Given the number of total, new, and pending
MOUs and their potential implications to the agency, the
Committee directs the Inspector General to provide a follow-up
to its September 12, 2003 report on FAA management and controls
over MOUs.
AIR TRAFFIC SERVICES
The bill provides $6,424,229,000 for air traffic services,
a reduction of $223,076,000 from the budget request. These
resources would be managed by FAA's air traffic organization.
Recommended adjustments to the budget estimate are listed and
described below:
Amount
Contract tower base program............................. +$3,200,000
Contract tower cost-sharing program..................... +395,000
Restoration of Research and Acquisitions office......... -222,171,000
Management of MOUs and MOAs............................. -500,000
BTS aviation statistics................................. -4,000,000
Contract tower program.--The bill includes $90,500,000, an
increase of $3,200,000 above the budget estimate, to continue
the contract tower base program. The President's budget
inflated the program and did not reflect the estimate for new
contracts being negotiated during fiscal year 2006, or costs to
continue operations at an estimated 15 new towers entering the
program during fiscal year 2006.
In addition, the bill provides $7,500,000, an increase of
$395,000 above the budget estimate, to continue the contract
tower cost-sharing program. The Committee continues to believe
this is a valuable program that provides safety benefits to
small communities. Communities in this program as of May 22,
2005 are shown below:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Airport name State
------------------------------------------------------------------------
King Salmon................................. AK
Fayetteville................................ AR
Springdale.................................. AR
Laughlin/Bullhead City...................... AZ
Hawthorne................................... CA
Waterbury/Oxford............................ CT
Macon....................................... GA
Bloomington................................. IN
Columbus Municipal.......................... IN
Gary Regional............................... IN
Muncie/Delaware County...................... IN
Garden City................................. KS
Manhattan................................... KS
Barkley regional (Paducah).................. KY
Worcester................................... MA
Sawyer...................................... MI
Jefferson City.............................. MO
Joplin Regional............................. MO
Concord..................................... NC
Kinston..................................... NC
Smith Reynolds (Winston-Salem).............. NC
Hickory Regional............................ NC
Lebanon Municipal........................... NH
Lea County/Hobbs............................ NM
Elko........................................ NV
Oneida County............................... NY
Stillwater.................................. OK
Latrobe..................................... PA
Williamsport/Lycoming County................ PA
Greenville Donaldson Center................. SC
Grand Strand/Myrtle Beach................... SC
McKeller-Sipes (Jackson).................... TN
Walla Walla Regional........................ WA
Morgantown.................................. WV
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Restoration of research and acquisition office.--The
Committee recommendation restores funding for a separate office
of research and acquisition. The President's budget proposed to
transfer this funding to the air traffic organization. Inasmuch
as not all research and acquisition staffing is related to air
traffic services activities, and in recognition that there are
separate appropriations for these important activities, the
Committee maintains the traditional budget structure.
Management of MOUs and MOAs.--Recognizing that the
improvements in the MOU process and oversight are likely to
result in reduced operating costs, the Committee assumes cost
savings of $500,000 from this effort.
Controller staffing.--According to FAA, the agency expects
that over the next 10 years, 73 percent of its 15,000
controllers will become eligible to retire. Consistent with its
10 year staffing plan, the FAA budget assumes hiring of 1,249
new controllers. This hiring will be offset by the estimated
loss of 654 controllers. The bill includes $24,875,000 for
salaries, benefits, training, and ancillary support costs
associated with a net increase of 595 in controller work force.
The Committee agrees with FAA that a one for one
replacement of retiring controllers is not prudent, as it would
not assume productivity improvements from procedural changes,
facility consolidation, or even new technology. The Committee
believes the business-like mindset of the air traffic
organization, as well as the unusual flexibility provided to
the agency through personnel and procurement reform, will make
such productivity improvements a reality and lessen the need
for additional personnel. In addition, many controllers working
traffic today are certified to work traffic, but are not yet
certified professional controllers (CPC). FAA data indicates
that new controllers are sent to an operational facility within
four months of initial qualification training, not three years.
FAA also has issued regulations to waive the mandatory
retirement age of 56 for controllers. The Committee believes
that this is a good hedge against the retirement surge in
future years. Further, the FAA expects to complete an analysis
in December of staffing needs for each facility based on its
size, complexity and traffic volume. This important analysis
will provide a more accurate estimate of needs.
Airway facilities technical workforce.--The bill provides a
total of $5,400,000, consistent with the budget request, to
hire and train 258 additional maintenance technicians. A recent
arbitration ruling upheld the contractual requirement that FAA
maintain a minimum level (6,100) of technical staff (systems
specialists, electronics technicians, and computer specialists)
for maintenance of the air traffic control equipment. This
staffing level is contained in the Professional Airways System
Specialists (PASS) Union Contract signed in January 2000.
Bureau of transportation statistics studies.--The Committee
denies the $4,000,000 requested for aviation statistical
studies to be conducted by bureau of transportation statistics.
It is not clear to the Committee how these studies will be
relevant to FAA's mission.
New York/New Jersey airspace redesign.--No funds made
available for national airspace redesign may be used to prepare
the environmental impact statement for the redesign of the New
York/New Jersey/Philadelphia regional airspace, or to conduct
any work as part of the review of the redesign project
conducted under the National Environmental Policy Act and
related laws, as long as the FAA fails to consider noise
mitigation.
COMPETITIVE SOURCING FOR FLIGHT SERVICE STATIONS
The bill provides $150,000,000 for competitive sourcing for
flight service stations, consistent with the budget request.
AVIATION SAFETY
The bill provides $951,042,000 for aviation safety, an
increase of $47,760,666 above the fiscal year 2005 level and
$9,300,000 above the budget request. Recommended adjustments to
the budget are described below.
Amount
Additional safety inspectors and engineers.............. +$8,000,000
Safety and security analytics........................... +1,000,000
Professional Aerial Application support system.......... +50,000
Certification of upset training program................. +250,000
Aviation safety inspectors.--The Committee provides
$15,103,000 for aviation safety personnel, an increase of
$8,000,000 over the budget estimate. The budget assumes the
office of aviation safety will attrit 151 full time equivalents
(FTEs) during fiscal year 2005. The Committee understands that
actual attrition appears to be 125 to 170 FTEs and that the Air
Transportation Oversight System (ATOS) may affect the number of
inspectors required to ensure safety.
The Committee notes that loss of certification staff has
negatively impacted the domestic aviation industry's ability to
bring new products to the marketplace, and in turn affect
global leadership and competitiveness. Therefore, the Committee
directs that $4,000,000 of the $8,000,000 additional provided
will result in a total FTE level in the office of aircraft
certification of 1,189. The remaining $4,000,000 above the
request shall be available to increase inspectors in the office
of flight standards.
Funds provided for the offices of aircraft certification
and flight standards shall not be reprogrammed for any other
purpose within or outside of the aviation safety office,
including hiring other types of personnel within aviation
safety. Further, this is designated as a special Congressional
item of interest. The Committee directs the Secretary to
provide a summary by March 1, 2006 regarding the use of the
funds provided, including, but not limited to the total FTE in
the offices of aircraft certification and flight standards,
total employees, vacancies, positions under active recruitment
to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations.
The Committee directs the FAA to issue a report on the
publication and implementation of final regulations
implementing organizational designation authority to increase
efficiency within the office of aircraft certification.
Safety inspections of air carriers.--In 1998, the FAA began
implementation of the Air Transportation Oversight Systems
(ATOS). Under this system, FAA inspectors are to use data
analysis to focus their inspections on areas that pose the
greatest safety risks and to shift the focus of those
inspections in response to changing conditions within air
carrier operations. In 1999, FAA began to transition the
remaining air carriers to the ATOS system. In 2002, the
Inspector General reported that ATOS program was conceptually
sound, and suggested improvements, each of which the FAA
implemented. The IG issued a second report on June 3, 2005 that
again stated that the program was conceptually sound. However,
it identified opportunities to fully implement the program to
enhance FAA's ability to perform safety oversight of air
carriers in transition. The IG stated that implementation of
its recommendations will make a safe aviation system even
stronger, and the FAA has agreed to implement the
recommendations. This Committee directs the FAA to provide a
report of the House and Senate Committees on Appropriation by
March 1, 2006 on the status of implementing the IG's
recommendations.
Safety and security analytics project.--The recommendation
includes $1,000,000 to initiate the safety and security
analytics project. Current software is available to analyze
electronic text found in descriptions of accidents, incidents,
pilot and controller reports, and other databases to determine
trends, patterns, and anomalies earlier than using other
methods. This technology will help FAA meet its long-term goal
of reducing the fatal accident rate among commercial air
carriers by focusing on long-term trends rather than specific
cases.
Professional Aerial Application Support System.--The
recommendation includes $50,000 for the National Agricultural
Aviation Research and Education Foundation's Professional
Aerial Application Support System.
Certification of upset recovery training.--The Committee
recommends $250,000 for FAA to evaluate and validate state of
the art methods of conducting enhanced upset recovery training
using centrifuge based flight simulator technology. Funds are
to conduct human factors experiments at the Civil Aeormedical
Institute to verify the benefits of this technology.
Flight attendant fatigue.--The Committee looks forward to
receiving the flight attendant fatigue study, as required the
fiscal year 2005 House report 108-671, and will give due
consideration to the report's recommendations.
Detroit Metropolitan air traffic control tower.--In
September 2004, mold contamination was discovered in various
locations of the Detroit Metropolitan Air Traffic Control Tower
during a safety inspection. The Committee urges the FAA to
conduct thorough and complete remediation of the mold found in
the air traffic control tower based on standard industry
practice. The Committee directs the FAA to consider the safety
and health of the employees that work in the tower as a
priority during any remediation efforts.
RESEARCH AND ACQUISITION
The Committee recommends $222,171,000 for the office of
research and acquisition, the same as the budget estimate, and
$2,385,483 above the fiscal year 2005 level.
COMMERCIAL SPACE TRANSPORTATION
The Committee recommends $11,759,000 for the office of
commercial space transportation, consistent with the budget
request, and an increase of $248,827 above fiscal year 2005.
STAFF OFFICES
The Committee recommends $448,219,000 for staff offices, a
reduction of $1,972,000 from the budget request. Adjustments to
the budget are explained below.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office Adjustment Recommended
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Financial services................ -$400,000 $50,583,000
Other staff offices............... -1,572,000 140,337,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Financial services.--The Committee recommends $50,583,000,
a reduction of $400,000 from the budget request. The Committee
recommendation does not include the requested funding for eight
additional staff in the office of budget, the office has 17
vacant positions. The FAA states that 8 of the vacant positions
are being transferred to Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, and six
positions are currently under recruitment. Therefore, the
Committee will reevaluate its recommendation if the vacancy
status in the near future warrants.
Human resource management.--The Committee recommends
$69,493,000, consistent with the budget estimate.
Region and center operations.--The Committee recommends
$150,774,000, consistent with the budget estimate.
Information services.--The Committee recommends
$36,612,000, consistent with the budget estimate.
Other staff offices.--The Committee recommends $140,237,000
for other staff offices. The Committee recommendation does not
include the requested funding for eight new employees for the
office of chief counsel and one new employee for the security
and hazmat office, as the current vacant positions are 10 and
38, respectively. Further, the FAA states the security and
hazmat office is under tight hiring restrictions and plans to
do limited hiring in the 4th quarter of fiscal year 2005. The
Committee recommendation does not provide funding for four new
employees in the Administrator's office. Although the office
has just one vacancy, the budget documents did not provide any
justification of need for this request. The Committee is
willing to reconsider this with adequate and timely
justification. The Committee provides an additional $100,000
for a new FTE in the office of government and industry affairs,
for a total funding level of $1,396,000.
ACCOUNT-WIDE ADJUSTMENTS
Personnel compensation and benefits.--The recommendation
includes a reduction of $8,000,000 in agency-wide personnel
compensation and benefits costs due to budget constraints.
Unfilled executive positions.--The Committee recommends a
reduction of $5,000,000, reflecting the unfilled roster of 19
executive positions in the agency, including 15 which were not
under active recruitment. Past hearing records indicate that,
at any given time, the agency is likely to have between 10 and
20 unfilled executive positions. For an agency with 176
executive positions, this level of openings may not be
problematic. However, it does indicate excess costs are being
budgeted for positions that are not likely to be filled in the
entirety of the fiscal year.
Working capital fund costs.--The recommendation allows
$23,879,000 for working capital fund costs, a reduction of
$1,500,000 below the budget estimate.
BILL LANGUAGE
Manned auxiliary flight service stations.--The bill
includes the limitation requested in the President's budget
prohibiting funds from being used to operate a manned auxiliary
flight service station in the contiguous United States. The FAA
budget includes no funding to operate such stations during
fiscal year 2006.
Second career training program.--Once again this year, the
bill includes a prohibition on the use of funds for the second
career training program. This prohibition has been in annual
appropriations Acts for many years, and is included in the
President's budget request.
Sunday premium pay.--The bill retains a provision begun in
fiscal year 1995 which prohibits the FAA from paying Sunday
premium pay except in those cases where the individual actually
worked on a Sunday. The statute governing Sunday premium pay (5
U.S.C. 5546(a)) is very clear: ``An employee who performs work
during a regularly scheduled 8-hour period of service which is
not overtime work as defined by section 5542(a) of this title a
part of which is performed on Sunday is entitled to . . .
premium pay at a rate equal to 25 percent of his rate of basic
pay.'' Disregarding the plain meaning of the statute and
previous Comptroller General decisions, however, in Armitage v.
United States, the Federal Circuit Court held in 1993 that
employees need not actually perform work on a Sunday to receive
premium pay. The FAA was required immediately to provide back
pay totaling $37,000,000 for time scheduled but not actually
worked between November 1986 and July 1993. Without this
provision, the FAA would be liable for significant unfunded
liabilities, to be financed by the agency's annual operating
budget. This provision is identical to that in effect for
fiscal years 1995 through 2005.
Aviation User Fees.--The bill includes a limitation carried
for several years prohibiting funds from being used to finalize
or implement any new unauthorized user fees.
Nonprofit safety standard setting organization.--The
Committee retains a provision that allows the use of funds to
enter into an agreement with a nonprofit standard setting
organization to develop safety standards.
Aeronautical charting and cartography.--The bill maintains
the provision which prohibits funds in this Act from being used
to conduct aeronautical charting and cartography (AC&C)
activities through the working capital fund (WCF). Public Law
106-181 authorized the transfer of these activities from the
Department of Commerce to the FAA, a move which the Committee
supported. The Committee believes this work should continue to
be conducted by the FAA, and not administratively delegated to
the WCF.
Store gift cards and gift certificates.--The bill maintains
the limitation in effect since fiscal year 2004 prohibiting FAA
from using funds to purchase store gift cards or gift
certificates through a government-issued credit card. This
provision responds to abuses documented by the U.S. Government
Accountability Office last year.
FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT
(AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $2,519,680,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 2,448,000,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 3,053,000,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +533,320,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. +605,000,000
The Facilities and Equipment (F&E) account is the principal
means for modernizing and improving air traffic control and
airway facilities. The appropriation also finances major
capital investments required by other agency programs,
experimental research and development facilities, and other
improvements to enhance the safety and capacity of the airspace
system.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,053,000,000
for this program, an increase of $533,320,000 (21 percent)
above the level provided for fiscal year 2005 and 605,000,000
above the budget estimate. The bill provides that of the total
amount recommended, $2,618,000,000 is available for obligation
until September 30, 2008, and $435,000,000 (the amount for
personnel and related expenses) is available until September
30, 2006. These obligation availabilities are consistent with
past appropriations Acts.
ENGINEERING DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION
The bill includes $234,310,000 for engineering development,
test, and evaluation activities.
Advanced technology development and prototyping.--The
Committee recommends $41,460,000, to be distributed as follows:
Amount
Runway incursion........................................ $7,100,000
Aviation system capacity improvement.................... 6,500,000
Separation standards.................................... 2,500,000
GA/vertical flight technology........................... 1,500,000
Operational concept validation.......................... 3,000,000
NAS requirements........................................ 800,000
Safer skies............................................. 3,400,000
NAS safety assessment................................... 1,500,000
GPS anti-jam technologies............................... 1,000,000
Wake turbulence......................................... 2,000,000
Airspace management laboratory.......................... 7,000,000
Lithium technologies to mitigate ASR.................... 1,000,000
Airport-related research................................ 1,000,000
Wind profiling and weather research Juneau.............. 3,160,000
--------------------------------------------------------
____________________________________________________
Total............................................. 41,460,000
Airport-related research.--Of the funds provided,
$1,000,000 is for FAA to enter into cooperative agreements with
non-profit research entities to conduct research to develop
safer, more durable, more cost-effective airfield pavements.
GPS anti-jam technology.--The Committee recommendation
includes $1,000,000 to continue the GPS anti-jam program to
reduce or remove GPS system vulnerabilities.
San Francisco International Airport.--The Committee
commends the Federal Aviation Administration for working
cooperatively with San Francisco International Airport (SFO),
airlines, pilots, and air traffic controllers to address policy
and safety issues related to implementation of a precision
runway monitoring/simultaneous offset instrument approach (PRM/
SOIA) procedure that has resulted in additional capacity when
weather conditions warrant.
Safe flight 21.--The Committee recommends $42,950,000, an
increase of $10,000,000 above the budget request. The
additional funds are to augment ADS-B funding: $500,000 is for
certification of a NAS-wide system; $6,000,000 is needed for
installation of 20 pre-production 1090 ground-based stations in
the contiguous United States; and $330,000 is for technical
program support.
AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT
The Committee recommends $1,588,286,000 for programs and
activities designed to establish, replace, modify, or otherwise
improve air traffic control facilities and equipment.
Terminal automation modernization program.--The Committee
has provided a total of $64,300,000 for the terminal automation
modernization program, $25,000,000 over the budget request. Of
the funds provided, an increase of $10,000,000 is for FAA to
continue to provide updated software to the busiest facilities
in the National Airspace System (NAS), and $15,000,000 is
provided to replace aging equipment at Minneapolis and St.
Louis. The budget request included replacement at Chicago and
Denver; however, Minneapolis and St. Louis are two other large,
critical sites identified by the DOT IG where current displays
used by controllers are suffering from significant reliability
problems.
The Committee remains concerned that FAA has not yet
provided reliable cost estimates and timetables for completing
Standard Terminal Automation Replacement (STARS) program as
directed. Delays and indecision with STARS are now directly
impacting the NAS. FAA has deferred action on replacing aging
displays at the 4 large critical sites addressed above for too
long. According to a recent report by the Inspector General,
these aging displays could have serious safety implications.
The Committee is disappointed that FAA will not make a
decision regarding how to complete terminal modernization this
summer as expected. Rather, FAA will approve only a handful of
sites and, once again, defer important decisions about many
facilities that manage aircraft in terminal airspace. Assuming
FAA can take action to replace aging displays at large sites as
directed by the Committee and that STARS deployments continue
at medium sites, questions and options then focus squarely on
the small sites.
Beyond fiscal year 2006, decisions need to be made about
the best way to address these smaller sites. All of FAA's
smaller sites--which number over 100--have a shortcoming with
respect to aging displays, not the automation platform. While
the display problems are not yet approaching the levels
experienced by the larger sites, decisions about what to do
cannot be postponed indefinitely. The Committee urges FAA to
make a decision about these sites that is based on an open,
transparent, and competitive process.
Terminal air traffic control facilities replacement.--The
Committee recommends $130,000,000 for the replacement of aged
air traffic control towers.
Instrument landing system establishment.--The
recommendation includes $30,000,000 for establishment of
instrument landing systems (ILSs) nationwide.
Voice recorder replacement program.--The Committee
recommends $7,000,000, an increase of $1,500,000 above the
budget estimate.
GPS approaches.--The Committee understands that the fiscal
year 2006 budget request for the wide area augmentation system
includes funds for the development of additional approaches and
flight procedures at the nation's non-part 139 certified
airports. The Committee supports this effort, and has provided
$110,000,000 for WAAS, an increase of $10,000,000 above the
budget request. Additional funds are provided to publish WAAS
approaches at airports without an existing ILS approach.
Integrated control and monitoring system.--The Committee
recommends $3,500,000 for continued procurement and
installation of the integrated control and monitoring system
(ICMS). FAA is currently using ICMS in Denver, Seattle, Newark,
Minneapolis, Salt Lake City, and Phoenix. This system would
offer significant benefits to other operational evolution plan
(OEP) airports as well as others with substantial landing aids
and lighting systems. The Committee expects the agency to
obligate these funds within six months of enactment, and to
install such systems at airports with the highest need.
Transponder landing system.--The recommendation includes
$20,000,000 for the transponder landing system (TLS).
Distance Measuring Equipment. The Committee recommends
$4,000,000 for distance measuring equipment, an increase of
$2,800,000 over the budget request.
Loran-C.--The Committee recommendation includes $25,000,000
for continued modernization of the Loran-C navigation system.
The Committee directs that none of these funds be reprogrammed
except through the Congressional reprogramming process.
Houston area air traffic system (HAATS).--The Committee
recommends $10,200,000, the same as the budget estimate for
HAATS.
Approach lighting system improvement program.--The
recommendation includes $25,000,000 for the approach lighting
system improvement program (ALSIP).
Medium-intensity approach lighting system replacement
(MALSR).--The Committee provides $5,000,000 for the MALSR
nationwide program, and recommends that FAA continue to procure
the latest MALSR equipment that has been approved for use in
the national airspace system and in support of small business
initiatives.
NON-AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT
The Committee recommends $138,100,000 for programs to
replace, modify, or otherwise improve facilities and equipment
not directly related to the provision of air traffic control
services in the national airspace system (NAS).
MISSION SUPPORT
The Committee recommends $266,703,100 for mission support
activities.
Frequency and spectrum engineering.--The Committee
recommendation includes $8,600,000 for frequency and spectrum
engineering, and increase of $2,500,000 over the budget
request. The additional funds are for the NAS interference,
detection, location, and mitigation (IDLM) project. This
project will enable FAA to more effectively identify radio
signals interfering with air traffic control functions and
resolve them quickly. Over the past few years, FAA has recorded
an average of over 1,500 interference events per year.
Center for advanced systems development.--The
recommendation provides $86,000,000 for the center for advanced
systems development, an increase of $16,400,000 above the
budget estimate, and equal to the fiscal year 2005 level.
PERSONNEL AND RELATED EXPENSES
The Committee recommends $435,000,000 for personnel and
related expenses. This appropriation finances the installation
and commissioning of new equipment and modernization of FAA
facilities.
BILL LANGUAGE
Capital investment plan.--The bill continues to require the
submission of a five year capital investment plan.
RESEARCH, ENGINEERING, AND DEVELOPMENT
(AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $129,880,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 130,000,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 130,000,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +120,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. ................
This appropriation provides funding for long-term research,
engineering and development programs to improve the air traffic
control system and to raise the level of aviation safety, as
authorized by the Airport and Airway Improvement Act and the
Federal Aviation Act. The appropriation also finances the
research, engineering and development needed to establish or
modify federal air regulations.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends $130,000,000, an increase of
$120,000 above the fiscal year 2005 enacted level and the same
as the President's budget request.
A table showing the fiscal year 2005 enacted level, the
fiscal year 2006 budget estimate, and the Committee
recommendation follows:
RESEARCH, ENGINEERING AND DEVELOPMENT
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2006 Committee
Program estimate recommended
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Improve Commercial Aviation Safety $88,932 $88,932
Fire research and safety...... 6,244 6,244
Propulsion and fuel systems... 4,049 4,049
Advanced materials/structural 2,613 2,613
safety.......................
Atmospheric hazards/digital 3,441 3,441
system safety................
Aging aircraft................ 19,007 19,007
Aircraft catastrophic failure 3,340 3,340
prevention...................
Flightdeck safety/systems 8,181 8,181
integration..................
Aviation safety risk analysis. 4,932 4,932
ATC/AF human factors.......... 9,654 9,654
Aeromedical research.......... 6,889 6,889
Weather research.............. 20,582 20,582
Improve Efficiency of the ATC 20,396 20,396
System...........................
Joint program and development 18,100 18,100
office.......................
Wake turbulence............... 2,296 2,296
Reduce Environmental Impacts:. 16,008 16,008
Environment and energy........ 16,008 16,008
Mission Support................... 4,664 4,664
System planning and resource 1,271 1,271
mgmt.........................
Technical laboratory 3,393 3,393
facilities...................
-------------------------------------
Total..................... 130,000 130,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Joint Planning and Development Office.--The bill includes
$18,100,000, as requested, for FAA's contribution to the multi-
agency Joint Planning and Development Office (JPDO). This
office involves the Departments of Defense, Commerce, and
Homeland Security, FAA, and the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration in developing a national plan for the
transformation of air transportation. This plan is expected to
establish a vision for the future air transportation system,
set national aerospace goals, and provide a forum to engage
industry and customer input. It is an advisory committee as
defined in the Federal Advisory Committee Act.
GRANTS-IN-AID FOR AIRPORTS
(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)
(LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)
(RESCISSION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)
(AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)
Liquidation of
contract Limitation on
authorization obligations
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005..... $2,800,000,000 ($3,472,000,000)
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.... 3,300,000,000 (3,000,000,000)
Recommended in the bill............. 3,600,000,000 (3,600,000,000)
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005. +800,000,000 (+128,000,000)
Budget request, fiscal year 2006 +300,000,000 (+600,000,000)
The bill includes a liquidating cash appropriation of
$3,600,000,000 for grants-in-aid for airports, authorized by
the Airport and Airway Improvement Act of 1982, as amended.
This funding provides for liquidation of obligation incurred
pursuant to contract authority and annual limitations on
obligations for grants-in-aid for airport planning and
development, noise compatibility and planning, the military
airport program, reliever airports, airport program
administration, and other authorized activities. This is
$300,000,000 above the amount requested in the President's
budget and $800,000,000 above the level enacted for fiscal year
2005.
LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS
The bill includes a limitation on obligations of
$3,600,000,000 for fiscal year 2006. This is $600,000,000 above
the President's budget request and $128,000,000 above the
fiscal year 2005 level.
DISCRETIONARY GRANTS
Within the overall obligation limitation in this bill,
funding of $973,112,398 is available for discretionary grants
to airports.
ADMINISTRATION
The bill provides that, within the overall obligation
limitation, $81,346,000 is available for administration of the
airports program by the FAA. This level includes $10,000,000
for the airport cooperative research pilot program, as
requested.
Letter of Intent.--The Committee understands that the
Panama City-Bay County International Airport Authority has
applied for a letter of intent (LOI) for the construction of a
new airport. According to the authority, two-thirds of the cost
of this proposed project will be funded from non-federal
sources. The committee encourages the FAA to promptly consider
this application.
BILL LANGUAGE
Runway incursion prevention systems and devices.--
Consistent with the provisions of Public Law 106-181 and the
fiscal year 2004 and 2005 Appropriations Acts, the bill allows
funds under this limitation to be used for airports to procure
and install runway incursion prevention systems and devices.
Small community air service pilot program.--The bill
specifies that $20,000,000 of the total amount limited is
available to continue the small community air service pilot
program. This is the same funding level as enacted since fiscal
year 2002.
The Committee recommendation includes a rescission of
contract authorization of $469,000,000. The rescission is from
contract authority in fiscal year 2005 that ``popped-up'' above
the obligation limitation available for that fiscal year.
Therefore, this rescission has no effect on any grants-in-aid
program. The proposed rescission is a result of section 107 of
AIR-21 (P.L. 106-181). This section specified that, in the
event appropriations for the facilities and equipment program
were less than authorized in a given fiscal year, additional
contract authorization would automatically be made available
for the grants-in-aid for airports program. The Committee
understands that the legislative committees intended to provide
flexibility in meeting the funding guarantees, by allowing the
Appropriations Committees to meet the guarantee by providing a
single, combined total of funding for the F&E and grants-in-aid
programs rather than hitting the precise authorized amounts for
each as specified in the authorization Act. Because the
Appropriations Committees are not provided an allocation of
budget authority for the grants-in-aid program, section 107
provided automatic budget authority for this purpose. The
Committee continues to disagree with the Congressional Budget
Offices' scoring of this provision.
ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS--FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION
Section 101. The Committee retains a provision requiring
FAA to accept landing systems, lighting systems, and associated
equipment procured by airports, subject to certain criteria.
Section 102. The Committee retains, with modification, a
provision limiting the number of technical workyears at the
Center for Advanced Aviation Systems Development. The
modification raises the limitation from 350 in fiscal year 2005
to 375 in fiscal year 2006.
Section 103. The Committee retains a provision prohibiting
FAA from requiring airport sponsors to provide the agency
``without cost'' building construction, maintenance, utilities
and expenses, or space in sponsor-owned buildings, except in
the case of certain specified exceptions.
Section 104. The Committee retains a provision prohibiting
funds to change weight restrictions or prior permission rules
at Teterboro Airport, Teterboro, New Jersey.
Section 105. The Committee continues a provision extending
the current terms and conditions of FAA's aviation insurance
program, commonly known as the ``war risk insurance'' program,
for one additional year, from December 31, 2005 to December 31,
2006. Although the underlying program is authorized until March
2008, certain provisions including premium price caps were set
to expire at the end of this calendar year. The Committee
recommendation preserves the status quo under this program, a
savings of $80,000,000 from the budget estimate. Savings accrue
because the bill's provisions result in additional revenue from
insurance premiums, which were assumed to be zero in the budget
estimate for fiscal year 2006.
Section 106. The bill retains a provision the prohibits
funds for engineering work related to an additional runway at
Louis Armstrong International Airport in New Orleans,
Louisiana.
Federal Highway Administration
The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) provides
financial assistance to the states to construct and improve
roads and highways, and provides technical assistance to other
agencies and organizations involved in road building
activities. Title 23 of the United States Code and other
supporting legislation provide authority for the various
activities of the FHWA. Funding is provided by contract
authority, with program levels established by annual
limitations on obligations set in Appropriations Acts.
The most recent long-term surface transportation
authorization act, the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st
Century (TEA-21), expired on September 30, 2003. Since that
time, Congress has passed several short-term extension bills
that have provided additional contract authority for the FHWA.
The current extension will expire on June 30, 2005. Because
reauthorization actions have not yet been completed, the
Committee has provided funding levels consistent with the
House-passed surface transportation reauthorization
legislation, the Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users
(TEA-LU), even though the actual structure of the federal
highway program in fiscal year 2006 is unknown at this time.
LIMITATION ON ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 \1\................... ($343,728,000)
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... (367,638,000)
Recommended in the bill............................... (359,529,000)
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... (+15,801,000)
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. (-8,109,000)
\1\ Includes across the board reduction of .8 percent.
This limitation controls spending for the salaries and
expenses of the FHWA required to conduct and administer the
federal-aid highway program and most other federal highway
programs.
The Committee recommends a limitation of $359,529,000. This
level is sufficient to fund six additional full time equivalent
staff years (FTEs) to oversee major projects, for an overall
agency total of 2,430 FTEs. The recommended level assumes the
following adjustment to the budget request:
Reduce funding for adjustments to agency operations
funding............................................. -$8,109,000
Reductions from the budget request.--The Committee reduces
funding for the line item identified in the budget request as
being for increased administrative funding in support of
oversight and stewardship activities (-$8,109,000) due to
inadequate justification. The Committee is willing to
reconsider this reduction should the FHWA provide adequate
documentation to support this funding increase.
Staff for oversight of major projects.--The Committee
provides $603,000 for 6 FTEs for oversight of major projects as
requested by the administration. The Inspector General has
recommended, and the Committee agrees, that the FHWA needs to
have better oversight of its program, specifically the major
projects. Major projects, with a total cost of $10,000,000 or
more, have a history of significant cost overruns and schedule
slippage, as seen again recently with reports on quality of
work issues relating to water leaks in the Interstate 93
tunnels of the central artery project in Boston and poor
analysis and inadequate disclosure of cost estimates relating
to the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge in California.
LIMITATION ON TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH
This limitation controls spending for the transportation
research and technology contract programs of the FHWA. In prior
years, it has included a number of contract programs including
intelligent transportation systems, surface transportation
research, technology deployment, training and education, and
university transportation research.
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $462,500,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006 \1\.................. ................
Recommended in the bill............................... 485,000,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +22,500,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. +485,000,000
\1\ An unspecified amount for fiscal year 2006 is assumed within the
federal-aid obligation limitation.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The recommendation includes an obligation limitation for
transportation research of $485,000,000, which is consistent
with the House-passed surface transportation reauthorization
legislation, TEA-LU. Because reauthorization actions have not
yet been completed, the Committee has not provided a break out
of the transportation research program by activities since this
pending legislation is likely to change the structure of the
existing program. Even so, the Committee provides a limitation
on the research program as has been past practice.
BUREAU OF TRANSPORTATION STATISTICS
Under the obligation limitation of the FHWA and within the
sublimitation for transportation research, the Committee
provides $33,000,000 for the Bureau of Transportation
Statistics (BTS). As stated previously, due to the lack of a
surface transportation authorization act for fiscal year 2006,
the Committee has funded programs at a level that is consistent
with the House-passed reauthorization legislation, TEA-LU.
Also, since passage of the Norman Y. Mineta Research and
Special Programs Improvement Act, Public Law 108-426, on
November 30, 2004, BTS is a part of the Research and Innovative
Technology Administration (RITA) within the department.
Accordingly, additional information regarding BTS is included
in the RITA section of this report.
FEDERAL-AID HIGHWAYS
(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)
(LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)
(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)
Liquidation of
contract Limitation on
authorization obligation
Appropriation, fiscal year $35,000,000,000 \1\ ($34,422,400,000)
2005........................
Budget request, fiscal year 35,000,000,000 (34,700,000,000)
2006........................
Recommended in the bill...... 36,000,000,000 (36,287,100,000)
Bill compared to:
Appropriation, fiscal +1,000,000,000 (+1,864,700,000)
year 2005...................
Budget request, fiscal +1,000,000,000 (+1,587,100,000)
year 2006...................
\1\ Includes across the board reduction of .8 percent.
Federal-aid highways and bridges are managed through a
federal-state partnership. States and localities maintain
ownership and responsibility for maintenance, repair and new
construction of roads. State highway departments have the
authority to initiate federal-aid projects subject to FHWA
approval of plans, specifications, and cost estimates. The
federal government provides financial support for construction
and repair through matching grants, the terms of which vary
with the type of road.
There are almost four million miles of public roads in the
United States and approximately 577,000 bridges. The federal
government provides grants to states to assist in financing the
construction and preservation of about 958,000 miles (24
percent) of these roads, which represents an extensive
Interstate system plus key feeder and collector routes.
Highways eligible for federal aid carry about 85 percent of
total U.S. highway traffic.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends a liquidating cash appropriation
of $36,000,000,000. This is the required amount to pay the
outstanding obligations of the various highway programs at
levels provided in this Act and prior appropriations Acts.
The Committee has included bill language, as requested by
the administration, that allows the secretary to charge and
collect fees from the applicant for a direct loan, guaranteed
loan, or line of credit to cover the cost of the financial and
legal analyses performed on behalf of the department. The fees
so collected are not subject to any obligation limitation or
the limitation on administrative expenses set for the TIFIA
program under section 188 of title 23, United States Code.
The bill includes language limiting fiscal year 2006
federal-aid highways obligations to $36,287,100,000, an
increase of $1,864,700,000 from the fiscal year 2005 enacted
level and an increase of $1,587,100,000 from the fiscal year
2006 budget request.
The Committee sets, through the annual appropriations
process, an overall limitation on the total contract authority
that can be obligated under the federal-aid highway program in
a given year. The Committee also provides direction and other
guidance regarding some of the programs that operate under this
overall limitation. With regard to fiscal year 2006, the
Committee finds itself in a position where the existing
authorizing legislation has expired and no program authority
extends into the coming fiscal year, yet the House has passed
its version of a multi-year surface transportation
reauthorization bill. However, many of the details regarding
the scope and structure of the federal highway program are
likely to be reshaped by the pending actions of the House and
Senate conferees. Therefore, to the extent feasible, the
Committee has honored the overall funding levels set by TEA-LU
but has remained silent regarding the underlying program
structure since these details are unknown at this time.
For years, federal-aid highways funds have been made
available to the states through a mix of apportioned programs,
which are distributed using a formula provided in law, and
allocated programs, which are distributed based on criteria set
in law and allow for some discretion on the part of the
secretary in selecting recipients. As stated previously, the
structure of the federal-aid highway program for fiscal year
2006 is unknown at this time due to the lack of authorizing
legislation. However, many of the apportioned programs that
currently exist are likely to continue and, therefore, the
descriptions of major highway programs that follow are based on
current law:
National highway system.--The ISTEA of 1991 authorized--and
the National Highway System Designation Act of 1995
subsequently established--the National Highway System (NHS).
This 163,000-mile road system serving major population centers,
international border crossings, intermodal transportation
facilities and major travel destinations, is the culmination of
years of effort by many organizations, both public and private,
to identify routes of national significance. It includes all
Interstate routes, other urban and rural principal arterials,
the defense strategic highway network, and major strategic
highway connectors, and is estimated to carry up to 76 percent
of commercial truck traffic and 44 percent of all vehicular
traffic. A state may choose to transfer up to 50 percent of its
NHS funds to the surface transportation program category. If
the secretary approves, 100 percent may be transferred. The
federal share of the NHS is 80 percent, with an availability
period of four years.
Interstate maintenance.--The 46,567-mile Dwight D.
Eisenhower National System of Interstate and Defense Highways
retains a separate identity within the NHS. This program
finances projects to rehabilitate, restore, resurface and
reconstruct the Interstate system. Reconstruction of bridges,
interchanges, and over-crossings along existing Interstate
routes is also an eligible activity if it does not add capacity
other than high occupancy vehicle (HOV) and auxiliary lanes.
All remaining federal funding to complete the initial
construction of the Interstate system has been provided through
previous highway legislation. TEA-21 and the extension acts
provide flexibility to states in fully utilizing remaining
unobligated balances of prior Interstate construction
authorizations. States with no remaining work to complete the
Interstate system may transfer any surplus Interstate
construction funds to their Interstate maintenance program.
States with remaining completion work on Interstate gaps or
open-to-traffic segments may relinquish Interstate construction
fund eligibility for the work and transfer the federal share of
the cost to their Interstate maintenance program.
Surface transportation program.--The surface transportation
program (STP) is a flexible program that may be used by the
states and localities for any roads (including NHS) that are
not functionally classified as local or rural minor collectors.
These roads are collectively referred to as federal-aid
highways. Bridge projects paid with STP funds are not
restricted to federal-aid highways but may be on any public
road. Transit capital projects are also eligible under this
program. The total funding for the STP may be augmented by the
transfer of funds from other programs and by minimum guarantee
funds under TEA-21 and the extension acts, which may be used as
if they were STP funds. Once distributed to the states, STP
funds must be used according to the following percentages: 10
percent for safety construction; 10 percent for transportation
enhancement; 50 percent divided among areas of over 200,000
population and remaining areas of the state; and, 30 percent
for any area of the state. Areas of 5,000 population or less
are guaranteed an amount based on previous funding, and 15
percent of the amounts reserved for these areas may be spent on
rural minor collectors. The federal share for the STP program
is 80 percent with a 4-year availability period.
Bridge replacement and rehabilitation program.--This
program provides assistance for bridges on public roads
including a discretionary set-aside for high cost bridges and
for the seismic retrofit of bridges. Fifty percent of a state's
bridge funds may be transferred to the NHS or the STP, but the
amount of any such transfer is deducted from national bridge
needs used in the program's apportionment formula for the
following year.
Congestion mitigation and air quality improvement
program.--The congestion mitigation and air quality improvement
(CMAQ) program provides funds to states to improve air quality
in non-attainment and maintenance areas. A wide range of
transportation activities are eligible, provided DOT, after
consultation with EPA, determines they are likely to help meet
national ambient air quality standards. TEA-21 provides greater
flexibility to engage public-private partnerships, and expands
and clarifies eligibilities to include programs to reduce
extreme cold starts, maintenance areas, and particulate matter
(PM-10) nonattainment and maintenance areas. If a state has no
non-attainment or maintenance areas, the funds may be used as
if they were STP funds.
On-road and off-road demonstration projects may be
appropriate candidates for funding under the CMAQ program. Both
sectors are critical for satisfying the purposes of the CMAQ
program, including reducing regional emissions and verifying
new mobile source control techniques.
Federal lands highways.--This program provides funding
through four major categories--Indian reservation roads,
parkways and park roads, public lands highways (which
incorporates the previous forest highways category), and
federally-owned public roads providing access to or within the
National Wildlife Refuge System. TEA-21 also established a new
program for improving deficient bridges on Indian reservation
roads.
Minimum guarantee.--Under TEA-21 and the extension acts,
after the computation of funds for major federal-aid programs,
additional funds are distributed to ensure that each state
receives an additional amount based on equity considerations.
This minimum guarantee provision ensures that each state will
have a return of 90.5 percent on its share of contributions to
the highway account of the Highway Trust Fund. To achieve the
minimum guarantee each fiscal year, $2.8 billion nationally is
available to the states as though they are STP funds (except
that requirements related to set-asides for transportation
enhancements, safety, and sub-state allocations do not apply),
and any remaining amounts are distributed among core highway
programs.
Appalachian development highway system.--This program makes
funds available to construct highways and access roads under
section 201 of the Appalachian Regional Development Act of
1965. Under TEA-21 and the extension acts, funding is
authorized at $450,000,000 for each of fiscal years 1999-2004;
is available until expended; and distributed based on the
latest available cost-to-complete estimate.
Emergency relief.--This program provides for the repair and
reconstruction of federal-aid highways and federally-owned
roads which have suffered serious damage as the result of
natural disasters or catastrophic failures. Emergency relief
(ER) funds can be used only for emergency repairs to restore
essential highway traffic, to minimize the extent of damage
resulting from a natural disaster or catastrophic failure, or
to protect the remaining facility and make permanent repairs.
If ER funds are exhausted, the Secretary of Transportation may
borrow funds from other highway programs.
ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS--FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
Section 110. The Committee includes a provision that
distributes obligation authority among federal-aid highways
programs.
Section 111. The Committee continues a provision that
credits funds received by the Bureau of Transportation
Statistics to the federal-aid highways account.
Section 112. The Committee continues a provision allowing
Nevada and Arizona to reimburse debt service payment on the
Bypass Bridge at Hoover Dam project with future apportionments,
in accordance with title 23, United States Code.
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
The primary mission of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration (FMCSA) is to improve the safety of commercial
vehicle operations on our nation's highways. To accomplish this
mission, the FMCSA is focused on reducing the number and
severity of large truck crashes. Agency resources and
activities contribute to ensuring safety in commercial vehicle
operations through enforcement, including the use of stronger
enforcement measures against safety violators; expedited safety
regulation; technology innovation; improvements in information
systems; training; and improvements to commercial driver's
license testing, record keeping, and sanctions. To accomplish
these activities, the FMCSA works closely with federal, state,
and local enforcement agencies, the motor carrier industry,
highway safety organizations, and individual citizens. In
addition, the FMCSA has the responsibility to ensure that
Mexican commercial vehicles, entering the U.S. in accordance
with the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), meet all
U.S. hazardous material and safety regulations.
The FMCSA's scope was expanded in fiscal year 2003 by the
U.S.A. Patriot Act (P.L. 107-56), which called for new security
measures. In addition, beginning in fiscal year 2002,
Appropriations Acts (P.L. 107-87, P.L. 108-7, P.L. 108-199, and
P.L. 108-447) have funded border enforcement and safety related
activities associated with implementation of NAFTA, and
activities associated with permitting of hazardous materials.
Since the most recent long-term surface transportation
authorization act, the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st
Century (TEA-21), expired on September 30, 2003, Congress has
passed several short-term extension bills that have provided
additional contract authority for the FMCSA. The current
extension will expire on June 30, 2005. Because reauthorization
actions have not yet been completed, the Committee has provided
funding levels consistent with the House-passed surface
transportation reauthorization legislation, the Transportation
Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (TEA-LU).
MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY OPERATIONS AND PROGRAMS
(LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)
(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)
(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)
(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
Liquidation of
contract Limitation on
authorization obligations
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005..... $257,547,000 \1\ ($255,487,00
0)
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.... 233,000,000 (233,000,000)
Recommended in the bill............. 215,000,000 (215,000,000)
Bill compared to:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005. -42,547,000 (-40,487,000)
Budget request, fiscal year 2006 -18,000,000 (-18,000,000)
\1\ Includes across the board reduction of .8 percent.
This limitation controls spending for salaries and
operating expenses and for motor carrier research by the FMCSA.
In recent years, the Committee has provided funding for a few
grant programs under this administrative account because no
flexibility existed to fund these priorities elsewhere.
However, consistent with TEA-LU, the Committee is providing a
limitation solely on the administrative expenses of the agency,
including research and technology activities, in fiscal year
2006.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends $215,000,000 in liquidating cash
for the operations and research activities of the FMCSA.
LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS
The Committee recommends a limitation on obligations of
$215,000,000 for the operating expenses of and motor carrier
safety research by the FMCSA. This is a level consistent with
the House-passed surface transportation reauthorization
legislation, TEA-LU. This funding level represents a reduction
of $40,487,000 below the fiscal year 2005 enacted level.
However, the fiscal year 2005 level included funding for
several grant programs that are not being continued in this
account in fiscal year 2006 because it is expected that these
grant programs will be funded under the national motor carrier
safety program in the next surface transportation
authorization.
The recommended level assumes the following adjustments
from the $205,051,000 that was identified in the FMCSA's budget
justification as being the fiscal year 2005 enacted level for
operations and programs, excluding grant programs:
Adjustments to base................................... +$5,682,000
New quality assurance and regulatory evaluation +1,800,000
programs.............................................
Promote transportation specialists in field to GS-13.. +838,000
Additional funding to address backlog of enforcement +500,000
cases................................................
Increased funding to research and technology programs. +941,000
Increased funding for information management +1,188,000
activities...........................................
Undistributed reduction............................... -1,000,000
A discussion of program funding levels follow:
Adjustments to base.--The Committee provides an increase of
$5,682,000 above the fiscal year 2005 enacted level for
required pay raises, GSA rent, working capital fund
adjustments, and inflation, as was requested in the budget
submission.
Quality assurance and regulatory evaluation programs.--The
Committee provides $1,800,000 for three additional federal full
time equivalent staff years (FTEs) and the associated contract
support for a new quality assurance program and a new
regulatory evaluation program.
Field transportation specialists.--Consistent with the
budget request, the Committee provides an additional $838,000
to promote a large number of transportation specialists in the
field to GS-13 commensurate with the level of responsibility
that these program managers are performing.
Backlog of enforcement cases.--The FMCSA requested a
$500,000 increase to address the agency's backlog of
enforcement cases. The Committee provides this funding as
requested.
Research and technology.--The Committee provides $9,500,000
for research and technology, a reduction of $1,453,000 below
the budget request and an increase of $941,000 above the fiscal
year 2005 level.
New entrant program.--This Committee provided funding for
this program for the first time in fiscal year 2004 and, in a
little over one year, over 40 states have implemented a state
new entrant program. Consistent with this success, the
Committee continues the program structure that limits federal
responsibility to program oversight and to respond to the rare
case where a state does not have the authority or ability to
implement the program by managing third party contracts.
Therefore, the Committee denies the request for the additional
$13,700,000 and the 20 additional FTEs to implement an expanded
federal role in the new entrant program.
Information management.--The Committee provides $42,370,000
for information management, an increase of $1,188,000 over last
year, but $3,334,000 below the budget request.
Education and outreach.--The Committee does not support the
FMCSA's proposed reduction to the agency's outreach and
education programs. As such, the Committee directs that no less
than $2,500,000 of the funds provided be used for outreach and
education. Within the funding provided, $500,000 is provided to
continue a program to increase the commercial motor vehicle
safety belt usage rate; $100,000 is provided to continue the
``safety is good business'' program; $150,000 is provided to
continue the motorcoach transportation service selection, and
$250,000 is provided for the household goods outreach program.
This funding level also includes $100,000 for the ``share the
road safely'' program that had previously been funded under the
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). In
addition, the Committee directs the NHTSA to return to the
FMCSA the one FTE that had been detailed from FMCSA to help
oversee the program.
For each of these initiatives and all other outreach
initiatives, the FMCSA must first develop a goal, message, and
coherent and explicit program strategy that clearly and
directly link FMCSA's outreach and education program
initiatives to each program's goal. The FMCSA shall provide
information regarding the goals and strategies to the House and
Senate Committees on Appropriations by February 10, 2006. The
Committee encourages the FMCSA to combine its outreach efforts
with other interactions it has with motor carrier companies,
such as security sensitivity visits, compliance reviews, and
safety audits.
Consistent with last year, the Committee provides $375,000
for FMCSA's telephone hotline.
Commercial vehicle analysis reporting system.--The
Committee directs that up to $6,800,000 of the funds provided
shall be available for the FMCSA to make grants to, or enter
into contracts with, states, local government, or other persons
for the commercial vehicle analysis reporting system.
Undistributed reduction.--An undistributed reduction of
$1,000,000 is also included to control the growth of the
agency's administrative expenses and to keep the fiscal year
2006 funding level within the levels set by TEA-LU. All other
requested increases not specifically cited in this report as
being approved are denied.
NATIONAL MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY PROGRAM
(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)
(LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)
(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)
Liquidation of
contract Limitation on
authorization obligations
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005..... $190,000,000 \1\ ($188,480,00
0)
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.... 232,000,000 (232,000,000)
Recommended in the bill............. 286,000,000 (286,000,000)
Bill compared to:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005. +96,000,000 (+97,520,000)
Budget request, fiscal year 2006 +54,000,000 (+54,000,000)
\1\ Includes across the board reduction of .8 percent.
The FMCSA's national motor carrier safety program (NMCSP)
was authorized by TEA-21, amended by the Motor Carrier Safety
Improvement Act of 1999, and continued into 2004 and 2005 by a
series of short-term extension acts. Under the previous
authorizing legislation, this program consisted of two major
areas: the motor carrier safety assistance program (MCSAP) and
the information systems and strategic safety initiatives
(ISSSI) program. MCSAP provides grants and project funding to
states to develop and implement national programs for the
uniform enforcement of federal and state rules and regulations
concerning motor carrier safety. The major objective of this
program is to reduce the number and severity of accidents
involving commercial motor vehicles. Grants are made to
qualified states for the development of programs to enforce the
federal motor carrier safety and hazardous materials
regulations and the Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety Act of
1986. The basic program is targeted at roadside vehicle safety
inspections of both interstate and intrastate commercial motor
vehicle traffic. ISSSI provides funds to develop and enhance
data-related motor carrier programs.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends $286,000,000 in liquidating cash
for this program.
LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS
The Committee recommends a limitation on obligations of
$286,000,000 for the national motor carrier safety program.
This is a level consistent with the House-passed surface
transportation reauthorization legislation, TEA-LU, and is
$97,520,000 greater than the fiscal year 2005 enacted level.
Because reauthorization actions have not yet been
completed, the Committee has not provided a break out of the
various motor carrier safety grant programs that would be
covered by this obligation limitation since this pending
legislation is likely to change the structure of the existing
program. Even so, the Committee provides a limitation on the
total amount of contract authority that can be obligated in
fiscal year 2006, regardless of the form these grant programs
take.
Under TEA-LU, the Secretary has the discretion to deduct up
to $15,000,000 of the funds made available for motor carrier
safety grants and use it for audits of new entrant motor
carriers. The interim final rule for the new entrant safety
assurance process was published on May 13, 2002, with an
effective date of January 2003. This rule requires all new
entrants to pass a safety audit within the first 18 months of
operations in order to receive permanent DOT registration. The
Committee notes the positive results that have been gained so
far by these audits. Therefore, should a reauthorization bill
get signed into law that provides this discretionary authority
to the secretary, the Committee strongly urges the department
to use this authority to fund the new entrant program to the
full extent allowable.
In addition, the secretary is encouraged to use the funding
designated for high priority activities and projects under
section 31104(f)(2)(A) of title 49, United States Code, to
supplement the new entrant audit program as necessary to ensure
that this program is sufficiently funded to conduct all of the
required audits. Furthermore, although it is the intent of the
Congress that this program be a grant program to the states,
the secretary may withhold such funds from a state or local
government that is unable to use government employees to
conduct new entrant motor carrier audits and may instead use
contract audits in those jurisdictions.
ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISION--FEDERAL MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY ADMINISTRATION
Section 120. The Committee continues a provision subjecting
funds appropriated in this Act to the terms and conditions of
section 350 of Public Law 107-87, including a requirement that
the secretary submit a report on Mexico-domiciled motor
carriers.
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA)
was established as a separate organizational entity in the
Department of Transportation in March 1970. It succeeded the
National Highway Safety Bureau, which previously had
administered traffic and highway safety functions as an
organizational unit of the Federal Highway Administration.
The majority of NHTSA's programs are currently authorized
under extensions to the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st
Century (TEA-21). In the absence of a long-term surface
transportation reauthorization, the Committee recommends
funding NHTSA programs under the levels prescribed in the
House-passed version of H.R. 3, the Transportation Equity Act:
A Legacy for Users.
Budget justifications.--The Committee directs NHTSA in its
fiscal year 2007 budget justification to provide information on
all proposed changes from the prior year, including the
rationale as to why particular programs are proposed for
reductions or elimination. Additionally, to the maximum extent
possible, NHTSA should include enacted fiscal year funding data
along with request data so that the Committee can make
appropriate comparisons.
OPERATIONS AND RESEARCH
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 \1\................... $231,122,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 231,367,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 231,367,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +245,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. ................
\1\ Includes transfer of funds from FHWA.
The Committee provides a total of $231,367,000 for
operations and research, to be distributed as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Salaries and benefits................................. $71,852,000
Travel................................................ 1,336,000
Operating expenses.................................... 25,698,000
Contract programs:
Safety performance (rulemaking)................... 11,518,000
Safety assurance (enforcement).................... 18,351,000
Highway safety programs........................... 46,345,000
Research and analysis............................. 72,086,000
General administration............................ 681,000
Grant administration reimbursements................... -16,500,000
-----------------
Total........................................... 231,367,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The recommendation makes the following adjustments to the
budget request:
Reduce transfer of funding for grant administration... +$765,000
Deny funding for harmonization of vehicle safety -200,000
standards............................................
Reduce funding for hydrogen fuel cell program......... -850,000
Reduce travel......................................... -70,000
Increase funding for the National EMS Information +355,000
System...............................................
OPERATING EXPENSES
Administrative grant reimbursements.--The Committee
recommends $16,500,000 for transfers for grant administration,
which is $324,000 above the fiscal year 2005 level and $765,000
below the request. The Committee does not believe a 6.4 percent
increase, as proposed by NHTSA, is necessary in this tight
budget climate and believes investing limited resources
directly to improve highway safety is a much higher priority.
Harmonization of vehicle safety standards and workforce
planning and development.--Due to budget constraints, funding
is not provided for the harmonization of vehicle safety
standards initiative.
HIGHWAY SAFETY PROGRAMS
Emergency medical services (EMS).--The Committee is aware
that national databases exist that support police and fire
services; however, there has been no similar national
repository for EMS data. EMS systems vary in their ability to
collect and use patient and EMS systems data to improve
emergency medical response and patient care in post-crash
events. Therefore, the Committee supported the inclusion of
additional funds in fiscal year 2005 to support a National EMS
Resource Center to assist state and local EMS systems in data
collection and analysis. The Resource and Technical Assistance
Center will provide technical assistance, including site
visits, to state emergency medical services offices and local
EMS agencies in converting to the National EMS Information
System (NEMSIS). The next steps in NEMSIS development will be
the full implementation of a national EMS database, full
operation of a NEMSIS Technical Assistance Center, and eventual
support of state data collection systems. The Committee has
provided an additional $355,000 over the budget request to
support continuation costs of the NEMSIS Technical Assistance
Center. The Committee encourages NHSTA to continue towards full
implementation of NEMSIS, which will provide data entry and
reporting capabilities at the local EMS level, data collection
and reporting capabilities at the state level, and a national
EMS database to be housed at NHTSA with a Technical Assistance
Center to assist EMS systems in data collection and use. One of
the ultimate goals of NEMSIS is to reduce post-crash death and
disability by developing a better understanding of current EMS
response and performance in order that scarce resources can be
best directed towards critical training, equipment, planning
and other needs that can best improve patient outcomes.
Next generation enhanced 9-1-1.--The Committee encourages
NHTSA to develop a pilot project of ``Next Generation''
Enhanced 9-1-1 (E9-1-1) activities, as defined by the ENHANCE
911 Act of 2004. In particular, the Committee is interested in
Internet Protocol (IP) based E9-1-1 demonstration projects. The
Committee expects that any demonstration would comply with
industry standards as adopted by the National Emergency Number
Association's Future Path Plan and Next Generation E9-1-1
capabilities.
RESEARCH AND ANALYSIS
Vehicle Identification Numbers.--The Committee is aware
that NHTSA and several states have been discussing collecting
vehicle identification numbers (VIN) at crash sites. Such data
would be extremely valuable to determine what safety
technologies were on the vehicles involved in a crash and
understand how those countermeasures performed. Therefore, the
Committee strongly encourages NHTSA and state governments to
collect and report these data in order to inform future crash
avoidance and automobile safety technology development.
Data collection and analysis.--The Committee supports
NHTSA's data collection and analysis activities, particularly
as they relate to using sound science as the basis for any
regulatory action. The Committee is concerned, however, that
NHTSA may be duplicating effort in the multiple databases it
maintains. Therefore, the Committee directs NHTSA to conduct a
comprehensive review of data collection activities and report
back to the Committees on Appropriations of the House of
Representatives and Senate by March 31, 2006 with respect to
the specific types of data collected in each of its data
collection and analysis programs and any opportunities to
consolidate these data into a system or systems that require
less annual operating support yet retain critical safety
information.
National Motor Vehicle Crash Causation Survey.--The
Committee provides $10,000,000 for the NMVCCS, which is an
increase of $3,056,000 above the fiscal year 2005 enacted
level. The Committee strongly supports efforts to identify the
factors that contributed to automobile accidents so that
research and development activities for crash avoidance and
crash survivability technologies can proceed quickly. The
Committee urges NHTSA to move forward as expeditiously as
possible in order to speed potential life-saving technologies
to market.
OPERATIONS AND RESEARCH
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... ................
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... ................
Recommended in the bill............................... $152,367,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005..................... +152,367,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................... +152,367,000
The Committee recommends a total of $152,367,000 for
operations and research funding from the general fund. The
administration proposed to fund these programs through the
highway trust fund, and therefore requested no general funds.
operations and research
(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)
(LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)
(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... ($227,551,000)
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... (227,367,000)
Recommended in the bill............................... (75,000,000)
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005..................... (-149,820,000)
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................... (-152,551,000)
\1\ Includes transfer from FHWA.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends $75,000,000 from the highway trust
fund for authorized activities associated with operations and
research.
national driver register
(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)
(LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)
(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... ($3,571,000)
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... (4,000,000)
Recommended in the bill............................... (4,000,000)
Bill compared to:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005..................... (+429,000)
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................... ................
The National Driver Register facilitates the interstate
exchange of driver licenses due to concerns regarding problem
drivers whose licenses to drive have been suspended or revoked
for cause. The Committee recommends $4,000,000 from the highway
trust fund for operations and research activities associated
with the national driver register, of which $3,075,000 is for
program activities and $925,000 is for salaries and benefits.
highway traffic safety grants
(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)
(LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)
(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)
Liquidation of
contract Limitation on
authorization obligations
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005..... $225,000,000 ($223,200,000)
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.... 465,000,000 (465,000,000)
Recommended in the bill............. 551,000,000 (551,000,000)
Bill compared to:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005. +326,000,000 (+327,800,000)
Budget request, fiscal year 2006 +86,000,000 (+86,000,000)
TEA-LU reauthorizes three state grant programs: the highway
safety program, the alcohol-impaired driving countermeasures
grant program, and the occupant protection incentive grant
program, and authorizes for the first time an additional four
state grant programs: state traffic safety information systems
improvement grants, high visibility enforcement grants, child
safety and booster seat grants and motorcyclist safety grants.
The Committee recommends $551,000,000 in liquidating cash,
which is the same as the amount authorized in the House-passed
version of TEA-LU.
LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS
As in past years, the bill includes language limiting the
obligations to be incurred under the various highway traffic
safety grants programs. These obligations are currently set in
extensions to TEA-21. For fiscal year 2006, the Committee has
provided limitations on obligations at the level prescribed in
the House-passed version of TEA-LU. The bill includes separate
obligation limitations with the following funding allocations:
Highway safety programs............................... ($229,000,000)
Occupant protection incentive grants.................. (136,000,000)
Alcohol-impaired driving countermeasures.............. (129,000,000)
State traffic safety information systems improvements. (30,000,000)
High visibility enforcement........................... (15,000,000)
Child safety and booster seat grants.................. (6,000,000)
Motorcyclist safety................................... (6,000,000)
The fiscal year 2006 budget submission reflected NHTSA's
reauthorization proposal, which restructures the highway safety
grant programs into a consolidated program, funded at the
combined level of TEA-21 sections 402, 410, 405, 411, 2003(b),
and 163 and 157 of title 23 of the United States Code. The
Committee has provided funding as envisioned in the House-
passed version of TEA-LU.
Bill language.--The bill maintains language that prohibits
the use of funds for construction, rehabilitation, and
remodeling costs or for office furnishings or fixtures for
state, local, or private buildings or structures. Language is
also continued that limits the amount available for technical
assistance to $500,000 under section 410.
ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISION--NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY
ADMINISTRATION
Section 130. The Committee continues a provision that
allows states to use funds provided under section 402 of title
23, U.S.C., to produce and place highway safety public service
messages in television, radio, cinema, print media, and on the
internet. The provision provides that any state that uses funds
for such purposes must submit a report to the Secretary, who in
turn is directed to submit the reports to the House and Senate
Committees on Appropriations. The provision allocates
$10,000,000 for national paid media to support national safety
belt mobilizations under section 405 and $20,000,000 under
section 410 to include: $6,000,000 to support state impaired
driving mobilization enforcement efforts and $14,000,000 for
paid media to support national law enforcement mobilizations on
impaired driving.
Federal Railroad Administration
The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) is responsible
for planning, developing, and administering programs to achieve
safe operating and mechanical practices in the railroad
industry, as well as managing the high-speed ground
transportation program. Grants to the National Railroad
Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) and other financial assistance
programs serving to rehabilitate and improve the railroad
industry's physical plant are also administered by FRA.
SAFETY AND OPERATIONS
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $138,651,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 145,949,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 145,949,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +7,298,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. ................
The safety and operations account provides support for
FRA's rail safety and passenger and freight program activities.
Funding also supports salaries and expenses and other operating
costs related to FRA staff and programs.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
A total of $145,949,000 is recommended for safety and
operations, which is a $7,298,000 increase above the fiscal
year 2005 enacted level. Of this total, $13,856,000 is
available until expended.
Push-pull operations.--The Committee is concerned about the
safety of passenger rail operations with the use of cab cars as
the forward car in the push-pull mode or self-propelled
locomotives with passenger seating (MU locomotives),
particularly after the tragic and deadly Metrolink train
derailment in Glendale, California in January. Previous studies
have noted that occupants of the relatively exposed cab car,
including the engineer, are vulnerable to serious injury or
fatality in the event of a collision with either a road vehicle
at a grade crossing or with another train. Current railroad
requirements must be reassessed to ensure the safety of
passengers occupying the leading car. In light of these
concerns, the Committee directs FRA to conduct a definitive
study regarding the use of cab cars during the push-pull mode
or in MU locomotives as compared to standard passenger
locomotives as leading vehicles in passenger trains, to include
a review of the following: the relative frequency and severity
of accidents, with special emphasis placed on the differences
associated with derailments; the efficacy of crashworthiness
features; and a review of the FRA's Emergency Order No. 20 and
its effectiveness in increasing passenger safety. FRA should
report to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations no
later than June 1, 2006.
RAILROAD RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $35,737,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 46,325,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 26,325,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... -9,412,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. -20,000,000
The railroad research and development appropriation
finances FRA contract research activities. The objectives of
this program are to reduce the frequency and severity of
railroad accidents and to provide technical support for rail
safety rulemaking and enforcement activities.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $26,325,000, a
reduction of $20,000,000 below the request as a result of
denying funds without prejudice for the Nationwide Differential
GPS program.
RAILROAD REHABILITATION AND IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
TEA-21 established the Railroad Rehabilitation and
Improvement Financing loan and loan guarantee program. The
aggregate unpaid principal amounts of the obligations may not
exceed $3,500,000,000 at any one time. Not less than
$1,000,000,000 is reserved for projects primarily benefiting
freight railroads other than class I carriers. The funding may
be used: (1) to acquire, improve, or rehabilitate intermodal or
rail equipment or facilities, including track, components of
track, bridges, yards, buildings, or shops; (2) to refinance
existing debt; or (3) to develop and establish new intermodal
or railroad facilities. No Federal appropriation is required,
since a non-Federal infrastructure partner may contribute the
subsidy amount required by the Credit Reform Act of 1990 in the
form of a credit risk premium. Once received, statutorily
established investigation charges are immediately available for
appraisals and necessary determinations and findings.
The Committee continues bill language specifying that no
new direct loans or loan guarantee commitments may be made
using federal funds for the payment of any credit premium
amount during fiscal year 2006.
NEXT GENERATION HIGH-SPEED RAIL
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $19,493,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... ................
Recommended in the bill............................... 10,165,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... -19,493,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. ................
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends $10,165,000 for the next
generation high-speed rail program, which is $10,165,000 above
the budget request and $9,328,000 below the fiscal year 2005
enacted level. The Committee points out to the administration
that this program provides value beyond passenger rail, and
disputes the notion that until the future of passenger rail
service is decided, no funding should be spent on high-speed
rail planning or research and development. Total funding is
allocated as follows:
Train control systems:
North American joint PTC project.................. $7,000,000
Grade crossing and innovative structures.............. 2,165,000
Corridor planning..................................... 1,000,000
-----------------
Total........................................... 10,165,000
Train control systems.--The Committee is encouraged by the
promise of positive train control technologies and the impact
they can have on reducing rail accidents--particularly
accidents that are caused by human error. Accordingly, the
Committee recommends $7,000,000 to continue the North American
joint PTC project, and encourages FRA to implement field
demonstrations that validate the use of PTC technologies.
GRANTS TO THE NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION
(AMTRAK)
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $1,207,264,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 360,000,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 550,000,000
Bill compared to:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... -657,264,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. +190,000,000
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends $550,000,000 for grants to Amtrak
in fiscal year 2006, which represents an increase of
$190,000,000 over the budget request. The administration asked
for $360,000,000, but reserved the entire sum for transfer to
the Surface Transportation Board to carry out directed service
for commuter rail operations in the event Amtrak is forced to
cease operations, thereby providing no funding for Amtrak
operations on the grounds that passenger rail service in the
United States requires reform. While the Committee agrees that
reform is critical, it is also equally important to sustain
passenger rail service in geographic regions where this service
is viable. Accordingly, the Committee recommendation
specifically prohibits Federal funding for the eighteen Amtrak
routes that operate at subsidy levels of greater than or equal
to $30 per passenger, based on fully-allocated profit/loss data
that excludes depreciation and interest. The Committee notes
that the 24 routes that remain eligible for Federal funding
under the recommendation (those requiring less than a $30
subsidy per passenger) represented more than 80 percent of
Amtrak's passengers in fiscal year 2004.
Capital grants.--The Committee is concerned that, whenever
Amtrak has faced fiscal crises, it has chosen to defer critical
maintenance and capital investments rather than scale back
other areas to fund these needs. Accordingly, the Committee
includes bill language providing $50,000,000 to the Secretary
of Transportation to make repairs to the Northeast Corridor.
The Secretary is directed to consult with Amtrak to determine
which capital projects are the most critical to further efforts
to bring the Northeast Corridor into a state of good repair.
Monthly reporting requirements.--The Committee directs
Amtrak to continue submitting monthly performance reports
containing the same information as has been presented
throughout fiscal year 2005.
Annual operating plan.--The Committee expects that Amtrak
will submit its annual operations report as required by 49 USC
24315.
ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISION--FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION
Section 140. The Committee includes an administrative
provision permitting FRA, in conjunction with Operation
Lifesaver, to conduct public awareness activities with respect
to grade crossing safety.
Federal Transit Administration
The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) was established as
a component of the Department of Transportation on July 1,
1968, when most of the functions and programs under the Federal
Transit Act (78 Stat. 302; 49 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.) were
transferred from the Department of Housing and Urban
Development. Known as the Urban Mass Transportation
Administration until enactment of the Intermodal Surface
Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991, the Federal Transit
Administration administers federal financial assistance
programs for planning, developing, and improving comprehensive
mass transportation systems in both urban and non-urban areas.
Much of the funding for the Federal Transit Administration
is provided by annual limitations on obligations provided in
appropriations Acts. However, direct appropriations are
required for specific portions of programs.
Authorization for the programs funded by the Federal
Transit Administration is contained in the Transportation
Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21). TEA-21 also amended
the Budget Enforcement Act (which expired on September 30,
2003) by creating the mass transit budget category which funds
transit formula grants, transit capital projects, Federal
Transit Administration administrative expenses, transit
planning and research, and university transportation center
expenses. The seventh extension of TEA-21 will expire on June
30, 2005. Because the conference of the surface transportation
reauthorization legislation has not yet concluded, the
Committee's recommendation continues the account and program
structure of TEA-21 and prior year appropriations Act, but
meets the overall funding level contained in H.R. 3 as passed
by the House of Representatives on March 10, 2005.
ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES
Limitation on
Appropriation obligations Total funding
(general fund) (trust fund)
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005........................... $9,704,000 $67,704,000 $77,367,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.......................... 83,500,000 0 83,500,000
Recommended in the bill................................... 12,000,000 68,000,000 80,000,000
Bill compared to:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... +2,328,000 +296,000 +2,624,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... -71,500,000 +68,000,000 -3,500,000
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends a total appropriation of
$80,000,000 for FTA's salaries and expenses, an increase of
$2,624,000 over the fiscal year 2005 funding level and
$3,500,000 below the budget request. The recommendation is
comprised of an appropriation of $12,000,000 from the general
fund and $68,000,000 from limitations on obligations from the
mass transit account of the highway trust fund. Funds for the
National Transit Database are assumed under ``Forumla grants''
as proposed in the budget request.
The administrator is authorized to transfer funding between
offices. Any transfers totaling more than three percent of the
initial appropriation from this account must be approved by the
House and Senate Committees on Appropriations. No new positions
have been approved.
E-gov.--The Committee denies funding for e-gov initiatives
based in the office of the secretary for lack of adequate
justification.
The Committee's recommendation includes funds for only
those information technology initiatives that directly support
FTA and its grant applications. No funds are provided for
transfer to another agency in support of other e-gov
initiatives.
Budget justifications.--It is important for the department
and the Congress to have the ability to analyze the needs of
FTA on an office-by-office basis consistent with other DOT
agencies. The Committee directs FTA to submit its fiscal year
2006 congressional budget justification for administrative
expenses itemized by office, with material detailing salaries
and expenses, staffing increases, and programmatic initiatives
of each office. The initiatives for each should be clearly
stated, and include a justification for each new position or
full-time equivalent, should FTA seek any next year. In
addition, FTA is directed to continue providing a breakout of
staff resources spent per new fixed guideway project in the
fiscal year 2006 budget request.
Transit security.--The Committee reiterates its direction
as stated in House Report 108-671 regarding transit security.
The Committee's position remains that the Department of
Homeland Security is the lead agency on transportation
security. As stated on the TSA website: ``All new improvements
will be coordinated with the Transportation Security
Administration (TSA) which has overall responsibility for
transportation security among all modes of transportation,
including rail and transit lines.'' As such, the Committee
recommends the same number of FTE for the security office as
provided in fiscal year 2005.
Project management oversight activities.--The Committee
directs that FTA continue reporting monthly to the House and
Senate Committees on Appropriations on the status of each
project with a full funding grant agreement.
To further support oversight activities, the bill continues
a provision requiring FTA to reimburse the Department of
Transportation Office of Inspector General $2,000,000 for costs
associated with audits and investigations of transit-related
issues, including reviews of new fixed guideway systems. This
reimbursement must come from funds available for the execution
of contracts. Over the past several years, the IG has provided
critical oversight of numerous major transit projects and FTA
activities, which the Committee has found invaluable. The
Committee directs the Inspector General will continue such
oversight activities in fiscal year 2006.
Full funding grant agreements (FFGAs).--TEA-21, as amended,
requires that the FTA notify the House and Senate Committees on
Appropriations as well as the House Committee on Transportation
and Infrastructure and the Senate Committee on Banking sixty
days before executing a full funding grant agreement. In its
notification to the House and Senate Committees on
Appropriations, the Committee directs the FTA to include the
following: (1) a copy of the proposed full funding grant
agreement; (2) the total and annual federal appropriations
required for that project; (3) yearly and total federal
appropriations that can be reasonably planned or anticipated
for future FFGAs for each fiscal year through 2006; (4) a
detailed analysis of annual commitments for current and
anticipated FFGAs against the program authorization; (5) an
evaluation of whether the alternatives analysis made by the
applicant fully assessed all viable alternatives; (6) a
financial analysis of the project's cost and sponsor's ability
to finance the project, which shall be conducted by an
independent examiner and which shall include an assessment of
the capital cost estimate and the finance plan; (7) the source
and security of all public-and private-sector financial
instruments; (8) the project's operating plan, which enumerates
the project's future revenue and ridership forecasts; and (9) a
listing of all planned contingencies and possible risks
associated with the project.
The Committee also directs FTA to inform the House and
Senate Committees on Appropriations in writing thirty days
before approving schedule, scope, or budget changes to any full
funding grant agreement. Correspondence relating to changes
shall include any budget revisions or program changes that
materially alter the project as originally stipulated in the
full funding grant agreement, including any proposed change in
rail car procurements.
FORMULA GRANTS
Limitation on
Appropriation obligations (trust Total funding
(general fund) fund)
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $499,990,000 $3,499,928,000 $3,999,918,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006 \1\.................. 0 6,315,000,000 6,315,000,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 662,550,000 3,754,450,000 4,417,000,000
Bill compared to:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +162,560,000 +162,560,000 +417,082,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. +662,550,000 -2,380,550,000 -1,718,000,000
\1\ The request proposed combining formula, planning, capital, JARC, and research grants into two accounts
titled ``Formula Grants and Research'' and ``Major Capital Investment Grants.'' The Committee recommendation
instead provides for separate accounts.
Formula grants to states and local agencies funded under
the Federal Transit Administration fall into four categories:
urbanized area formula grants; clean fuels formula grants;
formula grants and loans for special needs of elderly
individuals and individuals with disabilities; and formula
grants for other than urbanized areas. In addition, set asides
of formula funds are directed to a grant program for intercity
bus operators to finance Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
accessibility costs and the Alaska Railroad for improvements to
its passenger operations.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The accompanying bill provides $4,417,000,000 for transit
formula grants. The recommended level is comprised of an
appropriation of $662,550,000 from the general fund and
$3,754,450,000 from limitations on obligations from the mass
transit account of the highway trust fund.
Major project alternatives analysis and preliminary
engineering and design.--Funds in the bill can be used, among
other activities, for alternatives analysis and preliminary
engineering and design (PE&D) of new rail systems, extensions,
or busways. The Committee continues to assert that local
project sponsors of new rail systems, extensions, or busways
must use these formula funds (or those provided under section
5303 metropolitan planning) for alternatives analysis and
preliminary engineering and design activities rather than seek
section 5309 discretionary set-asides. Moreover, the Committee
expects FTA, when evaluating the local financial commitment of
a given project, to consider the extent to which the project's
sponsors have used these formula grant apportionments for
alternatives analysis and PE&D activities of proposed new
systems.
UNIVERSITY TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH
Limitation on
Appropriation obligations Total funding
(general fund) (trust fund)
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005........................... $744,000 $5,208,000 $5,952,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006 \1\...................... 0 0 0
Recommended in the bill................................... 1,200,000 6,800,000 8,000,000
Bill compared to:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... +456,000 +1,592,000 +2,048,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... +1,200,000 +6,800,000 +8,000,000
\1\ The request proposed combining formula, planning, capital, JARC, and research grants into two accounts
titled ``Formula Grants and Research'' and ``Major Capital Investment Grants.'' The Committee recommendation
instead provides for separate accounts.
Grants for university transportation research are awarded
to non-profit institutions of higher learning by the Research
and Innovative Technology Administration (RITA) using funds
appropriated to FTA. This program focuses on the transfer of
knowledge relevant to national, state, and local transit
issues, and builds the professional capacity of the
transportation workforce.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The accompanying bill provides a total of $8,000,000 for
university transportation research. The recommended program
level is comprised of an appropriation of $1,200,000 from the
general fund and $6,800,000 from a limitation on obligations
from the mass transit account of the highway trust fund.
TRANSIT PLANNING AND RESEARCH
Limitation on
Appropriation obligations Total funding
(general fund) (trust fund)
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005........................... $15,872,000 $111,104,000 $126,976,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006 \1\...................... 0 0 0
Recommended in the bill................................... 24,049,000 136,276,000 160,325,000
Bill compared to:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... +8,177,000 +25,172,000 +33,349,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... +24,049,000 +136,276,000 +160,325,000
\1\ The request proposed combining formula, planning, capital, JARC, and research grants into two accounts
titled ``Formula Grants and Research'' and ``Major Capital Investment Grants.'' The Committee recommendation
instead provides for separate accounts.
The transit planning and research program provides
financial assistance to states for statewide planning and other
technical assistance activities, planning support for
metropolitan areas, nonurbanized areas, research, development
and demonstration projects, fellowships for training in the
public transportation field, university research, and human
resource development.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The accompanying bill provides $160,325,000 for transit
planning and research. The recommended level is comprised of an
appropriation of $24,049,000 from the general fund and
$136,276,000 from limitations on obligations from the mass
transit account of the highway trust fund. Of the funds
provided, the Committee expects $103,325,000 to go toward
planning activities and assistance and $57,000,000 to research
and development initiatives.
TRUST FUND SHARE OF EXPENSES
(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)
(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $6,744,500,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 690,000,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 7,209,700,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +465,200,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. +6,520,000,000
This account provides the portion of funds for each of
FTA's programs derived from the Mass Transit Account of the
Highway Trust Fund. For fiscal year 2006, the Committee has
provided $7,209,700,000 for liquidation of contract
authorization.
CAPITAL INVESTMENT GRANTS
Limitation on
Appropriation obligations Total funding
(general fund) (trust fund)
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005........................... $414,014,000 $2,898,100,000 $3,312,114,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006 \1\...................... 872,800,000 689,700,000 1,562,500,000
Recommended in the bill................................... 546,251,000 3,095,424,000 3,641,675,000
Bill compared to:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... +132,237,000 +197,324,000 +329,561,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... -326,549,000 +2,405,724,000 +2,079,175,000
\1\ The request proposed combining formula, planning, capital, JARC, and research grants into two accounts title
``Formula Grants and Research'' and ``Major Capital Investment Grants.'' The Committee recommendation instead
provides for separate accounts.
The transit capital investment program provides capital
assistance for three primary activities: new and replacement
buses and facilities; modernizing existing rail systems; and
new fixed guideway systems. Eligible recipients for capital
investment funds are public bodies and agencies (transit
authorities and other state and local public bodies and
agencies thereof) including states, municipalities, other
political subdivisions of states; public agencies and
instrumentalities of one or more states; and certain public
corporations, boards, and commissions established under state
law. Buses and bus facilities funds are allocated on a
discretionary basis, as are new starts funds. Fixed guideway
modernization funds are allocated by statutory formula to
urbanized areas with rail systems that have been in operation
for at least seven years.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The accompanying bill provides a total of $3,641,675,000 to
be available for capital investment grants, of which
$546,251,000 is from the general fund and $3,095,424,000 from a
limitation on obligations from the mass transit account of the
highway trust fund.
Funds provided for capital investment grants shall be
distributed as follows:
Amount
Bus and bus facilities.................................. $693,335,000
Fixed guideway modernization............................ 1,386,670,000
New starts.............................................. 1,561,670,000
--------------------------------------------------------
____________________________________________________
Total............................................... 3,641,675,000
Parallel electric hybrid buses.--The Committee is strongly
supportive of efforts to encourage local transit authorities to
adopt clean bus technology such as the parallel electric-diesel
hybrid system into their fleets. The Committee notes that the
FTA has been unable to meet its target of increasing the number
of low emission buses by two percent per year in three of the
last four years for which data is available. Because of the
significantly lower emissions and potentially reduced operating
expenses of parallel electric diesel hybrids systems, and the
benefits those outcomes would realize, the Committee will be
looking for ways to increase incentives to help local transit
authorities adopt this technology more rapidly than the current
two percent per year target. The Committee expects the FTA to
provide a report by March 1, 2006 on how best to increase the
rate of introducing new low emission technology, including
parallel electric-diesel hybrids.
New starts rating and evaluation process.--Transit use is
important in a number of the nation's major urban centers.
However, many cities have built or are building systems that
are overpriced or underutilized. The Committee has encouraged
FTA to continually and consistently improve the evaluation and
decision-making process for the new starts process. All parties
involved, including FTA, the Congress, and local transit
agencies, need to be able to assess projects based on a capable
ratings and evaluation system, and the FTA needs to be more
adept at weeding out projects that do not relieve the most
congestion, move the most people and have the greatest cost-
benefit ratio. The Committee is encouraged by the recent
proposed changes to the new starts program earlier this year.
The proposed change to the cost effectiveness rating and the
adjustment of the cost effectiveness breakpoints shows an
effort by FTA to manage the exploding expectations for new
starts funding.
As local communities develop their own preferred
transportation alternatives, the Committee continues its
insistance that these communities use Federal standards and
procedures in their local analysis if they are to seek federal
transportation funding through the new starts program. Further,
FTA shall not approve the entry of any project into preliminary
engineering if the project's alternatives analysis does not
clearly espouse the federal new starts criteria and standards,
by showing that the project will attract and move more riders,
at lower cost, than other transportation alternatives.
New starts report.--The Committee is satisfied with the
timely submission of FTA's fiscal year 2006 annual report on
new starts projects. To ensure that this report continues to be
submitted on time, the Committee has continued bill language
included in fiscal year 2006 that requires FTA to submit its
annual new starts report with the initial submission of the
President's budget request.
The Committee directs FTA not to reallocate funds provided
in prior year appropriations Acts for the Department of
Transportation as follows:
Bus and Bus Facilities:
Lawrence Transit System Transfer Center, KS (Fiscal
year 2003)
Minneapolis Downtown Circulator, MN (Fiscal year
2003)
Minneapolis, 63rd Ave. Park and Ride, MN (Fiscal year
2003)
Northwest Corridor Busway, MN (Fiscal year 2003)
Jefferson Transit Facilities, WA (Fiscal year 2003)
Attleboro Intermodal Mixed-Use Garage Facility
(Fiscal year 2003)
Tompkins Consolidated Transit Center, NY (Fiscal year
2002)
Jamaica Intermodal Facilities, NY (Fiscal year 2002)
Macon Terminal Intermodal Station, GA (Fiscal year
2003)
Intermodal/Inland Port Terminal, SC (Fiscal year
2003)
New Starts:
Northstar Corridor, MN (Fiscal year 2003)
Dulles Corridor Project, VA (Fiscal year 2002)
Lowell, MA--Nashua, NH Commuter Rail (Fiscal year
2003)
JOB ACCESS AND REVERSE COMMUTE GRANTS
Limitation on
Appropriation obligations Total funding
(general fund) (trust fund)
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005............................... $15,500,000 $108,500,000 $124,000,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006 \1\.......................... 0 0 0
Recommended in the bill....................................... 26,250,000 148,750,000 175,000,000
Bill compared to:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005........................... +10,750,000 +40,250,000 +51,000,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.......................... +26,250,000 +148,750,000 +175,000,000
\1\ The request proposed combining formula, planning, capital, JARC, and research grants into two accounts
titled ``Formula Grants and Research'' and ``Major Capital Investment Grants.'' The Committee recommendation
instead provides for separate accounts.
The purpose of the job access and reverse commute grant
program is to develop services designed to transport welfare
recipients and low income individuals to and from jobs and to
develop transportation services for residents of urban centers
and rural and suburban areas to suburban employment
opportunities.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
For fiscal year 2006, the job access and reverse commute
(JARC) grants program is funded at a total level of
$175,000,000, with $26,250,000 derived from the general fund
and $148,750,000 derived from the mass transit account of the
highway trust fund.
ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS--FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION
Section 150. The Committee continues the provision that
exempts previously made transit obligations from limitations on
obligations.
Section 151. The Committee continues the provision that
allows unobligated funds for projects under ``Capital
Investment Grants'' in prior year appropriations Acts to be
used in this fiscal year.
Section 152. The Committee continues the provision that
allows for the transfer of prior year appropriations from older
accounts to be merged into new accounts with similar, current
activities.
Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation
OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE
(HARBOR MAINTENANCE TRUST FUND)
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $15,773,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 8,000,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 16,284,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +511,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. +8,284,000
The Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation (the
Corporation) is a wholly owned Government corporation
established by the St. Lawrence Seaway Act of May 13, 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, including the two Seaway
locks located in Massena, NY and vessel traffic control in
areas of the St. Lawrence River and Lake Ontario. The mission
of the corporation is to serve the United States intermodal and
international transportation system by improving the operation
and maintenance of a safe, secure, reliable, efficient, and
environmentally responsible deep-draft waterway. The
corporation's major priorities include: safety, reliability,
trade development, management accountability, and bi-national
collaboration with its Canadian counterpart.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends a total appropriation of
$16,284,000 to fund the operations and maintenance of the
corporation, $8,284,000 above the budget request and $511,000
above the fiscal year 2005 enacted level. Appropriations from
the harbor maintenance trust fund and revenues from non-federal
sources finance the operation and maintenance of the Seaway for
which the corporation is responsible. The Committee denies the
request to re-establish tolls on the U.S. portion of the Saint
Lawrence Seaway. Bill language to authorize the toll provision
was not provided to the Committee in time to review or identify
ramifications of the toll proposal. In addition, the Seaway
provided insufficient justification to support the provision
and did not address the Committees concerns regarding ``double-
taxation and other factors affecting the industry on the
Seaway.''
Maritime Administration
The Maritime Administration (MARAD) is responsible for
programs that strengthen the U.S. maritime industry in support
of the Nation's security and economic needs, as authorized by
the Merchant Marine Act, 1936. MARAD's mission is to promote
the development and maintenance of an adequate, well-balanced
United States merchant marine, sufficient to carry the Nation's
domestic waterborne commerce and a substantial portion of its
waterborne foreign commerce, and capable of serving as a naval
and military auxiliary in time of war or national emergency.
MARAD, working with the Department of Defense (DOD), helps
provide a seamless, time-phased transition from peacetime to
wartime operations, while balancing the defense and commercial
elements of the maritime transportation system. MARAD also
manages the maritime security program, the voluntary intermodal
sealift agreement program and the ready reserve force, which
assure DOD access to commercial and strategic sealift and
associated intermodal capability. Further, MARAD's education
and training programs through the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy
and six state maritime schools help provide skilled U.S.
merchant marine officers.
maritime security program
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $97,910,400
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 156,000,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 156,000,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +58,089,600
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. ................
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends $156,000,000 for the Maritime
Security Program (MSP), consistent with the budget request.
This recommendation provides funding directly to MARAD and
assumes that MARAD will continue to administer the program with
support and consultation of the Department of Defense. The
purpose of the MSP is to maintain and preserve a U.S. flag
merchant fleet to serve the national security needs of the
United States. The MSP provides direct payments to U.S. flag
ship operators engaged in U.S.-foreign trade. Participating
operators are required to keep the vessels in active commercial
service and are required to provide intermodal sealift support
to the Department of Defense in times of war or national
emergency. The Committee's recommendation provides funding
consistent with the National Defense Authorization Act, which
increased the authorization for ships under the MSP from 47 to
60, and the payment per ship from $2,100,000 to $2,600,000 per
year. In January, MARAD awarded 60 MSP operating agreements for
the most commercially viable and militarily useful ships. The
recommendation will provide the necessary resources for the
operation of the MSP at the authorized level through fiscal
year 2006.
OPERATIONS AND TRAINING
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $108,602,176
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 113,650,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 112,336,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +3,733,824
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. -1,314,000
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $112,336,000
to fund programs under the operations and training account of
MARAD, an increase of $3,733,824 above the fiscal year 2005
appropriation and $1,314,000 below the budget request. Funds
provided for this account are to be distributed as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
House
Activity (all figures in $000's) FY06 Request recommended
------------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. Merchant Marine Academy:
Salary and Benefits................. $23,750 $23,750
Midshipmen Program.................. 7,032 7,032
Instructional Program............... 5,746 5,746
Program Direction and Administration 2,945 2,945
Maintenance, Repair, & Operating 7,381 7,381
Requirements.......................
Capital Improvements................ 17,000 17,000
-------------------------------
Subtotal, USMMA................... 63,854 63,854
===============================
State Maritime Schools:
Student Incentive Payments.......... 1,200 1,200
Direct Scholarship Payments......... 1,200 1,800
Scholarship Maintenance and Repair.. 8,211 8,211
-------------------------------
Subtotal, State Maritime Academies 10,611 11,211
===============================
MARAD Operations:
Base Operations..................... 34,029 34,029
Information technology, electronic 5,062 3,149
government.........................
GSA Space Increase.................. 93 93
-------------------------------
Subtotal, MARAD Operations........ 39,185 37,271
===============================
Subtotal, Operations and Training. 113,650 112,336
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under the United States Merchant Marine Academy, the
Committee recommendation includes $63,854,000 for the operation
and maintenance of the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy (USMMA),
consistent with the budget request. The $8,387,000 increase
from the fiscal year 2005 level is to fund infrastructure
improvements, technological improvements, and simulation
techniques that will efficiently provide the training necessary
to meet current and future standards imposed by Federal and
other organizational entities, and to ensure continued academic
accreditation.
Under the State Maritime Schools, the Committee
recommendation includes $11,211,000 for the six State Maritime
Schools (SMS), an increase of $600,000 over the budget request.
These additional funds are provided for cadet training and
facilities to result in $300,000 per school in direct
scholarship payments.
The Committee provides $37,271,000 for MARAD operations, a
reduction of $1,914,000 from the budget request. Within the
operations total, the Committee provides the fiscal year 2005
level of $3,050,000 for IT related activities and $99,000 for
electronic government, consistent with the level provided in
fiscal year 2005. This is below the request level due to lack
of sufficient justification. The Committee will reconsider the
funding level if it receives adequate justification in a timely
manner. The Committee notes that it never received adequate
justification last year regarding MARAD's IT funding request.
SHIP DISPOSAL
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $21,443,072
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 21,000,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 21,000,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... -443,072
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. ................
MARAD serves as the federal government's disposal agent for
government-owned merchant vessels weighing 1,500 gross tons or
more. The ship disposal program provides resources to dispose
of obsolete merchant-type vessels in the National Defense
Reserve Fleet (NDRF). The Maritime Administration is required
by law to dispose of its obsolete inventory by the end of 2006;
however, MARAD has acknowledged that it will not meet this
statutory deadline. There are currently 124 vessels located in
three fleet sites in the NDRF awaiting disposal. In fiscal year
2004, MARAD removed fifteen ships for disposal and projects
that it will remove another 15 in 2005 and 13 in 2006. These
vessels pose a significant environmental threat due to the
presence of hazardous substances such as asbestos and solid and
liquid polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). The list includes a
nuclear ship, the SAVANNAH, which contains remnants of a
nuclear reactor.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends $21,000,000 for ship disposal,
consistent with the budget request and $443,072 below the
fiscal year 2005 enacted level. Within the funds provided for
ship disposal, the Committee provides $3,000,000 to
decommission the SAVANNAH.
In a March 2005 report, GAO identified management
weaknesses in MARAD's ship disposal program. The report stated
that MARAD lacked the vision needed to sustain a long-term
effort, and that its managers are not in a position to make
sound decisions concerning the ship disposal program. The
Committee requires MARAD to strengthen the management of the
ship disposal program, including the development of a
comprehensive integrated approach. The Committee continues to
encourage MARAD to pursue various disposal options, including
international disposal. Further, the Committee notes the recent
increased competitiveness of domestic scrapping operations and
encourages MARAD to promote aggressive competition among the
domestic scrapping industry and international disposal
facilities for funds appropriated for disposal.
MARITIME GUARANTEED LOAN (TITLE XI) PROGRAM
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $4,725,888
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 3,526,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 3,526,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... -1,199,888
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. ................
The maritime guaranteed loan account as provided for by
title XI of the Merchant Marine Act of 1936, provides for
guaranteed loans for purchasers of ships from the U.S.
shipbuilding industry and for modernization of U.S. shipyards.
Funds for administrative expenses for the Title XI program are
appropriated to this account, and then transferred by
reimbursement to operations and training to be obligated and
outlayed.
As required by the Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990, this
account includes the subsidy costs associated with the loan
guarantee commitments made in 1992 and beyond (including
modifications of direct loans or loan guarantees that resulted
from obligations or commitments in any year), as well as
administrative expenses of this program. The subsidy amounts
are estimated on a net present value basis; the administrative
expenses are estimated on a cash basis.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends $3,526,000, consistent with the
budget request. This is $1,199,888 below the fiscal year 2005
level.
SHIP CONSTRUCTION
(RESCISSION)
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... -$1,979,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... ................
Recommended in the bill............................... -2,071,280
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... -92,280
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. -2,071,280
The Committee rescinds $2,071,280 from the ship
construction account. This account is currently inactive except
for determinations regarding the use of vessels built under the
program, final settlement of open contracts, and closing of
financial accounts.
NATIONAL DEFENSE TANK VESSEL CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $74,400,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... -74,400,000
Recommended in the bill............................... ................
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... -148,800,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. +74,400,000
The fiscal year 2004 Defense Authorization Act (Public Law
108-136) authorized the National Defense Tank Vessel
Construction Program to provide financial assistance for the
construction of five privately owned product tank vessels to be
available for national defense purposes in time of war or
national emergency. The purpose of the program is to revitalize
commercial tank ship construction in the U.S. The Department of
Defense has stated that a critical deficiency exists for U.S.
flag tankers capable of carrying multiple petroleum cargoes.
Vessels constructed under this program will operate as part of
the Maritime security fleet.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee provides no new funding for this program.
Further, it does not rescind funding provided in fiscal year
2005, nor does it repeal Subtitle D, National Defense Tank
Vessel Construction Assistance, of Title XXXV of the Maritime
Security Act of 2003, Public Law 108-136, as proposed in the
budget request.
ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS--MARITIME ADMINISTRATION
Section 160. The Committee continues a provision that
allows the Maritime Administration to furnish utilities and
services and make repairs to any lease, contract, or occupancy
involving government property under the control of MARAD and
rental payments shall be covered into the Treasury as
miscellaneous receipts.
Section 161. The Committee continues a provision that
prohibits obligations incurred during the current year from
construction funds in excess of the appropriations contained in
this Act or in any prior appropriations Act.
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
(PHMSA), which was established as an administration within the
Department of Transportation effective November 30, 2004,
pursuant to the Norman Y. Mineta Research and Special Programs
Improvement Act (Public Law 108-246), is responsible for the
department's pipeline safety program and oversight of hazardous
materials transportation safety operations. As part of its
mission, the agency is dedicated to safety by working toward
the elimination of transportation-related deaths and injuries
in hazardous materials and pipeline transportation, and by
promoting transportation solutions that enhance communities and
protect the natural environment.
ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES
This appropriation finances the program support costs for
the PHMSA. This includes policy development, counsel, budget,
financial management, civil rights, management, administration
and agency-wide expenses.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee provides $17,027,000 for these costs, of
which $645,000 is to be provided from the Pipeline Safety Fund.
Administrative support.--A total of six new positions are
requested in fiscal year 2006 to provide accounting, financial
support and administrative support--two human resources
positions; two positions for personnel security and continuity
of operations; one administrative support position to oversee
real estate, space, telecommunications, property, and other
administrative services; and one accounting position. The
Committee approves all six of these positions and half-year
funding has been provided.
Information technology activities.--The PHMSA requests a
$198,000 increase in its information technology program to
support information exchange, such as electronic
communications, filing pipeline incident reports, and online
applications for exemptions from hazardous materials
regulations. The Committee provides this funding as requested.
Administrative costs for new positions.--Consistent with
the new positions that have been provided, $129,000 is provided
for associated administrative costs.
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY
The PHMSA oversees the safety of the more than 800,000
daily shipments of hazardous materials in the United States and
uses risk management principles and security threat assessments
to understand, communicate, and reduce dangers inherent in
hazardous materials transportation. The agency formulates,
issues and revises hazardous materials regulations which cover
hazardous materials definitions and classifications, hazard
communications, shipper and carrier operations, training and
security requirements, and packaging and container
specifications.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The bill includes $26,183,000 to continue the agency's
hazardous materials safety functions.
Spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste
shipments.--The budget requests four new positions to support
the legal challenges regarding shipments of spent nuclear fuel
and high-level radioactive waste to Skull Valley, Utah. The
Committee approves two of these positions and the associated
half-year costs.
Hazardous materials regulations compliance.--The PHMSA is
requesting three new positions to help ensure compliance with
current hazmat regulations. The Committee approves two of these
positions and half-year funding associated with these positions
has been provided.
PIPELINE SAFETY
(PIPELINE SAFETY FUND)
(OIL SPILL LIABILITY TRUST FUND)
(Oil spill
(Pipeline safety liability trust Total
fund) fund)
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 \1\....................... $54,331,000 $14,880,000 $69,211,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.......................... 54,165,000 19,000,000 73,165,000
Recommended in the bill................................... 57,860,000 15,000,000 72,860,000
Bill compared to:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... +3,529,000 +120,000 +3,649,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... +3,695,000 -4,000,000 -305,000
\1\ Includes across the board reduction of .8 percent.
PHMSA oversees the safety, security, and environmental
protection of pipelines through analysis of data, damage
prevention, education and training, enforcement of regulations
and standards, research and development, grants for states
pipeline safety programs, and emergency planning and response
to accidents. The pipeline safety program is responsible for a
national regulatory program to protect the public against the
risks to life and property in the transportation of natural
gas, petroleum and other hazardous materials by pipeline. The
enactment of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 also expanded the
role of the pipeline safety program in environmental protection
and resulted in a new emphasis on spill prevention and
containment of oil and hazardous substances from pipelines.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The bill includes $72,860,000 to continue pipeline safety
operations, research and development, and state grants-in-aid
in fiscal year 2006. The bill specifies that of the total
appropriation, $15,000,000 shall be derived from the oil spill
liability trust fund and $57,860,000 shall be from the pipeline
safety fund.
State one-call grants.--The Committee directs that no less
than $1,000,000 of the funds provided is for the one-call
grants program, as was directed in fiscal year 2005.
Pipeline safety staffing.--The staff levels of the office
of pipeline safety (OPS) have increased dramatically over the
past few fiscal years and again the agency is requesting a
significant staffing increase for 2006, asking that eight new
positions be added. The Committee approves five of these
additional positions--two new pipeline inspectors for Houston,
Texas, where over 50% of the major pipeline operators are
headquartered; one new inspector to work on integrity
management program compliance; and two new state program
managers to evaluate state pipeline programs. All other
proposed positions are denied.
State pipeline safety grants.--The OPS requests funding to
assist state pipeline agencies to increase inspection and
enforcement activities required by the Pipeline Safety
Integrity Act. Funding totaling $185,000 is provided for this
purpose.
Oil spill liability trust fund.--The Committee continues to
be concerned with the significant increases in the request of
funds from the oil spill liability trust fund. The Oil
Pollution Act of 1990 requires that these trust funds be used
exclusively for oil spill prevention and response activities,
and the Committee strongly encourages the OPS to allocate
oversight activities between the hazardous liquid and gas
pipelines and to factor the oil spill liability trust fund into
the allocation formula that determines the hazardous liquid
pipeline user fee assessment to accurately reflect the amount
and type of oversight activities being conducted by the office
consistent with the trust fund. Last year, the Committee
directed that the fiscal year 2006 budget justification should
adequately address this issue by containing an itemization of
how these funds are being allocated within the OPS. That
information was not included. Without this information, the
Committee cannot support the administration's request to
increase the level of funding drawn from the oil spill
liability trust fund from $15,000,000 to $19,000,000.
Furthermore, the Committee is once again directing the agency
to include an itemization of how funds from the oil spill
liability trust fund are being allocated within the OPS in the
fiscal year 2007 budget justification.
EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS GRANTS
(EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FUND)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Emergency (Emergency
preparedness preparedness Total
fund) grant program)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005........................... \1\ $198,000 ($14,300,000) $14,498,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.......................... 200,000 ................ 200,000
Recommended in the bill................................... 200,000 (14,300,000) 14,500,000
Bill compared to:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... +2,000 ................ +2,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... ................ (+14,300,000) +14,300,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Includes across the board reduction of .8 percent.
The Hazardous Materials Transportation Uniform Safety Act
of 1990 (HMTUSA) requires the PHMSA to: (1) develop and
implement a reimbursable emergency preparedness grant 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 mandatory training curriculum for emergency
responders.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends $200,000, the same amount as
requested, for activities related to emergency response
training curriculum development and updates, as authorized by
section 117(A)(i)(3)(B) of HMTUSA. The Committee has provided
an obligation limitation of $14,300,000 for the emergency
preparedness grant program.
Research and Innovative Technology Administration
The Research and Innovative Technology Administration
(RITA) was established as an administration within the
Department of Transportation effective November 30, 2004,
pursuant to the Norman Y. Mineta Research and Special Programs
Improvement Act, Public Law 108-426. The mission of RITA is to
provide strategic clarity to the department's multi-modal and
intermodal research efforts, while coordinating the
multifaceted research agenda of the department.
RITA coordinates, facilitates, and reviews research and
development programs and activities through: advancement and
research and development of innovative technologies, including
intelligent transportation systems; comprehensive
transportation statistics research, analysis, and reporting;
education and training in transportation and transportation-
related fields, including the University Transportation
Centers; and activities of the Volpe National Transportation
Center.
Also included within RITA is the Bureau of Transportation
Statistics (BTS), which is funded by an allocation from Federal
Highway Administration's federal-aid highway account. BTS
compiles, analyzes, and makes accessible information on the
nation's transportation systems; collects information on
intermodal transportation and other areas as needed; and
enhances the quality and effectiveness of the statistical
programs of the Department of Transportation through research,
the development of guidelines, and the promotion of
improvements in data acquisition and use.
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 \1\................... $4,310,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 6,274,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 4,326,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +16,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. -1,948,000
\1\ FY 2005 amount represents the transfer of resources from the Office
of the Secretary of Transportation ($975,000) and the Research and
Special Programs Administration ($3,335,000).
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The bill includes $4,326,000 to continue research and
development activities in fiscal year 2006. This funding level
represents only a minor increase over the fiscal year 2005
level and is attributable to the amount identified in the
budget justification as being necessary for inflation and other
mandatory increases.
Reductions from the budget request.--The Committee reduces
funding by $1,948,000 below the request due to inadequate
justification. The Committee is disturbed by the poor quality
of the budget justification that was provided for this newly
formed agency and notes the complete lack of information
pertaining to specific requested increases above prior year
funding levels. As has been noted in the past, the Committee
cannot meet the administration's request if it does not come
with adequate justification.
For similar reasons, the Committee denies funding for seven
additional full-time equivalent staff years (FTEs). Although
identified in several charts within the budget request
document, these additional FTEs were never described within the
written justification and no explanation was provided as to why
they were needed, thereby making it impossible for the
Committee to determine the significance of either funding or
not funding these FTEs.
Therefore, the Committee denies the increased funding and
additional FTEs that have been requested until such time as the
department can adequately explain the need for these increases.
Poor planning behind reorganization.--The budget
justification for RITA stated repeatedly that ``not enough is
known about the impending reorganization structure and
distribution of its functions to confidently predict RITA
priorities'' as it relates to the various program and
performance goals. The Committee notes that P.L. 108-426, which
created RITA, was passed in November 2004 based on the
department's recommendations to Congress to reorganize. Yet,
the department still does not appear to have a clear direction
as to how this newly created agency should operate. This shows
a lack of planning and foresight on the part of the department
and causes this Committee to question the planning process that
was behind the department's request for the reorganization. It
is the Committee's hope that the department's budget request
for next fiscal year will be better organized and will provide
a clearer picture as to the long-term goals and objectives of
this agency.
BUREAU OF TRANSPORTATION STATISTICS
Under the appropriation of the Federal Highway
Administration, the bill provides $33,000,000 for the BTS.
The most recent long-term surface transportation
reauthorization act, the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st
Century, expired on September 30, 2003. Since that time,
Congress has passed several short-term extension bills that
have provided contract authority for the various surface
transportation programs, with the current extension set to
expire on June 30, 2005. Because reauthorization actions have
not yet been completed, the Committee has funded BTS at a level
for fiscal year 2006 that is consistent with the House-passed
surface transportation reauthorization legislation, the
Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users.
As has been the practice in previous years, the Committee
limits BTS staff to 126 FTEs in fiscal year 2006 in order to
curtail the significant growth in staffing that occurred
previously within this agency.
Office of Inspector General
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
The Inspector General's office was established in 1978 to
provide an objective and independent organization that would be
more effective in: (1) preventing and detecting fraud, waste,
and abuse in departmental programs and operations; and (2)
providing a means of keeping the Secretary of Transportation
and the Congress fully and currently informed of problems and
deficiencies in the administration of such programs and
operations. According to the authorizing legislation, the
Inspector General (IG) is to report dually to the Secretary of
Transportation and to the Congress.
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $58,528,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 62,499,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 62,499,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +3,971,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. ................
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommendation provides $62,499,000 for
activities of the Office of Inspector General, consistent with
the budget request. The Committee continues to value highly the
work of the Office of Inspector General in oversight of
departmental programs and activities.
In addition, the OIG will receive $7,224,000 from other
agencies in this bill, as noted below:
Federal Highway Administration................................$3,524,000
Federal Transit Administration................................ 2,000,000
Federal Aviation Administration............................... 1,200,000
National Transportation Safety Board.......................... 500,000
Funding is sufficient to finance 435 full-time equivalent
(FTE) staff years in fiscal year 2006, for an increase of 5
FTE.
Unfair business practices.--The bill maintains language
first enacted in fiscal year 2000 which authorizes the OIG to
investigate allegations of fraud and unfair or deceptive
practices and unfair methods of competition by air carriers and
ticket agents.
Audit reports.--The Committee requests the Inspector
General to continue forwarding copies of all audit reports to
the Committee immediately after they are issued, and to
continue to make the Committee aware immediately of any review
that recommends cancellation or modifications to any major
acquisition project or grant, or which recommends significant
budgetary savings. The OIG is also directed to withhold from
public distribution for a period of 15 days any final audit or
investigative report which was requested by the House or Senate
Committees on Appropriations.
Surface Transportation Board
The Surface Transportation Board was created on January 1,
1996 by P.L. 104-88, the Interstate Commerce Commission (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 provisions to the Board; and transferred
certain motor carrier functions to the Federal Highway
Administration (now under the Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration). The Board is specifically responsible for
regulation of the rail and pipeline industries and certain non-
licensing regulations of motor carriers and water carriers. The
law empowers the Board through its exemption authority to
promote deregulation administratively on a case-by-case basis
and continues intact the important rail reforms made by the
Staggers Rail Act of 1980.
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 \1\................... $20,030,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006 \2\.................. 23,138,000
Recommended in the bill \3\........................... 25,372,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +5,342,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. +2,234,000
\1\ Includes $1,050,000 in collections of user fees.
\2\ Assumes collection of $1,250,000 in user fees, to offset the
appropriation as the fees are collected throughout the fiscal year.
\3\ Assumes collection of $1,250,000 in user fees, to offset the
appropriation as the fees are collected throughout the fiscal year.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends a total appropriation of
$25,372,000, an increase of $2,234,000 above the budget
request. Included in the recommended amount is an estimated
$1,250,000 in fees, which will offset the appropriated funding.
At this funding level, the Board will be able to accommodate
150 full-time equivalent staff years. In addition, the
Committee has provided one-time funding of $4,500,000 to
accommodate STB's pending office relocation.
User fees.--Current statutory authority, under 31 U.S.C.
9701, grants the Board the authority to collect user fees. The
Committee believes that $1,250,000 in user fees is reasonable.
Language is included in the bill allowing the fees to be
credited to the appropriation as offsetting collections, and
reducing the general fund appropriation on a dollar-for-dollar
basis as the fees are received and credited. This language,
continued from last year, simplifies the tracking of the
collections and provides the Board with more flexibility in
spending its appropriated funds.
Union Pacific/Southern Pacific merger.--On December 12,
1997, the Board granted a joint request of Union Pacific
Railroad Company and the City of Wichita and Sedgwick County,
KS (Wichita/Sedgwick) to toll the 18-month mitigation study
pending in Finance Docket No. 32760. The decision indicated
that at such time as the parties reach agreement or discontinue
negotiations, the Board would take appropriate action.
By petition filed June 26, 1998, Wichita/Sedgwick and UP/SP
indicated that they had entered into an agreement, and jointly
petitioned the Board to impose the agreement as a condition of
the Board's approval of the UP/SP merger. By decision dated
July 8, 1998, the Board agreed and imposed the agreement as a
condition to the UP/SP merger. The terms of the negotiated
agreement remain in effect. If UP/SP or any of its divisions or
subsidiaries materially changes or is unable to achieve the
assumptions on which the Board based its final environmental
mitigation measures, then the Board should reopen Finance
Docket 32760 if requested by interested parties, and prescribe
additional mitigation properly reflecting these changes if
shown to be appropriate.
Administrative Provisions--Department of Transportation
Section 170. The Committee continues the provision allowing
the Department of Transportation to use funds for aircraft;
motor vehicles; liability insurance; uniforms; or allowances,
as authorized by law.
Section 171. The Committee continues the provision limiting
appropriations for services authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109 to the
rate for an Executive Level IV.
Section 172. The Committee continues the provision
prohibiting funds in this Act for salaries and expenses of more
than 100 political and Presidential appointees in the
Department of Transportation, and prohibits political and
Presidential personnel assigned on temporary detail outside the
Department of Transportation.
Section 173. The Committee continues the provision
prohibiting funds for the implementation of section 404 of
title 23, United State Code.
Section 174. The Committee continues the provision
prohibiting recipients of funds made available in this Act from
releasing personal information, including social security
number, medical or disability information, and photographs from
a driver's license or motor vehicle record, without express
consent of the person to whom such information pertains; and
prohibits the withholding of funds provided in this Act for any
grantee if a state is in noncompliance with this provision.
Section 175. The Committee continues the provision allowing
funds received by the Federal Highway Administration, Federal
Transit Administration, and the Federal Railroad Administration
from states, counties, municipalities, other public
authorities, and private sources for expenses incurred for
training may be credited to each agency's respective accounts.
Section 176. The Committee continues the provision
authorizing the Secretary of Transportation to allow issuers of
any preferred stock to redeem or repurchase preferred stock
sold to the Department of Transportation.
Section 177. The Committee continues the provision
prohibiting funds in Title I of this Act from being issued for
any grant unless the Secretary of Transportation notifies the
House and Senate Committees on Appropriations not less than
three full business days before any discretionary grant award,
letter of intent, or full funding grant agreement totaling
$1,000,000 or more is announced by the department or its modal
administrations.
Section 178. The Committee continues a provision for the
Department of Transportation allowing funds received from
rebates, refunds, and similar sources to be credited to
appropriations.
Section 179. The Committee continues a provision allowing
amounts from improper payments to a third party contractor that
are lawfully recovered by the Department of Transportation to
be available to cover expenses incurred in the recovery of such
payments.
Section 180. The Committee continues a provision allowing
the Secretary of Transportation to transfer unexpended sums
from ``Office of the Secretary, Salaries and Expenses'' to
``Minority Business Outreach''.
Section 181. The Committee continues the provision
prohibiting the Office of the Secretary of Transportation from
approving assessments or reimbursable agreements pertaining to
funds appropriated to the modal administrations in this Act,
unless such assessments or agreements have completed the normal
reprogramming process for Congressional notification.
Section 182. The Committee continues the provision
prohibiting the use of funds to implement an essential air
service local cost share participation pilot program.
TITLE II--DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Departmental Offices
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005 \1\................... $156,299,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 195,253,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 187,452,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +31,153,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. -7,801,000
\1\ Does not include $22,113,000 for the office of foreign assets
control.
The Departmental Offices' function in the Treasury
Department is to provide basic support to the Secretary of the
Treasury, who is the chief operating executive of the
Department. The Secretary of the Treasury also has a primary
role in formulating and managing the domestic and international
tax and financial policies of the Federal Government. The
Secretary's responsibilities funded by the salaries and
expenses appropriation include: recommending and implementing
United States domestic and international economic and tax
policy; fiscal policy; governing the fiscal operations of the
Government; maintaining foreign assets control; managing the
public debt; managing development of financial policy;
representing the United States on international monetary, trade
and investment issues; overseeing Treasury Department overseas
operations; directing the administrative operations of the
Treasury Department; and providing executive oversight of the
bureaus within the Treasury Department. This account also
includes funding for the office of professional responsibility.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $187,452,000
for departmental offices, salaries and expenses, an increase of
$31,153,000 over the fiscal year 2005 enacted level and
$7,153,000 below the request. The funding recommendations are
made based on information included in the budget justification.
Therefore, the transfer authority provided to the department
under this heading is set at 2 percent. Funds are to be
allocated as follows:
Executive direction................................... $7,216,000
General counsel....................................... 7,521,000
Economic polices and programs......................... 32,011,000
Financial policies and programs....................... 24,721,000
Terrorism and financial crimes programs \1\........... 35,409,000
Treasury-wide management policies and programs........ 16,843,000
Administration........................................ 63,731,000
\1\ Includes the office of foreign assets controls.
The Committee has included a travel limitation of
$3,000,000 for fiscal year 2006 and restates the travel report
directives contained in House Report 108-792. The Committee is
recommending the travel limitation to ensure that adequate
resources are available for the day-to-day operations of the
department. The Committee directs the secretary to ensure that
a portion of the travel funds are made available to general
schedule employees to support the training and development of
all departmental office employees.
Additionally, the bill includes $258,000 for unforeseen
emergencies, $5,173,000 for the department-wide financial
statement audit and internal control programs, $3,000,000 for
information technology modernization requirements, and $100,000
for official reception and representation expenses.
The Committee recommends $35,409,000 for the office of
terrorism and financial intelligence (TFI). Of the amount
provided, $1,998,000 is for the office of the undersecretary,
$3,700,000 is for the office of terrorist financing and
financial crimes (OTTC), 22,032,000 is for the office of
financial assets control (OFAC), and $7,679,000 is for the
office of intelligence analysis (OIA). The Committee is
concerned that the Office of Terrorism and Financial
Intelligence is resourcing its operations at the expense of its
key analytic and intelligence units and shortchanging the
ability of OFAC to perform its mission effectively. Earlier
this year, Treasury proposed to detail 23 OFAC FTE to OIA, and
then request 9 new FTE for OFAC in the budget justification.
The Committee's recommendation funds 9 FTE in OFAC as
requested, and an additional 14 FTE in OIA. The Committee made
its decision based on the fact that Treasury has not provided
adequate justification for the additional FTE, nor a
comprehensive plan for this office, which was created less than
one year ago.
The Committee directs the department to provide to the
Committee a report of TFI's short and long-term personnel and
resource requirements for the next five years, and a narrative
of the TFI's strategic plan for its organizational structure,
including its interaction and relationship with subordinate
agencies such as the OIA, OFAC, and the Financial Crimes
Enforcement Newtork (FinCEN). Morevoer, the Committee directs
the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to assess TFI and
include a discussion of the strategic goals of TFI; an
assessment of its implementation plan and strategies for
accomplishing its legislative mandates; whether its structure,
policies, resources, human capital requirements, mission,
direction and other organizational factors are in alignment
with the functions of subordinate agencies such as OIA, FinCEN,
and OFAC and avoids duplication of performance; if its control
and measurements systems are consistent with keeping TFI on
track toward its goals; and include recommendations for program
and organizational improvements. The Committee directs the
Treasury Department and the GAO to deliver their reports to the
Committee no later than February 1, 2006.
The Committee's recommendation does not include an increase
of $720,000 over the fiscal year 2005 funding level for media
room operations. The Committee determines this cost increase to
be excessive and directs Treasury to bring down the cost of
this initiative.
The Committee's recommendation does not include $1,000,000
for building maintenance and repairs. While the Committee
agrees that in the future funds should be set aside for routine
repair and maintenance of the Treasury Building, the T-BARR
initiative should be able to address any issues in fiscal year
2006.
The Committee's recommendation does not include funds for
any e-gov project outside of the regular scope of the
department's operations, or any project coordinated by another
agency.
The Committee appreciates Treasury's efforts to retool the
department's budget documents in response to concerns expressed
from a year ago. In fiscal year 2005, senior Treasury officials
coordinated with the Committee early in the 2006 budget process
to make adjustments to Treasury budget presentation materials.
As a result, the fiscal year 2006 budget-in-brief (BIB) is a
remarkable improvement over previous years. It is a clear,
concise and usable document. Nevertheless, while the BIB has
improved, the Treasury congressional justification documents
continue to need major changes. The Committee expects the same
process used to transform the BIB to change the justification.
A retooled congressional justification should provide detailed
discussion of proposed new initiatives, and changes in the
agency's financial plan from prior year enactment that build on
a request for the new year such as transfers and annualization
of prior year programs.
The Committee recognizes the positive first step in
significantly reducing the performance information in the
fiscal year 2006 budget documents. The Committee encourages the
department to continue to refine and better focus its
performance measures. Good performance information should
demonstrate to the Committee the marginal benefits received
from dollars appropriated. In light of tight fiscal
constraints, the Committee also values Treasury efforts to
reduce ineffective, low priority and obsolete programs. The
Committee expects Treasury to continue to hold programs to a
firm test of accountability and focus funding on top
priorities, but developing fair and responsible budgets, in
this austere fiscal environment.
Once the fiscal year 2006 appropriations Act is signed into
law, the Committee directs the department to submit an
operating plan for the fiscal year 2006 resources provided to
the department, including all offices and bureaus, not more
than 60 days after enactment. The operating plan must include
funding and FTE levels for all offices and objectives by fiscal
year 2005 actual, fiscal year 2006 request, and fiscal year
2006 enacted. In addition, the plan must include information on
any initiative, major procurement, and program at the
department. The operating plan should incorporate input from
all senior level managers of the department, and once
submitted, the final plan should be made available to those
managers. In the past two years, the department has undertaken
a large number of reprogramming actions that rely heavily on
attrition and deferments to meet various new initiatives and
priorities during the fiscal year. The Committee understands
the need for some flexibility to meet unanticipated needs, but
has the experience to know that a stable operating budget will
help anchor an agency in its mission and enable managers to
meet the day-to-day needs of the department.
The Committee has noticed the inordinate amount of time it
takes the department to respond to basic budget inquiries.
Information related to the expenditure of current year and
budget year funds is directly the jurisdiction of the Committee
and one of its basic oversight responsibilities. Further, once
an appropriations Act is enacted, or the budget submitted, the
department should have definite answers regarding the
obligation of funds and the justification for all budget
requests. The Committee directs the department to respond in a
more timely manner to all Committee requests. Further, in order
to eliminate confusion over which Treasury official is
responsible for signing correspondence to the Committee, the
Committee directs that correspondence related to the Committee
shall be signed by either the Secretary, the Chief Financial
Officer, or the relevant bureaus director.
The Committee recognizes the prominence placed on economic
and financial issues at the Organization for Economic
Cooperation and Development in Paris, France, and directs the
department to maintain a senior staff presence attached to the
United States Mission in Paris. Over the years, there has been
an erosion in the presence of the Treasury Department at the
United States Mission, but the importance of the issues
involved necessitate that this trend now cease and that a
senior position be established.
The Committee is concerned about the failure of airlines to
properly fund the pension obligations of their employees and
retirees. Recent bankruptcy court rulings and announcements by
other airlines that they may seek similar relief from pension
obligations, have precipitated a crisis for the Pension Benefit
Guaranty Corporation. As a result, airlines are asking
taxpayers to further subsidize their continuing losses.
Within 90 days of the enactment of this Act, the Government
Accountability Office is directed to analyze the impact that a
re-regulation of the airline industry would have on reducing
potential pension defaults by airlines.
department-wide systems and capital investments programs
(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $32,002,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 24,412,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 21,412,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... -10,590,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. -3,000,000
This appropriation funds the modernization of Treasury
business processes and increases in department-wide systems
efficiency through technology investments for systems that
involve more than one Treasury bureau or Treasury's interface
with other governmental agencies.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $21,412,000
for department-wide systems and capital investment programs,
$3,000,000 below the budget request and $10,590,000 below the
fiscal year 2005 enacted level.
Of the amount recommended, the Committee has provided
$3,000,000 for various TFI information technology investments.
Should the department require additional resources for this
initiative, the Committee directs the department to utilize
revenue from the Treasury Forfeiture Fund, up to $3,000,000. To
ensure the rational and reasonable development and procurement
of such investments, the Committee directs the Government
Accountability Office to provide assistance and oversight as
TFI embarks on this system development.
Recent reports of unrealized savings from major information
technology (IT) investments, such as those associated with the
development and implementation of the HR-Connect system, and
award protests associated with the Treasury Communications
Enterprise (TCE) Network do little to inspire the confidence of
the Committee in the department's ability to manage its IT
portfolio, or inspire the Committee to fund new systems. Too
often, the Committee is backed into the corner of funding
initiatives and systems based on the promise of management
reform, the threat of departmental collapse, or the argument
that too much money has been invested to pull the plug. In this
budget climate, the Committee cannot afford to fund the failure
and shortcomings of IT investments. The Committee directs the
department to provide more detailed information in the
operating plan regarding all IT initiatives and investments,
development and implementation timelines, and costs and
savings.
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $16,368,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 16,722,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 17,000,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +632,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. +278,000
This appropriation provides agency-wide audit and
investigative functions to identify and correct operational and
administrative deficiencies, which create conditions for
existing or potential instances of fraud, waste, and
mismanagement. The audit function provides program, contract,
and financial statement audit services. Contract audits provide
professional advice to agency contracting officials on
accounting and financial matters relative to negotiation,
award, administration, repricing, and settlement of contracts.
Program audits review and evaluate all facets of agency
operations. Financial statement audits assess whether financial
statements fairly present the agency's financial condition and
results of operations, the adequacy of accounting controls, and
compliance with laws and regulations. The investigative
function provides for the detection and investigation of
improper and illegal activities involving programs, personnel,
and operations.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $17,000,000
for the Office of Inspector General, an increase of $632,000
above the fiscal year 2005 enacted level and an increase of
$278,000 above the budget request. The increase is for
additional audit capability in the areas of regulation
responsibility and the on-going audit of the Treasury building
renovation project. The bill includes $2,000,000 for official
travel expenses, $2,000 for reception and representation
expenses, and up to $100,000 for unforeseen emergencies.
treasury inspector general for tax administration
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $128,093,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 133,286,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 133,286,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +5,193,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. ................
The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Restructuring and Reform
Act of 1998 established the Office of Treasury Inspector
General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) and abolished the IRS
Office of the Chief Inspector. TIGTA conducts audits,
investigations, and evaluations to assess the operations and
programs of the IRS and its related entities, the IRS Oversight
Board and the Office of Chief Counsel. The purpose of those
audits and investigations is to: (1) promote the economic,
efficient, and effective administration of the nation's tax
laws and to detect and deter fraud and abuse in IRS programs
and operations; and (2) recommend actions to resolve fraud and
other serious problems, abuses, and deficiencies in these
programs and operations.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $133,286,000
for the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration, an
increase of $5,193,000 above the fiscal year 2005 enacted level
and equal to the budget request.
air transportation stabilization program
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $1,984,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 2,942,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 2,500,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +16,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. -942,000
The Air Transportation Stabilization Board was authorized
in the Air Transportation Safety and Stabilization Act to issue
$10,000,000,000 of federal credit instruments to air carriers.
The purpose is ``to compensate air carriers for losses incurred
by the air carriers as a result of the terrorist attacks on the
United States that occurred on September 11, 2001'', providing
among other criteria, that ``such agreement is a necessary part
of maintaining a safe, efficient, and viable commercial
aviation system in the United States''.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,500,000 for
the air transportation stabilization program, an increase of
$16,000 over the fiscal year 2005 enacted level and $942,000
below the budget request. The Committee's recommendation is
based on a lack of justification for the greater expense.
treasury building and annex repair and restoration
(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $12,217,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 10,000,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 10,000,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... -2,217,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. ................
This appropriation funds the repairs, selected
improvements, and construction necessary to renovate and
maintain the main Treasury Building, the Treasury annex, and
other Treasury buildings.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $10,000,000
for Treasury Building and Annex Repair and Restoration (T-
BARR), a decrease of $2,217,000 below the fiscal year 2005
enacted level and the same as the budget request. The requested
and proposed funding level should be adequate for the final
year of funding for this project.
Financial Crimes Enforcement Network
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $71,922,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 73,630,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 73,630,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +1,708,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. ................
The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) is
responsible for implementing Treasury's anti-money laundering
regulations through administration of the Bank Secrecy Act, 31
U.S.C. section 5311, et seq. (BSA). It also serves as a United
States Government source for the systematic collection and
analysis of information to assist in the investigation of money
laundering and other financial crimes. FinCEN supports law
enforcement investigative efforts by federal, state, local and
international agencies, and fosters interagency and global
cooperation against domestic and international financial
crimes. It also provides U.S. policymakers with strategic
analyses of domestic and worldwide trends and patterns. It
prevents money laundering through its regulatory and outreach
programs, including setting policy for and overseeing BSA
compliance by financial institutions, and by providing BSA
training for law enforcement, bankers, and bank regulators.
Pursuant to the USA Patriot Act of 2001, FinCEN was made a
Treasury Bureau in recognition of its key role in supporting
investigations and other government efforts to identify and
stop the financing of terrorist organizations and activity. The
Patriot Act also gave FinCEN substantial new responsibilities
for collecting, sharing, and managing financial and other
information as part of its counter-terrorism mission.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $73,630,000
for the financial crimes enforcement network, an increase of
$1,708,000 above the fiscal year 2005 enacted level and the
same as the budget request.
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $82,336,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 62,486,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 91,126,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +8,790,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. +28,640,000
The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) is
responsible for the enforcement of laws designed to eliminate
certain illicit activities and to regulate lawful activities
relating to distilled spirits, beer, wine and nonbeverage
alcohol products, and tobacco. Its responsibilities are focused
on collecting revenue; reducing taxpayer burden and improving
service while preventing diversion; and protecting the public
and preventing consumer deception in certain regulated
commodities.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $91,126,000
for the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, an increase
of $8,790,000 above the fiscal year 2005 enacted level and
$28,790,000 above the budget request. The budget request
assumed $28,640,000 in revenue from new user fees to be
enacted. However, the Committee never received the proposed
legislation authorizing such fees and assumes that the proposal
did not have much merit. In addition, the bill includes up to
$6,000 for official reception and representation expenses and
up to $50,000 for cooperative research and development
programs.
Bureau of Engraving and Printing
The Bureau of Engraving and Printing (BEP) designs,
manufactures, and supplies Federal Reserve notes, various
public debt instruments, as well as most evidences of a
financial character issued by the United States, such as
postage and internal revenue stamps. The BEP also executes
certain printings for various territories administered by the
United States, particularly postage and revenue stamps.
The operations of the BEP are financed by a revolving fund
established in accordance with the provisions of Public Law 81-
656, August 4, 1950 (31 U.S.C. 181), which requires the BEP to
be reimbursed by customer agencies for all costs of
manufacturing products and services performed. The BEP is also
authorized to assess amounts to acquire capital equipment and
provide for working capital needs. The anticipated work volume
is based on estimates of requirements submitted by agencies
served. The following table summarizes BEP revenue and expense
data for fiscal years 2004 through 2006:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2004 (actual) 2005 (estimate) 2006 (estimate)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total revenue.......................................... $524,752,000 $530,000,000 $575,000,000
Revenue from currency.............................. 491,179,000 507,000,000 569,000,000
Revenue from stamps................................ 19,501,000 17,000,000 0
Other revenue...................................... 14,072,000 6,000,000 6,000,000
Cost of operations..................................... 553,558,000 530,000,000 575,000,000
Net revenue \1\ (to Treasury).......................... -28,806,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Capital investments will be less than depreciation, a non-cash expense, in each of these years. In order to
avoid accumulating working capital in excess of Bureau needs, currency prices are set at a level that will
result in an annual loss (on paper). This loss will not exceed the depreciation expense, ensuring the solvency
of the Bureau's revolving fund.
Bureau of the Public Debt
ADMINISTERING THE PUBLIC DEBT
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $173,765,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 176,923,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 176,923,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +3,158,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. ................
This appropriation provides funds for the conduct of all
public debt operations and the promotion of the sale of U.S.
securities.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends a net appropriation of
$176,923,000 for administering the public debt, an increase of
$3,158,000 above the fiscal year 2005 enacted level and the
same as the budget request. The bill includes up to $2,000,000
for systems modernization.
Community Development Financial Institutions Fund Program
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS FUND PROGRAM ACCOUNT
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $55,078,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 7,900,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 55,000,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... -78,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. +47,100,000
The Community Development Financial Institutions Fund
provides grants, loans and technical assistance to new and
existing community development financial institutions such as
community development banks, community development credit
unions, revolving loan funds and micro-loan funds. Recipients
must use the funds to support mortgage, small business and
economic development lending in currently underserved,
distressed neighborhoods. The Fund is also responsible for
implementation of the Community Renewal Tax Relief Act of 2000.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $55,000,000
for the program in fiscal year 2006, an increase of $47,100,000
when compared to the budget request, and $78,000 below the
fiscal year 2005 funding level. The budget request proposed
moving the program to the Department of Commerce as a part of
the ``Strengthening America's Communities'' program, leaving
only the administration of the New Markets Tax Credit program
and the outstanding award portfolio. The Committee recommends
the entire program remain at the Treasury. Of the funds
provided, $13,000,000 is for administrative costs of the
program.
Financial Management Service
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $229,083,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 236,243,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 236,243,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +7,160,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. ................
The Financial Management Service (FMS) is responsible for
the management of Federal finances and the collection of
Federal debt. As the Federal Government's central financial
agent, FMS receives and disburses public monies, maintains
government accounts, and reports on the status of the
government's finances. FMS is also accountable for developing
and implementing the most reliable and efficient financial
methods and systems to manage and improve the Government's cash
management, credit management, and debt collection programs.
Pursuant to the Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996, FMS
became the primary agency for the collecting of federal non-tax
debt that is due and owed to the government. Through FMS, there
is a coordinated effort to collect debt from those who have
defaulted on agreements with the Federal government.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $236,243,000
for the Financial Management Service, an increase of $7,160,000
above the fiscal year 2005 enacted level and the same as the
budget request. The bill includes up to $9,220,000 for
information systems modernization initiatives and up to $2,500
for official reception and representation expenses.
United States Mint
UNITED STATES MINT PUBLIC ENTERPRISE FUND
The United States Mint manufactures coins, receives
deposits of gold and silver bullion, and safeguards the Federal
government's holdings of monetary metals. For fiscal year 1997,
Congress established the United States Mint Public Enterprise
Fund (Public Law 104-52), which authorized the U.S. Mint to use
proceeds from the sale of coins to finance the costs of its
operations and which consolidated all existing Mint accounts
into a single fund. Public Law 104-52 also provides that, in
certain situations, the levels of capital investments for
circulating coins and protective services shall factor into the
decisions of the Congress such that those levels compete with
other requirements for funding.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends a spending level for capital
investments by the U.S. Mint for circulating coinage and
protective services of $36,900,000, an increase of $12,900,000
above the fiscal year 2005 spending level and the same as the
level included in the budget request. The following table
provides basic information on the revenues, costs, and products
of the Mint for fiscal years 2004 through 2006:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Circulating coins Commemorative
quarters Numismatic coins Protection
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2004 (actual):
Number of coins........... 11.1 billion............ 2.2 billion...... 24 million.......
Cost of operations........ $194 million............ $241 million..... $521 million..... $39 million.
Revenue................... $443 million............ $560 million..... $667 million.....
2005 (est.):
Number of coins........... 12.8 billion............ 2.6 billion...... 22 million.......
Cost of operations........ $253 million............ $228 million..... $709 million..... $36 million.
Revenue................... $524 million............ $655 million..... $800 million.....
2006 (est.):
Number of coins........... 12.7 billion............ 2.9 billion...... 22 million.......
Cost of operations........ $242 million............ $238 million..... $696 million..... $39 million.
Revenue................... $524 million............ $718 million..... $825 million.....
Net revenue (to Treasury). $439 million............ $775 million..... $500 million..... ($41 million).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Internal Revenue Service
TAX ADMINISTRATION AND OPERATIONS
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005..................... ..................
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................... $10,013,555,000
Recommended in the bill............................. ..................
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................. ..................
Budget request, fiscal year 2006................ -10,013,555,000
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Internal Revenue Service requested that Congress
consolidate its existing accounts into a single account that
would fund all taxpayer service and enforcement activities. The
Committee denies this request and retains the existing,
discrete account structure.
processing, assistance, and management
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $4,056,857,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... ................
Recommended in the bill............................... 4,181,520,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +124,663,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. +4,181,520,000
This appropriation provides for processing tax returns and
related documents; processing data for compiling statistics of
income; assisting taxpayers in correct filing of their returns
and in paying taxes that are due; overall planning and
direction of the Internal Revenue Service; and management of
financial resources and procurement.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends $4,181,520,000 for Processing,
Assistance and Management, which is $4,181,520,000 above the
budget request and $124,663,000 above fiscal year 2005.
Taxpayer service.--The Committee is concerned that, with
the increasing focus on enforcement, the IRS might exacerbate
problems with compliance as a result of a lack of resources for
taxpayer service. It is clear to the Committee that IRS has
rushed to meet an arbitrary figure specified for cuts to
service programs, so much so that clearly IRS has not had time
to evaluate the impact its proposals would have on taxpayers,
nor has it consulted with stakeholders. The Committee does not
question the notion that some taxpayer assistance centers
(TACs) should be closed or realigned with other IRS assets to
achieve savings. However, the methodology used to develop the
list of TACs to be closed leaves a great deal to be desired.
Specifically, the Committee is disturbed that the National
Taxpayer Advocate (NTA), the Treasury Inspector General for Tax
Administration (TIGTA), the IRS Oversight Board, and other
important stakeholder groups were not consulted during the
development phase of the model that was used to identify which
TACs should be closed. The Committee has included an
administrative provision prohibiting the use of funds to close
TACs for fiscal year 2006 until TIGTA has completed a thorough,
scientific review of the impact this initiative would have on
individual taxpayers. The Committee has included additional
bill language that requires IRS to consult with NTA, TIGTA, the
IRS Oversight Board, and other appropriate parties to receive
feedback regarding data points that are incorporated in the
model that determines which TACs should be closed and the
weighting of those factors in the process.
IRS Oversight Board.--The Committee is concerned that IRS
proposed to reduce funding for the IRS Oversight Board by 50
percent in its budget request. As a result of this concern, the
Committee has included bill language that dedicates $1,500,000
to support the continued operations of the IRS Oversight Board,
which is an important source of independent information and
analysis of IRS activities. The Committee expects this action
will not be necessary in future fiscal years.
The Committee is concerned that disabled military retirees,
whose successful VA disability claims take more than 3 years to
be resolved, are unable to receive the back tax they are owed
for more than 3 years due to IRS statute of limitations. The
Committee directs the IRS to work with the VA and report back
to the Committee within 90 days of the enactment of this act on
how many disabled military retirees have been denied the full
back tax that they are owed due to the 3 year statute of
limitations, and how many military retirees have VA disability
claims that have been pending for 3 years or longer and will be
penalized by the 3 year statute of limitations.
tax law enforcement
(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $4,363,539,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... ................
Recommended in the bill............................... 4,541,466,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +177,927,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. +4,541,466,000
This appropriation provides for the examination of tax
returns, both domestic and international; the administrative
and judicial settlement of taxpayer appeals of examination
findings; technical rulings; monitoring employee pension plans;
determining qualifications of organizations seeking tax-exempt
status; examining tax returns of exempt organizations;
enforcing statutes relating to detection and investigation of
criminal violations of the internal revenue laws; collecting
unpaid accounts; compiling statistics of income and compliance
research; securing unfiled tax returns and payments; and
expanded efforts to reduce overclaims and erroneous filings
associated with the earned income tax credit.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends $4,541,466,000, an increase of
$4,541,466,000 over the request and $177,927,000 over fiscal
year 2005. Included in the recommendation is $55,584,000 to
support IRS activities under the Interagency Crime and Drug
Enforcement program.
information systems
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $1,577,768,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... ................
Recommended in the bill............................... 1,606,846,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +29,078,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. +1,606,846,000
This appropriation provides for service-wide data
processing support, including the evaluation, development, and
implementation of computer systems (including software and
hardware) requirements.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends $1,606,846,000, an increase of
$1,606,846,000 over the request and $29,078,000 over fiscal
year 2005. The Committee has included bill language that makes
$75,000,000 available until September 30, 2007 in order to
facilitate information technology purchases as requested by
IRS.
Information systems vulnerability.--The Committee is
concerned that vulnerability management has been largely
overlooked by the Federal government as a means of securing
cyberspace and critical computer networks. By applying basic
vulnerability management principles, agencies can reduce the
annual cost of securing networks by identifying cyber security
weaknesses, quantifying their business risk due to exposure,
knowing the state of their network with respect to their
specific security policies, enforcing these security policies,
measuring performance against them over time, and verifying
policy compliance across distributed organizations. In
addition, vulnerability management can also result in reduced
severity and more effective responses when incidents do occur.
The Committee is aware that the National Institute of
Standards and Technology (NIST) has evaluated and certified a
new technology providing such a vulnerability management
solution. This technology will allow for a greater
understanding of where exposures exist, will identify the
corresponding business risk, and allow risks to be eliminated
in a systematic, priority-driven manner. The Committee
encourages IRS to review this technology and implement it, if
appropriate.
business systems modernization
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $203,360,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 199,000,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 199,000,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... -4,360,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. ................
This appropriation provides funding for IT contractors to
modernize key business systems of the Internal Revenue Service.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $199,000,000
for business systems modernization, a decrease of $4,360,000
from the fiscal year 2005 enacted level and the same as the
budget request. The release of funding from this account is
governed by the same statutory conditions that governed the
funds appropriated into this account in previous years.
The Committee notes that there have been serious concerns
voiced by the IRS Oversight Board, the Government
Accountability Office and the Treasury Inspector General for
Tax Administration with respect to prior program performance.
The Committee recognizes that IRS and the PRIME contractor have
scaled back the proposed BSM work plan to a more manageable
level, and expects that each milestone for fiscal year 2006
will be met on time and within budget as a result of providing
the budget request.
health insurance tax credit administration
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $34,562,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 20,210,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 20,210,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... -14,352,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. ................
This appropriation provides contractor support to develop
and administer the advance payment option for the health
insurance tax credit included in Public Law 107-210, the Trade
Act of 2002.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $20,210,000
for health insurance tax credit administration, a decrease of
$14,352,000 below the fiscal year 2005 enacted level and the
same as the budget request.
administrative provisions--internal revenue service
Sec. 201. The Committee continues a provision that allows
the transfer of 5 percent (3 percent in the case of Tax Law
Enforcement) of any appropriation made available to the IRS to
any other IRS appropriation.
Sec. 202. The Committee continues a provision that requires
that IRS maintain a training program in taxpayer rights,
dealing courteously with taxpayers, and cross-cultural
relations.
Sec. 203. The Committee continues a provision that requires
IRS to institute policies and procedures that will safeguard
the confidentiality of taxpayer information.
Sec. 204. The Committee continues a provision that makes
funds available for improved facilities and increased manpower
to provide efficient and effective 1-800 help line service for
taxpayers.
Sec. 205. The Committee includes a provision that prohibits
IRS from closing or consolidating taxpayer assistance centers
(TACs) until a thorough study is completed that assesses the
impact of closures on taxpayer compliance. In addition,
language is included that requires IRS to consult with the
National Taxpayer Advocate, the IRS Oversight Board, the
Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration and IRS
employees on the model used to determine which TACs should be
closed.
General Provisions--Department of the Treasury
Section 210. The Committee continues the provision that
allows the Department of the Treasury to purchase uniforms,
insurance, and motor vehicles without regard to the general
purchase price limitation, and enter into contracts with the
State Department for health and medical services for Treasury
employees in overseas locations.
Section 211. The Committee continues the provision that
authorizes transfer, up to 2 percent, between the Internal
Revenue Service and the Treasury Inspector General for Tax
Administration under certain circumstances.
Section 212. The Committee continues the provision limiting
funds for the purchase of law enforcement vehicles unless the
purchase is consistent with vehicle management principles.
Section 213. The Committee continues the provision that
prohibits the Department of the Treasury from undertaking a
redesign of the $1 Federal Reserve note.
Section 214. The Committee continues the provision that
provides for transfers from and reimbursements to ``Financial
management service, salaries and expenses'' for the purposes of
debt collection.
Section 215. The Committee continues the provision
extending the life of Treasury's franchise fund.
Section 216. The Committee continues the provision that
requires Congressional approval for the construction and
operation of a museum by the United States Mint.
Section 217. The Committee includes a provision prohibiting
funds in this Act from being used to merge the United States
Mint and the Bureau of Engraving and Printing without the
approval of the House and Senate committees of jurisdiction.
Section 218. The Committee has modified last year's
provision directing the Secretary of the Treasury to provide
report within 90 days of enactment describing how Treasury
defines and reports on the statutory provisions addressing
currency manipulation by America's trading partners. The
department should include in the report specific examples of
what it defines to be currency manipulation, and should include
those examples that encompass the full range of the
International Monetary Fund (IMF) definitions, including
currency pegs, interventions and other forms used to
artificially value a currency. In addition, the department
should address how it consults with the IMF as required by the
1988 Omnibus Trade Act, how the IMF and the Treasury each
separately and independently define currency manipulation to
gain unfair trade advantage, how the Treasury factors its own
evaluation and definition of manipulation into consultations
with IMF, and how the Treasury's final determination in the
semi-annual report to Congress reflects both views. The
secretary should report the countries and occasions when it has
cited a trading partner since the 1988 Trade Act, the specific
citations and definitions for citing them, and the total
numbers of times the department has cited America's trading
partners.
TITLE III--DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2006 recommendation:
Program Level.................................... $37,650,238,000
Rescissions...................................... -2,493,600,000
Offsetting Collections........................... -2,016,000,000
Net Appropriation.............................. 33,452,052,000
Fiscal year 2005 appropriation:
Program Level.................................... 35,108,400,000
Rescissions...................................... -2,321,000,000
Offsetting Collections........................... -2,850,000,000
Net Appropriation.............................. 31,915,207,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request:
Program Level.................................... 33,347,486,000
Rescissions...................................... -2,321,000,000
Offsetting Collections........................... -1,959,000,000
Net Appropriation.............................. 29,147,486,000
Comparison with Fiscal year 2005 appropriation:
Program Level................................ 1,536,845,000
Rescissions.................................. 172,600,000
Offsetting Collections....................... 834,000,000
Net Appropriation.......................... 1,536,845,000
Comparison with Fiscal year 2006 budget request:
Program Level................................ 4,304,566,000
Rescissions.................................. -149,248,000
Offsetting Collections....................... -57,000,000
Net Appropriation.......................... 4,304,566,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) was
established by the Department of Housing and Urban Development
Act of 1965 (Public Law 89-174). HUD is the principal federal
agency responsible for administering and regulating programs
and industries concerned with the nation's housing needs,
economic and community development, and fair housing
opportunities.
In carrying out the mission of serving the needs and
interests of the nation's communities and of the people who
live and work in them, HUD administers mortgage and loan
insurance programs, rental and homeownership subsidy programs
for low-income families, neighborhood rehabilitation programs,
and community development programs.
The Committee recommends a total program level of
$33,452,042,000 for the Department of Housing and Urban
Development, an increase of $1,536,835,000 above the fiscal
year 2005 level, and $4,304,556,000 above the request.
Over the past five years, the Committee has demonstrated
the high priority it places on housing and community
development programs by providing significant additional
resources to the Department at a time of fiscal constraint.
Total funding provided for HUD programs has increased by 15
percent in five years. However, despite this large increase,
funding for most HUD programs has remained flat, or been
reduced, because Section 8 funding has grown by 45 percent and
in the budget recommended by the Committee for 2006, Section 8
will consume 60 percent of the entire HUD budget. Most of the
growth has occurred in Section 8 voucher renewals, which has
increased by almost 30 percent since fiscal year 2001. Such
growth is not sustainable and reform is imperative to ensure
that all of the nation's housing and community development
needs can continue to receive Federal assistance.
Public and Indian Housing
TENANT BASED RENTAL ASSISTANCE
(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
Fiscal year 2006 recommendation...................... $15,531,400,000
Fiscal year 2005 appropriation....................... 14,765,900,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request...................... 15,845,194,000
Comparison with Fiscal year 2005 appropriation... +765,480,000
Comparison with Fiscal year 2006 budget request.. -313,794,000
The Committee recommends a total of $15,531,400,000 in
total funding for this account, an increase of almost
$765,480,000 above the 2005 enacted level in total and
$734,471,000 above the amount enacted in 2005 for the renewal
of tenant-based Section 8 vouchers. Consistent with the
Administration's request the Committee continues the advance of
$4,200,000,000 of the funds appropriated under this heading for
Section 8 programs to October 1, 2006. The entire advance is
limited to this account. However, language in included in this
account, which allows the Secretary to transfer up to
$200,000,000 of the advance appropriation to the Project Based
Rental Assistance Account during periods of Continuing
Resolutions and if funds are available.
Voucher Renewals.--The Committee is providing
$14,089,756,000 the same as requested and a 6% increase in
funds compared to fiscal year 2005 for the renewal of tenant
based vouchers. This is considerably more than rents have
increased and, in fact, there is some evidence to suggest that,
nation-wide, subsidies for rental assistance have begun to
level off relative to their 2004 levels. However funds are not
being reduced to reflect the potential for lower costs because
the evidence is not yet complete and the rise in tenant-based
rents over the past 5 years has been more than 40%. The
Department is instructed to monitor and report to the House and
Senate Committees on Appropriations each quarter on the trends
in Section 8 subsidy and to report on the extent to which
changes in subsidy are due to changes in rent or changes in
tenant income. The Committee will conduct a review of the
trends in gross rents and subsidy requirements prior to
enactment of a final bill.
The 2006 Committee recommendation completes the transition
of the appropriations for this program from a ``unit-based''
system back to a ``budget-based'' program as the program has
historically operated. Whereas in fiscal year 2005, Congress
estimated the costs of the Tenant-based program based on units
under lease during the three-month period that immediately
preceded passage of the Act, that level set the baseline for
all future appropriations. This Act builds upon that by
providing sufficient funds to renew all of the vouchers under
lease on which appropriations were based in FY 2005 prior to
the pro rata reduction required to stay within appropriated
amounts, adjusted by the local Annual Adjustment Factor
(reflecting actual local rent increases) for 2005 and inflation
estimates for 2006, plus funds for the estimated number of
renewal of units entering the TBRA Account from other forms of
assistance for the first time in 2005.
The Committee recognizes that a fully ``budget based''
system now in effect leaves the Public Housing Authorities with
a single fixed amount for the calendar year and with the
difficult task of maximizing the renewal of vouchers while
existing under a complex regime of rules and requirements that
do nothing to facilitate the process. Absent real reforms to
the program to reduce costs and dramatic changes to the
program's implementation guidelines to reduce the
administrative burden, the Committee directs the Department to
take whatever regulatory and administrative actions it can to
increase flexibility, reduce administrative burden and
streamline program implementation. The Committee directs the
Department to provide a full report on the regulatory and
administrative actions available to the Department by September
1, 2005.
HUD is also instructed to establish the formula necessary
to distribute funds to the PHAs based on the methodology
described above and must communicate to each PHA, within 45
days of enactment, the fixed amount that will be made available
to each PHA for calendar year 2006. Language is repeated this
year to ensure that all funds are assigned and obligated
expeditiously and that the Department holds no funds in
reserve. The amount being provided in this account is the only
source of Federal funds that may be used to renew tenant-based
vouchers. The amounts appropriated here may not be augmented
from any other source.
The Committee has been made aware that the use of the May/
June/July data may have had an adverse impact on some of the
June PHAs or created other anomalous results. Therefore,
language is included to set aside up to $45,000,000 within
renewal funding for the purpose of restoring vouchers to those
public housing entities that were severely reduced solely due
to the snapshot of costs in the fiscal year 2005 Act and due to
an extraordinary increase in costs from portability over the
past year. The Secretary shall set the thresholds for each
request for funds by a public housing and has complete
discretion on the amount to provide, if any, after verification
of the information provided.
These are one-time adjustments that reset the baseline for
the future allocation of funds and Public housing agencies must
continue to manage their Section 8 programs on a budget basis
established in the 2005 Appropriations Act. Yet the issue of
portability continues to be troubling and the Department is
instructed, prior to the submission of the 2007 budget, to
develop and submit proposals to minimize the cost that
portability could have on PHAs operating on a fixed annual
budget.
The Committee has reviewed carefully but not agreed to the
Administration's request for a central fund. The Administration
has not clearly identified the circumstances under which the
funds would be made available, and its inclusion could lead
public housing agencies to anticipate the availability of
additional funding above their fixed budget allocation.
The Committee encourages HUD to continue working with the
City of Baltimore Housing Authority to identify ways that the
City of Baltimore Housing Authority can implement the terms of
the federal court order arising out of Bailey et al v. Housing
Authority of Baltimore City.
Tenant protection.--The Committee provides $165,700,000 for
tenant protection vouchers, $4,004,000 more than enacted for
2005 and $188,381,000 less than the Administration requested.
The Administration's request assumed the full implementation of
a final mandatory conversion (demolition) rule for public
housing units that should not be rehabilitated on the basis of
a cost benefit analysis. This rule is not going to be fully
implemented in time to require that first time vouchers of the
entire 30,000 units assumed. Hence, the Committee has provided
funding for tenant protection vouchers at the historic levels
requested for this fiscal year.
Administrative Fees.--The Committee recommends
$1,225,000,000 for allocation to the PHAs to conduct activities
associated with placing and maintaining individuals under
Section 8 assistance. This amount is $24,574,000 below the
enacted level for 2005 and $70,408,000 below the levels
proposed by the Administration. This reduction reflects the
shift of contracts currently handled by HUD's financial
management center (FMC) to the project based Section 8 program,
and therefore no longer administered by the PHAs. The Committee
does not include funds as requested for a contract to determine
the appropriate and reasonable administrative fee structure.
The proper time to readdress the issue of Administrative fee
structures is after the Congress has implemented significant
reforms to the administrative requirements. Until then the
Department is instructed to allocate fees based on the pro rata
allocation methodology used for the 2005.
Although no assumption is made about the enactment of
authorizing legislation to reduce the administrative burden on
PHAs, it is reasonable for the Committee to assume that some
immediate short-term reductions in burden can occur. Therefore,
the Department shall provide the Committee with a list of
administrative and regulatory changes that can be put in place
in time to benefit PHAs for 2006, no later than September 1,
2005.
Family Self-Sufficiency Coordinators (FSS).--The Committee
includes $45,000,000 for FSS coordinators, the same amount as
enacted for 2005 and $10,000,000 less than requested by the
Administration. Coordinators help residents link up with
important services in the community to speed the achievement of
self-sufficiency. The Department provided no data or other
information to demonstrate that the number of PHAs
participating in the FSS program would increase by more than
50. Hence the requested increase is denied.
Working Capital Fund.--The Committee provides the requested
amount of $5,900,000 for transfer to the Working Capital Fund
(WCF). In that this is a minimum amount, the Department is
encouraged to apply whatever resources are needed to complete
the development of a secure, scalable and workable information
collection system so that the Department and the Congress can
get a better understanding of the public assistance inventory.
This should be HUD's top priority for infrastructure
development.
Project-Based Rental Assistance
(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
Fiscal year 2006 recommendation....................... 5,088,300,000
Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................ 5,298,272,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request....................... 5,072,100,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2006 budget request... +16,200,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2005 appropriations... -209,972,000
The Project-Based Rental Assistance account (PBRA) provides
a rental subsidy to a private landlord tied to a specific
housing unit so that the properties themselves, rather than the
individual living in the unit, remain subsidized. Amounts
provided in this account include funding for the renewal of
expiring project-based contracts, including Section 8, moderate
rehabilitation, and single room occupancy (SRO) contracts,
amendments to Section 8 project-based contracts, and
administrative costs for performance-based project-based
Section 8 contract administrators and costs associated with
administering moderate rehabilitation and single room occupancy
contracts.
The Committee provides a total of $5,088,300,000 for the
annual renewal of project-based contracts, of which
$147,200,000 is for the costs of contract administrators and
$1,000,000 is for the Working Capital Fund.
This is $255,103,000 below the enacted level for fiscal
year 2005 and is $17,000,000 above the Administration's
Request. The Committee agrees with the Administration's request
to use the recapture of project-based recaptures for the
renewal of project based contracts as well as amendments
beginning in 2006. Until now the use of excess funds from long-
term expiring contracts has been limited to amendments.
Therefore, the Committee agrees that no increase in new
appropriations is necessary to meet the 2006 needs of this
program. However, the Committee concluded that the
Administration's assumptions concerning costs savings due to
the rental income verification (RHIIP) and mark-to-market
restructures is pure speculation and unsupportable. Therefore,
savings proposed by the Administration for these activities,
are rejected by the Committee.
Instead, language is included in the Tenant-Based Rental
Assistance Account that allows the Department to transfer up to
$200,000,000 of the advance appropriation available during
fiscal year 2006, if sufficient new funds or recaptures are not
available when needed or the government operates under a
continuing resolution. Prior to 2005, the project based program
had access to the advanced appropriation during periods when
new appropriations were not available on October 1st.
The Committee is taking action that was not proposed by the
Administration to protect all project-based units covered by
HUD contracts. Language is included to permit Section 8
performance-based contract administration funds to be available
for performance-based contract administration for other forms
of project-based subsidy payments such as the debt service
subsidy paid on Sec. 236 projects and the rent subsidies
provided Supportive Housing for the Elderly and the Disabled as
well as the rent supplement and rental assistance payment
programs. The Department will be permitted to use a portion of
appropriations, in addition to recaptures, to utilize
performance-based contract administrators to improve oversight
and management of these other forms of project-based
assistance.
HOUSING CERTIFICATE FUND
(RESCISSION)
Fiscal year 2006 recommendation................ -$2,493,600,000
Fiscal year 2005 appropriation................. -1,557,000,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request................ -2,500,000,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2005 +936,600,000
appropriation.................................
Comparison with fiscal year 2006 budget -6,400,000
request.......................................
The Committee recommends a rescission of $2,493,600,000
from unobligated balances and carryover remaining in the
Housing Certificate Fund from the Section 8 tenant-based and
project-based rental assistance programs as proposed in the
budget request.
Language is included under this account clarifying that
excess balances in the Housing Certificate Fund shall not be
used to augment fiscal year 2006 funding for the tenant-based
rental assistance. The Committee believes such practice is
inappropriate since it results in total program spending in
excess of the levels appropriated in the bill leading to future
funding problems that create instability and uncertainty for
the individuals who rely on the program and jeopardize funding
for other important housing programs.
Public Housing Capital Fund
(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
Fiscal year 2006 recommendation....................... $2,600,000,000
Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................ 2,579,200,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request....................... 2,327,200,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2005 appropriation.... +20,800,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2006 budget request... +272,800,000
The Public Housing Capital Fund provides funding for public
housing capital programs, including public housing development
and modernization. Examples of capital modernization projects
include replacing roofs and windows, improving common spaces,
upgrading electrical and plumbing systems, and renovating the
interior of an apartment.
The Committee recommends a total funding level of
$2,600,000,000, an increase of $20,080,000 above the 2005
enacted level and $272,800,000 above the Administration's
request. Within the amounts provided the committee directs
that:
--$17,000,000 is made available for Emergency Capital
needs; the Committee continues last year's language to
ensure that funds are used only for repairs needed due
to an unforeseen and unanticipated emergency event or
natural disaster event that occurs during fiscal year
2006.
--$24,000,000 is directed to the Resident Opportunity
and Supportive Services, as requested by the
Administration.
--$11,000,000 is directed to Administrative
receiverships, as requested for remediation of troubled
PHAs. No funds are being provided for Technical
Assistance based on the large build up of unobligated
balances. The Department is expected to cover the costs
of the fair market rents (FMR) surveys from funds
remaining available in this account;
--$8,820,000 is directed to the support of
administrative and judicial receiverships, as
requested, and
--No less than $10,000,000 for transfer to the
Working Capital Fund to support the development of and
modifications to, information technology systems which
support Public and Indian Housing (PIH) programs. This
reflects the Committee's continued concern that
investments must be made to correct deficiencies in PIH
information technology systems to improve PIH's ability
to conduct appropriate financial and management
oversight of its programs.
As requested, the recommendation does not designate a
separate set-aside for the Neighborhood Networks grants because
such activities are already an eligible use of capital funds.
In addition the Committee does not provide funding for the
Section 23 Lease adjustments since all Section 23 public
housing units have already been converted to Section 8
vouchers.
The Department is directed to continue to provide the
quarterly detailed reports on those PHA with obligation rates
of less than 90 percent.
Public Housing Operating Fund
(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
Fiscal year 2006 recommendation................ $3,600,000,000
Fiscal year 2005 appropriation................. 2,438,300,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request................ 3,407,300,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2005 1,161,644,000
appropriation.................................
Comparison with fiscal year 2006 budget +192,700,000
request.......................................
The Public Housing Operating Fund (PHOF) subsidizes the
costs associated with operating and maintaining public housing.
This subsidy supplements funding received by public housing
authorities (PHA) from tenant rent contributions and other
income. In accordance with Section 9 of the United States
Housing Act of 1937, as amended, funds are allocated by formula
to public housing authorities for the following purposes:
utility costs; anticrime and anti-drug activities, including
the costs of providing adequate security; routine maintenance
cost; administrative costs; and general operating expenses.
The Committee has provided $3,600,000,000 for the Federal
share of PHA operating expenses. This amount is $192,700,000
greater than the Administration requested and $1,161,644,000
greater than the enacted level for fiscal year 2005. In 2005
the Congress enacted a one-time shift in the payment of funds
to PHAS, which resulted in the one-time savings of almost one
billion dollars. The Committee has restored funding for public
housing operating subsidies to but could only do so by reducing
other HUD programs. As requested, up to $10,000,000 may be used
for the ``graduation bonus.''
In 2001, Congress funded and mandated that the Department
establish the costs of operating a well run Public Housing
Authority. This report to the Congress, which became known as
the Harvard Study, made several important recommendations to
reform the current allocation formula to better align the
allocation with the actual costs. Congress, in fiscal year 2005
mandated that HUD and the public housing industry negotiate a
new regulation to implement the Harvard Study. This was
completed and a consensus report was issued on June 10, 2004.
The PHA community entered into negotiations in good faith and
the results were negotiated not on the basis of a specific
dollar amount but on a more equitable distribution of the
funds. Once transition costs are removed, the amount required
is not significantly greater than the amounts appropriated in
recent years. That negotiation process and the result has been
undercut and rendered irrelevant by the Administration's
proposed rule.
Hence language is included that requires funds be allocated
to the PHAs in accordance with the negotiated outcome as set
forth in the ``Post 4th Session Rule'' signed on June 10th
2004. In addition $50,000,000 is designated within the amounts
provided to assist in the conversion to asset management for
those public housing agencies that would lose more than 5
percent in funding compared to the existing Performance Funding
System.
The detailed operating formula based on the instructions
above shall be developed and submitted to the Committee in
conjunction with or as part of the Department's Operating Plan.
As proposed, language designating $10,000,000 for transfer
to the Department of Justice to be allocated by the Attorney
General through existing programs, such as Weed and Seed is not
included in fiscal year 2006. However, all activities
previously authorized under the public housing drug elimination
program (PHDEP) are permissible activities under the operating
and capital fund accounts.
The Committee includes language, as proposed in the budget,
restating fundamental principles of appropriations law which
prohibits funds appropriated in this Act for fiscal year 2005
payments from being used to supplement a prior year
appropriation for prior year payments.
The committee also continues language, carried in prior
years, prohibiting funds from being used for section 9(k)
activities. Proposed language is not included making funds
available for two years.
Revitalization of Severely Distressed Public Housing (Hope VI)
Fiscal year 2006 Recommendation....................... $0
Fiscal year 2005 Appropriation........................ 142,848,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request....................... -142,848,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2005 Appropriation.... -142,848,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2006 budget request... +142,848,000
The Revitalization of Severely Distressed Public Housing
program, also known as HOPE VI, provides competitive grants to
public housing authorities to revitalize entire neighborhoods
adversely impacted by the presence of badly deteriorated public
housing projects. In addition to developing and constructing
new affordable housing, the program provides PHAs with the
authority to demolish obsolete projects and to provide self-
sufficiency services for families who reside in and around the
facility.
The Committee does not provide funds for the HOPE VI
program in 2006. The Administration did not request funds for
this program. Language proposed by the Administration to
rescind funds appropriated for 2005 is not included.
The Committee recognizes that this program has had a varied
and controversial history. On the one hand, the projects that
have been completed have been successful and demonstrate what
the program could accomplish. On the other hand, the
Administration has provided an overwhelming case that far too
many projects have not been completed in a timely way. Many
funded years ago have yet to start. Currently over $2 billion
in funds from prior years remain in a backlog and hundreds of
vouchers have remained unused for years. Furthermore,
resistance to the program from tenants remains strong, further
delaying many projects.
Most importantly, the Committee is convinced that, although
10 years have been an important demonstration period, the per-
unit costs of the program is too high, relative to
alternatives, to be sustained over the long run. Yet promises
of reform and a new long-term strategy for achieving some of
the program's objectives has not been forthcoming.
Therefore, the Committee believes that the best course of
action is to reject the Administration's request to rescind the
2005 funding making those funds available in 2006 for grant
awards, but until a new authorization is enacted by Congress to
revise and reform the program, no further funding is merited.
Native American Housing Block Grants
(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)
Fiscal year 2006 Recommendation....................... $600,000,000
Fiscal year 2005 Appropriation........................ 621,984,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request....................... 582,600,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2005 appropriation.... -21,984,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2006 budget request... +17,400,000
The Native American Housing Block Grants program provides
funds to Indian tribes and their tribally designated housing
entities (TDHEs) to address housing needs within their
communities. The block grant is designed to fund a TDHE's
operating requirements and capital needs.
The Committee recommends $600,000,000 for the Native
American Block Grant and the Indian Community Development Block
Grant Fund. This is $17,400,000 more than the Administration
requested and $21,984,000 less than enacted in 2005. The
Committee's recommendation to reduce funding relative to 2005
enacted levels is based on the Administration's official
estimate that $97,000,000 in previously appropriated funds will
carry over into 2006.
In 2003 when HUD began using the new 2000 Census data HUD
shifted the basis for the needs portion of the formula
distribution of funds from single race to the multi-race
database. The Committee has become aware that this shift has
caused serious disruption and the loss of funding for a
majority of single race tribes, which benefit from the use of
single race data. Therefore, language is included instructing
HUD to distribute funds on the basis of single race of multi
race data which ever is the higher amount for each recipient.
Additional funding has been provided to ensure that no grant
recipient will lose funding as a result of the new calculation
of need.
The Indian CDBG program was previously funded as a set
aside in the Community Development Block Grant, and the
Committee agrees with the Administration's proposal that the
Indian CDBG program is best combined with the Native American
Block grant and should be administered by the Office of Public
and Indian Housing. However, as proposed, the balances
remaining in each program shall remain separate and be
administered separately.
Of the amounts made available under this heading,
--$549,342,000 is provided for the Native American
Block Grant
--$45,000,000 is provided for the Indian Community
Block Grant
--$2,000,000 is included for Section 601 loan
guarantees, the same as enacted for FY 2005, to
guarantee $17,900,000 in new loans. However, the
Department is advised that loan level activity must be
monitored to ensure that sufficient grant funds are
available as collateral for new loans.
--$2,308,000 is for Technical Assistance training and
associated travel;
--$150,000 is transferred to the Department Salary
and Expenses account and;
--$1,200,000 for the Native for American Indian
Housing Council to conduct training and technical
assistance.
Native Hawaiian Housing Block Grant
Fiscal year 2006 recommendation....................... $8,815,000
Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................ 0
Fiscal year 2006 budget request....................... 8,815,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2005 appropriation.... +8,815,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2006 budget request... 0
The Hawaiian Homelands Homeownership Act of 2000 created
the Native Hawaiian Housing Block Grant program to provide
grants to the State of Hawaii Department of Hawaiian Home Lands
(DHHL) for housing and housing related assistance to develop,
maintain and operate affordable housing for eligible low-income
Native Hawaiian families.
The Committee recommends $8,815,000 for this program, the
same as provided in fiscal year 2005 as a set aside under the
Community Development Block Grant heading. The committee agrees
to fund the program as a separate account as proposed in the
budget. Of the amounts provided, $352,606 is for technical
assistance.
Indian Housing Loan Guarantee Fund Program Account
(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
Limitation on
Program account direct Loans
Fiscal year 2006 Recommendation..... $2,645,000 $98,966,942
Fiscal year 2005 appropriation...... 4,960,000 145,345,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request..... 2,645,000 98,967,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2005 -2,315,000 -46,378,000
appropriation......................
Comparison with fiscal year 2006 0 0
budget request.....................
Section 184 of the Housing and Community Development Act of
1992 establishes a loan guarantee program for Native Americans
to build or purchase homes on trust land. This program provides
access to sources of private financing for Indian families and
Indian housing authorities that otherwise cannot acquire
financing because of the unique legal status of Indian trust
land. This financing vehicle enables families to construct new
homes or to purchase existing properties on reservations.
The Committee recommends $2,645,000 in new credit subsidy
for the Section 184 loan guarantee program, the same amount
requested by the Administration and $2,315,000 below the fiscal
year 2005 enacted level. This will be sufficient to guarantee
$98,967,000 in new loans. The Committee strongly supports the
issue of the program of loan guarantees for the purchase,
construction or rehabilitation of single-family homes on trust
or restricted lands. However, the Department has indicated that
of the $4,960,000 enacted for fiscal year 2005, $3,161,000 will
carry over into 2006. Hence in total, more resources will be
available in fiscal year 2006 than in fiscal year 2005. Of the
amounts made available, $250,000 is transferred to the
Department's Salary and Expenses Account.
Native Hawaiian Housing Loan Guarantee Fund Program Account
(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
Limitation on
Program account direct Loans
Fiscal year 2006 recommendation..... $882,000 $35,000,000
Fiscal year 2005 appropriation...... 992,000 39,403,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request..... 882,000 35,000,000
Comparison with Fiscal year 2005 -110,000 -2,403,000
appropriation......................
Comparison with Fiscal year 2006 0 0
budget request.....................
The Hawaiian Homelands Homeownership Act of 2000 created
the Native Hawaiian Housing Loan Guarantee Fund program to
provide loan guarantees for native Hawaiian individuals and
their families, the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands, the
Office of Hawaiian Affairs, and private nonprofit organizations
experienced in the planning and in the development of
affordable housing for Native Hawaiians for the purchase,
construction, and/or rehabilitation of single-family homes on
Hawaiian Home Lands. This program provides access to private
sources of financing that would otherwise not be available
because of the unique legal status of Hawaiian Home Lands.
The Committee recommends $882,000 for this program the same
as requested to guarantee a total loan volume of $35,000,000,
the full amount requested. Language is included transferring
$35,000 to the HUD salaries and expenses account for
administrative expenses.
Community Planning and Development
HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR PERSONS WITH AIDS
Fiscal year 2006 recommendation....................... $285,000,000
Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................ 281,751,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request....................... 268,000,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2005 appropriation.... +3,272,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2006 budget request... +17,000,000
The Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA)
program is authorized by the Housing Opportunities for Persons
with AIDS Act. This program provides States and localities with
resources and incentives to devise long-term comprehensive
strategies to meet the housing needs of persons with HIV/AIDS
and their families. Ninety percent of funding is distributed by
formula to qualifying States and metropolitan areas on the
basis of the cumulative number and incidences of AIDS reported
to the Centers for Disease Control. The remaining 10 percent of
funding is distributed through a national competition.
Government recipients are required to have a HUD-approved
Comprehensive Plan/Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy
(CHAS).
For fiscal year 2006, the Committee recommends
$285,000,000, an increase of $3,272,000 over the enacted levels
for fiscal year 2005, and an increase of $17,000,000 above the
budget request. Within the total amount provided, $1,000,000 is
for technical assistance, training and oversight as requested.
The Committee continues to believe that creating new housing
opportunities for persons with AIDS should be the priority for
HOPWA funding.
Bill language is included, carried in previous years, which
requires the Secretary to renew expiring permanent supportive
housing contracts previously funded under the national
competition, which meet all program requirements, before
awarding new competitive grants.
Rural Housing and Economic Development
Fiscal year 2006 recommendation....................... $10,000,000
Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................ 23,808,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request....................... 0
Comparison with fiscal year 2005 appropriation.... -13,808,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2006 budget request... +10,000,000
This account provides funding to rural non-profit
organizations, community development corporations, Indian
tribes, State housing finance agencies, State economic
development and/or Federally recognized community development
agencies.
The Committee recommends $10,000,000 funding for this
program. The Administration requested no funds for this
program. Most initiatives in rural economic transformation are
and should be funded through the US Department of Agriculture
(USDA), which has the expertise in rural economic development,
rural housing and community stabilization. These funds are
intended to develop innovative economic strategies.
Empowerment Zones/Enterprise Communities
Fiscal year 2006 recommendation....................... $0
Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................ 9,920,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request....................... 0
Comparison with fiscal year 2005 appropriation.... -9,920,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2006 budget request... 0
This account provides discretionary grant funding to 15
urban Enterprise Zones and Enterprise Communities (EZ/ECs)
designated in Round II.
The statute that created Round II EZ/ECs did not authorize
discretionary grant funding for these communities, but instead
authorized tax incentives to stimulate revitalization efforts
in these communities. However, since fiscal year 1999,
discretionary grant funds have been provided under this
account.
The Committee recommends no funding for this program. The
Administration requested no funding for this program. As the
10-year Round II program winds down communities should use
their remaining funds from prior year appropriations to close
out activities funded by the grants.
community development fund
(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)
Fiscal year 2006 recommendation....................... $4,151,500,000
Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................ 4,671,328,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request....................... 0
Comparison with fiscal year 2005 appropriation.... -519,828,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2005 budget request... +4,151,500,000
The Community Development Fund provides funding to State
and local governments, and to other entities that carry out
community and economic development activities under various
programs.
The Committee recommends a total of $4,151,500,000 for the
Community Development Fund account, a decrease of $519,828,000
from the amount provided in fiscal year 2005 and an increase of
$4,151,500,000 to the fiscal year 2006 budget request.
Of the amounts made available:
--$3,859,900,000 is for the formula grants and the
state share, $250,000,000 below the level enacted for
FY 2005. The Administration proposed to eliminate this
program. HUD is instructed to use the same methodology
as used in FY 2005 to distribute these funds.
--$290,000,000 for economic development initiative
activities; and
--$1,600,000 is transferred to the Working Capital
Fund.
The Committee has maintained the formula program at the
highest possible level for fiscal year 2006, consistent with
the need to fully fund rental assistance and operating programs
for low income families administered by public housing
authorities, the disabled and in spite of the Administration's
pressure to reduce and retarget the funds to non-economic
development activities. However, while maintaining the basic
program intact, the Committee was not able to also maintain the
large number of set asides for special programs and
organizations that have been traditionally funded within this
account.
As a result, the Committee has recommended a significant
reduction in the number of programs to be included as set
asides in the Community Development Fund, and agrees that the
Community Development Fund should focus entirely on traditional
CDBG activities. Self-Help and other organizations that assist
primarily in home ownership will no longer be funded as part of
the Community Development Fund in order to maximize the amount
to be distributed for the formula.
In addition, the Department's renewed emphasis on
maximizing the allocation of funds where the needs are greatest
is undermined by the continued growth in set asides that
diminish the amount of funds that can be distributed in this
manner. This problem was made more acute in fiscal year 2006
because the Committee was not able to fully fund the Community
Development Fund at the levels provided in 2005.
However, although many of the programs that began as one
time funding requirements have not achieved self-sufficiency as
hoped, the Committee does not agree with the Administration's
proposal to terminate all funding for all set asides that were
funded in fiscal year 2005 within the CDF. Several have been
merged with other similar programs in HUD, as noted elsewhere
in this report. Youthbuild is proposed by the Administration
for transfer and merger with the Job Corps in the Department of
Labor and therefore is not funded in this bill. Others are
funded in a new account, which was proposed by the
Administration solely for The Self-Help Homeownership
Opportunity program, but which the Committee has expanded to
include other homeownership assistance activities and
organizations formerly funded under this heading.
community development loan guarantees program account
(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
Limitation on
Program cost Guaranteed loans
Fiscal year 2006 recommendation..... $0 $0
Fiscal year 2005 appropriation...... 5,952,000 275,000,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request..... 0 0
Comparison with fiscal year 2005 5,952,000 -275,000,000
appropriation......................
Comparison with fiscal year 2006 0 0
budget request;....................
The Section 108 Loan Guarantees program underwrites private
market loans to assist local communities in the financing of
the acquisition and rehabilitation of publicly-owned real
property, rehabilitation of housing, and certain economic
development projects.
The Committee recommends no funds for this program. No
funds were requested by the Administration. $6,900,000 was
enacted in fiscal year 2005 for a loan level of $275,000,000.
While the Committee recognizes that there is a place for a non-
competitive loan program to fill gaps in funding at the local
level, this program is not consistent with current government
loan principles and has not been fully utilized due to the
reluctance to use CDBG funds as collateral. It is also somewhat
inconsistent with HUD's attempts to refocus and a target CDBG
grant funds to localities in the greatest need. The committee
would welcome program changes that would reduce the loan
guarantee below 100 percent and provide for collateral from
non-CDBG sources of funds.
Brownfields Redevelopment
Fiscal year 2006 recommendation....................... $0
Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................ 23,808,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request....................... 0
Comparison with fiscal year 2005 appropriation.... -23,808,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2005 budget request... 0
The Brownfields Redevelopment program provides competitive
economic development grants in conjunction with section 108
loan guarantees for qualified Brownfields projects. Grants are
made in accordance with section 108(q) selection criteria.
The goal of the program is to return contaminated sites to
productive uses with an emphasis on creating substantial
numbers of jobs for lower-income people in physically and
economically distressed neighborhoods.
The Committee recommends no funding for the Brownfields
Redevelopment Program at HUD. The Administration has requested
no funding for the past several years. Congress enacted
$23,808,000 in fiscal year 2005. The Committee believes that
due to the recent dramatic increases in funding in EPA and
expanded EPA authority in recent authorizations for this
program, HUD funding is no longer essential or appropriate.
Home Investment Partnerships Program
(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
Fiscal year 2006 recommendation....................... $1,900,000,000
Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................ 1,899,680,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request....................... 1,941,000,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2005 appropriation.... +320,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2006 budget request... -41,000,000
The HOME investment partnerships program provides grants to
States, units of local government, Indian tribes and insular
areas, through formula allocation, for the purpose of expanding
the supply of affordable housing in the jurisdiction. Upon
receipt, State and local governments develop a comprehensive
housing affordability strategy that enables them to acquire,
rehabilitate, or construct new affordable housing, or to
provide rental assistance to eligible families.
The Committee recommends $1,900,000,000 for activities
funded under this account, the same as enacted in fiscal year
2005 and $41,000,000 below the request. Funds are provided as
follows:
--Formula Grants: $1,790,000,000 for formula grants
for participating jurisdictions (States, units of local
government and consortia of units of local government)
and insular areas, an increase of $59,000,000 above the
amount requested and $10,000,000 above the amount
enacted for fiscal year 2005 level. Of the amount
provided, pursuant to the statute, at least 15 percent
of each participating jurisdiction's allocation is
reserved for housing that is developed, sponsored, or
owned by Community Housing Development Organizations
(CHDOs);
--Housing Counseling: $41,700,000 for housing
counseling programs. The Committee has continued
funding for this activity within this account rather
than creating a separate account as proposed in the
budget request;
--HOME/CHDO Technical Assistance: $17,300,000 for
technical assistance activities for State and local
participating jurisdictions and non-profit CHDOs. The
Committee notes that the HOME statute authorizes
technical assistance to be provided through contracts
with eligible non-profit intermediaries as well as with
other organizations recommended by participating
jurisdictions and therefore directs HUD to use
$8,000,000 to contract with qualified non-profit
intermediaries to provide CHDO technical assistance in
fiscal year 2006;
--Working Capital Fund: no less than $1,000,000 for
transfer to the Working Capital Fund to support the
development and modification of information technology
systems that serve programs and activities under
Community Planning and Development.
In addition to the amounts above:
--Down-payment Assistance Initiative: $50,000,000 for
the Down-payment Assistance Initiative to be allocated
by the Secretary to participating jurisdictions to
provide down-payment assistance to low-income families
to help them achieve homeownership. The budget request
had included $200,000,000 for down-payment assistance.
The amount enacted for fiscal year 2005 was
$49,600,000.
The Committee is concerned that recent changes to
metropolitan statistical area (MSA) boundaries may
significantly lower area median incomes (AMI) in some
communities with high housing costs, making ineligible many
families and individuals who are currently eligible for housing
subsidized through the Community Development Block Grant
program and the HOME program, which have AMI eligibility
requirements. The Committee encourages HUD to explore ways to
help such mass transition to the new AMI, other than through
any adjustment of funding formulas, to reduce the impact of MSA
boundary changes on affordable housing and homeownership
opportunities.
Self-Help and Assisted Homeownership
Fiscal year 2006 Recommendation....................... $60,800,000
Fiscal year 2005 Appropriations....................... 0
Fiscal year 2006 Budget Request....................... 30,000,000
Comparison with 2005 appropriations............... 60,800,000
Comparison with 2006 request...................... 30,800,000
The Committee recommends $60,800,000 for the Self Help
Opportunity Program. This is a new account, which is proposed
by the Administration to fund programs that previously have
been funded as set asides within the Community Development Fund
(CDF). The Administration requested $30,000,000 to fund the
SHOP/Habitat for Humanity program. The Administration
recommended no funding for all other programs previously
included in the Community Development Fund.
The Committee has expanded this account to include other
activities, which are primarily focused on assisting low to
moderate income families achieve homeownership and that were
formerly funded within the Community Development Fund (CDF.)
Most are funded at levels slightly below the fiscal year 2005
enacted levels. Reductions recommended by the committee for
these programs, are consistent with reductions taken in most
HUD programs to meet rental assistance priorities. Therefore
language is included that provides:
--$23,800,000 for the Self Help Homeownership
Program,
--$28,000,000 for the National Community Development
Initiative (NCDI) for LISC and Enterprise Foundation,
of which $1,000,000 is for capacity building activities
administered by Habitat for Humanity and not less than
$1,000,000, is for rural areas.
--$3,000,000 for the Housing Assistance Council;
--$4,000,000 for the Housing Partnership Network for
a one-time grant to capitalize the reinsurance pool;
--$1,000,000 for the Native American Indian Housing
Council; and
--$1,000,000 for the Special Olympics.
Homeless Assistance Grants
(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
Fiscal year 2006 recommendation................ $1,340,000,000
Fiscal year 2005 appropriation................. 1,240,511,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request................ 1,404,000,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2005 +99,489,000
appropriation.................................
Comparison with fiscal year 2006 budget -100,000,000
request.......................................
The homeless assistance grants account provides funding for
the following homeless programs under title IV of the McKinney
Act: (1) the emergency shelter grants program; (2) the
supportive housing program; (3) the section 8 moderate
rehabilitation (single room occupancy) program; and (4) the
shelter plus care program. This account also supports
activities eligible under the innovative homeless initiatives
demonstration program.
The Committee recommends funding homeless programs at
$1,340,000,000, an increase of $99,489,000 above the enacted
level for 2005 and $100,000,000 below the request. The
recommendation includes no less than $238,000,000 to provide
full funding for the costs associated with the renewal of all
expiring Shelter Plus Care contracts. Language is included in
the bill requiring funds to be made available for this purpose.
The recommendation includes $11,674,000 for the national
homeless data analysis project and for technical assistance,
and no less than $1,000,000 for transfer to the Working Capital
Fund for development and modifications of information
technology systems that serve activities under Community
Planning and Development.
Language is included in the bill that: (1) requires not
less than 30 percent of the funds appropriated, excluding
amounts made available for renewals under the shelter plus care
program, be used for permanent housing; (2) requires the
renewal of all expiring shelter plus care contracts; (3)
requires funding recipients to provide a 25 percent match for
social services activities; (4) requires all homeless programs
to coordinate their programs with mainstream health, social
services and employment programs; and (5) provides two-year
availability for obligation of funds provided under this
account, except that no year availability is provided for the
portion of funding necessary to meet initial contract
requirements for the Single Room Occupancy program.
Funding for the Prisoner Re-entry Initiative is not
included since authorizing language has not been enacted.
Housing Programs
HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY
(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
Fiscal year 2006 recommendation....................... $741,000,000
Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................ 741,000,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request....................... 741,000,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2005 appropriation.... 0
Comparison with fiscal year 2006 budget request... 0
The housing for the elderly (Section 202) program provides
eligible private, non-profit organizations with capital grants
to finance the acquisition, rehabilitation or construction of
housing intended for low-income elderly people. In addition,
the program provides project-based rental assistance contracts
(PRAC) to support operational costs for units constructed under
the program.
The Committee recommends a $741,000,000 for the Section 202
program for fiscal year 2005, the same levels as enacted for
2005 and requested for 2006. The recommendation allocates
funding as follows:
--$656,200,000 for new capital and project rental
assistance contracts (PRAC);
--$10,000,000 for one-year renewals of expiring PRAC
payments;
--$49,600,000 for service coordinators and the
continuation of congregate services grants;
--$24,800,000 for grants to convert section 202
projects to assisted living facilities; and
--No less than $400,000 for transfers to the Working
Capital Fund to support the development of and
modifications to information technology systems, which
support programs and activities for the elderly.
Language is included, carried in prior years, relating to
the initial contract and renewal terms for assistance provided
under this heading. Language is also included to allow these
funds to be used for inspections and analysis of data by HUD's
REAC program office.
Housing for the Persons with Disabilities
(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
Fiscal year 2006 recommendation....................... $238,100,000
Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................ 238,100,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request....................... 119,900,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2005 appropriation.... 0
Comparison with fiscal year 2006 budget request... +118,200,000
The housing for the persons with disabilities (Section 811)
program provides eligible private, non-profit organizations
with capital grants to finance the acquisition, rehabilitation
or construction of supportive housing for disabled persons and
provides project-based rental assistance (PRAC) to support
operational costs for such units. The Committee recommends a
$238,000,000 for Section 811 activities, the same as fiscal
year 2005 enacted level, and $118,200,000 above the request.
The recommendation allocates funding as follows:
--Up to $157,100,000 for capital grants and PRAC;
--$78,300,000 for renewals or amendments of expiring
tenant-based rental assistance;
--$2,300,000 PRAC renewals;
--$400,000 for transfer to the Working Capital Fund
for the development and maintenance of information
technology systems for programs and activities for
housing for persons with disabilities programs; and
--Up to $5,000,000 may be made available for
incremental vouchers, at the Secretary's discretion.
The Committee recommends $238,100,000 for the Section 811
program. This is the same as the enacted level for 2005 and is
$118,200,000 million above the Administration's request. The
Administration proposes to eliminate funding for the
construction of facilities that accommodate low-income disabled
individuals arguing instead that disabled individuals prefer
section 8 tenant based vouchers. The committee completely
rejects this argument and has not been able to corroborate the
Administration's claims that there is no urgent need for
additional facilities. The Committee finds that, in fact, there
is universal agreement at all levels of analysis that facility
construction and vouchers are needed for this program in fiscal
year 2006. The Administration's analysis is based on
fundamentally flawed assumptions and blames the Department for
following Congressional mandate.
Language is included to allow these funds to be used for
inspections and analysis of data by HUD's REAC program office.
The Committee directs HUD to issue program guidance for the
Section 811 ``mainstream'' tenant-based program by March 15,
2006. HUD shall include guidance on: (1) targeting of rental
assistance consistent with 811 eligibility criteria; (2)
maintenance of these vouchers exclusively for persons eligible
under Section 811 upon turnover; (3) retention of a meaningful
role for non-profit disability organizations. The Committee is
aware of concerns that funding for Section 811 tenant-based
rental assistance may be diverted to the Section 8 voucher
program. Such diversion would be a violation of Section 811
statute. No more than $5,000,000 is provided for incremental
vouchers in fiscal year 2006 given the inexorable increase in
renewal costs that would be required in subsequent years.
Housing Counseling
Fiscal year 2006 recommendation....................... $0
Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................ 0
Fiscal year 2006 budget request....................... 39,700,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2005 appropriation.... 0
Comparison with fiscal year 2006 budget request... -39,700,000
In fiscal year 2005, $39,764,000 was appropriated for
housing counseling as a set-aside under the HOME Investments
Partnership Program account.
Section 106 of the Housing and Urban Development Act of
1968 authorized HUD to provide housing counseling services to
homebuyers, homeowners, low and moderate income renters, and
the homeless. The Committee does not recommend the creation of
a separate account for housing counseling activities, but
instead has provided $41,700,000 for this activity as a set-
aside within the HOME Investments Partnership Program account.
Flexible Subsidy Fund
(TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
The Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968 authorized
HUD to establish a revolving fund into which rental collections
in excess of the established basic rents for units in Section
236 subsidized projects are deposited. Subject to approval in
appropriations acts, the Secretary is authorized under the
Housing and Community Development Amendment of 1978 to transfer
excess rent collections received after 1978 to the Troubled
Projects Operating Subsidy program, renamed the Flexible
Subsidy Fund.
The Committee recommends that the account continue to serve
as a repository of excess rental charges appropriated from the
Rental Housing Assistance Fund. Although these resources will
not be used for new reservations, they will continue to offset
Flexible Subsidy outlays and other discretionary expenditures
to support affordable housing projects.
The recommendation includes language identical to language
carried in prior years, to allow surplus funds derived from
rental collections which were in excess of allowable rent
levels to be returned to project owners only for the purposes
of rehabilitating and renovating those properties.
Manufactured Housing Fees Trust Fund
Fiscal year 2006 recommendation....................... $12,896,000
Offsetting collections............................ 12,896,000
Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................ 12,896,000
Offsetting collections............................ 12,896,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request....................... 13,000,000
Offsetting collections............................ 13,000,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2005 appropriation.. 0
Comparison with fiscal year 2005 budget request. -104
The National Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety
Standards Act of 1974, as amended by the Manufactured Housing
Improvement Act of 2000, authorized the Secretary to establish
Federal manufactured home construction and safety standards for
the construction, design, and performance of manufactured
homes.
All manufactured homes are required to meet the Federal
standards, and fees are charged to producers to cover the costs
of administering the Act.
The Committee recommends up to $12,896,000 for the
manufactured housing standards programs to be derived from fees
collected and deposited in the Manufactured Housing Fees Trust
Fund established pursuant to the Manufactured Housing
Improvement Act of 2000. The amount recommended is the same as
the 2006 request and the 2005 enacted level. Language contained
in previous Acts is continued to ensure that the net
expenditures do not exceed fee collections at the end of the
fiscal year.
Federal Housing Administration
MUTUAL MORTGAGE INSURANCE PROGRAM ACCOUNT
(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Limitation of Limitation of
direct loans guaranteed loans Administrative expenses
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2006 recommendation............. $50,000,000 $185,000,000,000 $355,000,000
Fiscal year 2005 appropriation.............. 50,000,000 185,000,000,000 354,051,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request............. 50,000,000 185,000,000,000 355,000,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2005 0 0 +949,000
appropriation..............................
Comparison with fiscal year 2006 budget 0 0 0
request....................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The FHA mutual mortgage insurance program account includes
the mutual mortgage insurance (MMI) and cooperative management
housing insurance (CMHI) funds. This program account covers
unsubsidized programs, primarily the single-family home
mortgage program, which is the largest of all the FHA programs.
The cooperative housing insurance program provides mortgages
for cooperative housing projects of more than five units that
are occupied by members of a cooperative housing corporation.
The Committee recommends the following limitations on loan
commitments in the MMI program account as follows:
$185,000,000,000 for loan guarantees and $50,000,000 for direct
loans. The recommendation also includes $355,000,000 for
administrative expenses, of which $351,000,000 is transferred
to the Salaries and expenses account, and $4,000,000 is
transferred to the Office of Inspector General. In addition,
$62,600,000 is provided for non-overhead administrative
contract expenses, of which no less than $18,281,000 is
transferred to the Working Capital Fund for development and
modifications to information technology systems that serve
programs or activities under Housing Programs or the Federal
Housing Administration. Language is continued as requested and
carried in previous years appropriating additional
administrative expenses in certain circumstances.
General and Special Risk Program Account
(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Limitation of Limitation of Administrative
direct loans guaranteed loans expenses Program costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2006 recommendation...... $50,000,000 $35,000,000,000 $231,400,000 $8,800,000
Fiscal year 2005 appropriation....... 50,000,000 35,000,000,000 225,945,000 9,920,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request...... 50,000,000 35,000,000,000 231,400,000 8,800,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2005 0 0 5,455,000 -1,120,000
appropriation.......................
Comparison with fiscal year 2006 0 0 0 0
budget request......................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The FHA general and special risk insurance (GI and SRI)
program account includes 17 different programs administered by
FHA. The GI fund includes a wide variety of insurance programs
for special purpose single and multi-family loans, including
loans for property improvements, manufactured housing, multi-
family rental housing, condominiums, housing for the elderly,
hospitals, group practice facilities and nursing homes. The SRI
fund includes insurance programs for mortgages in older,
declining urban areas that would not be otherwise eligible for
insurance, mortgages with interest reduction payments,
mortgages for experimental housing and for high-risk mortgagors
who would not normally be eligible for mortgage insurance
without housing counseling.
The Committee recommends the following limitations on loan
commitments for the general and special risk insurance program
account as requested: $35,000,000,000 for loan guarantees and
$50,000,000 for direct loans.
As requested, the recommendation includes $8,800,000 direct
appropriation for credit subsidy. The recommendation also
includes $231,400,000 for administrative expenses, of which
$211,400,000 is transferred to the Salaries and Expenses
account and $20,000,000 is transferred to the Office of
Inspector General. An additional $71,900,000 is provided for
non-overhead administrative expenses, of which no less than
$10,800,000 is transferred to the Working Capital Fund for
development and modifications to information technology systems
that serve activities under Housing Programs or the Federal
Housing Administration.
Language is continued, carried in previous years,
appropriating additional administrative expenses in certain
circumstances.
Government National Mortgage Association
GUARANTEES OF MORTGAGE-BACKED SECURITIES LOAN GUARANTEE PROGRAM ACCOUNT
(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
Limitation of
guaranteed loans Administrative expenses
Fiscal year 2006 recommendation............................... $200,000,000,000 $10,700,000
Fiscal year 2005 appropriation................................ 200,000,000,000 10,609,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request............................... 200,000,000,000 11,360,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2005 appropriation............ 0 +91,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2006 budget request........... 0 -660,000
The guarantee of mortgage-backed securities program
facilitates the financing of residential mortgage loans insured
or guaranteed by the Federal Housing Administration (FHA), the
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and the Rural Housing
Services program. The Government National Mortgage Association
(GNMA) guarantees the timely payment of principal and interest
on securities issued by private service institutions such as
mortgage companies, commercial banks, savings banks, and
savings and loan associations that assemble pools of mortgages,
and issues securities backed by the pools. In turn, investment
proceeds are used to finance additional mortgage loans.
Investors include non-traditional sources of credit in the
housing market such as pension and retirement funds, life
insurance companies and individuals.
The recommendation includes a $200,000,000,000 limitation
on loan commitments for mortgage-backed securities as
requested, the same level provided in fiscal year 2005. The
Committee also recommends $10,700,000 for administrative
expenses to be transferred to the Salaries and Expenses
account.
Policy Development and Research
RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY
Fiscal year 2006 recommendation....................... $60,600,000
Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................ 45,100,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request....................... 69,700,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2005 appropriation.... +15,464,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2006 budget request... -9,138,000
The Housing and Urban Development Act of 1970 directs the
Secretary to undertake programs of research, studies, testing,
and demonstrations related to the HUD mission. These functions
are carried out internally through contracts with industry,
non-profit research organizations, and educational institutions
and through agreements with State and local governments and
other Federal agencies.
The Committee recommends $60,600,000 for PD&R. The
Administration requested $69,700,000 for PD&R under a
restructured program content, which includes basic PD&R
programs and Section 107 programs formerly funded as set asides
within CDBG. In fiscal year 2005 $88,400,000 was provided for
these same programs. Of the amounts made available, language is
included to designate:
--$26,562,000 for basic research, of which $750,000
is directed to the National Academy of Sciences,
National Research Council for a review of HUD ongoing
research and to recommend the future of HUD's research
program. The committee is concerned that HUD's research
office has become largely a grant making organization
rather than conducting leading edge research with a
strong in house capability. The Council is directed to
provide a report to the House and Senate Committees on
Appropriations, prior to the submission of the
President's fiscal year 2007 budget request that
reviews current research priorities and makes
recommendation on a new course of research for HUD. The
Report should include specific recommendations and
should examine the elimination of an in house research
office, if the Council sees no long-term value to HUD
specific research or that HUD related research can or
should be done by other Departments.
--$29,038,000 for grants to institutions of higher
education funded under Section 107.
--$5,000,000 for the PATH program. The Committee
retains language included last year that exempts 50% of
the funds provided from competition. HUD is encouraged
to shift this program, in its entirety, including
staff, to the Office of Housing.
Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity
FAIR HOUSING ACTIVITIES
Fiscal year 2006 recommendation....................... $38,800,000
Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................ 46,128,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request....................... 38,800,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2005 appropriation.... -7,328,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2006 budget request... 0
The Fair Housing Act, title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of
1968, as amended by the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988,
prohibits discrimination in the sale, rental and financing of
housing and authorizes assistance to State and local agencies
in administering the provision of fair housing statutes. The
Fair Housing Assistance Program (FHAP) assists State and local
fair housing enforcement agencies that are certified by HUD as
``substantially equivalent'' to HUD with respect to enforcement
policies and procedures. FHAP assures prompt and effective
processing of complaints filed under title VIII that are within
the jurisdiction of State and local fair housing agencies. The
Fair Housing Initiatives Program (FHIP) alleviates housing
discrimination by providing support to private nonprofit
organizations, State and local government agencies and other
nonfederal entities for the purpose of eliminating or
preventing discrimination in housing, and to enhance fair
housing opportunities.
The Committee recommends a total of $38,800,000 for this
account, a decrease of $7,328,000 below the fiscal year 2005
enacted level and the same as the budget request.
Of this amount, $22,700,000 is for FHAP and $16,100,000 is
for FHIP.
The Committee expects HUD to continue to provide quarterly
reports on obligation and expenditure of these funds,
delineated by each program and activity.
Language is included, carried in previous years,
designating the amount available for FHIP.
Office of Lead Hazard Control
LEAD HAZARD REDUCTION
Fiscal year 2006 recommendation....................... $119,000,000
Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................ 166,656,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request....................... 119,000,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2005 appropriation.... -47,656,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2006 budget request... 0
The Lead Hazard Reduction Program, authorized under the
Housing and Community Development Act of 1992, provides grants
to State and local governments to perform lead hazard reduction
activities in housing occupied by low-income families. The
program also provides technical assistance, undertakes research
and evaluations of testing and cleanup methodologies, and
develops technical guidance and regulations in cooperation with
EPA.
The Committee recommends $119,000,000 for this account, the
same as requested. Amounts provided are to be allocated as
follows:
--$92,600,000 for the lead-based paint hazard control
grant program to provide assistance to State and local
governments and Native American tribes for lead-based
paint abatement in private low-income housing;
--$8,800,000 for Operation LEAP (Lead Elimination
Action Program), which provides competitive grants to
non-profit organizations and the private sector for
activities, which leverage funds for local lead hazard
control programs;
--$8,800,000 for technical assistance and support to
State and local agencies and private property owners.
This is an increase of $100,000 over the budget
request;
--$8,800,000 for the Healthy Homes Initiative for
competitive grants for research, standards development,
and education and outreach activities to address lead-
based paint poisoning and other housing-related
diseases and hazards;
Language is included, as requested by the Administration,
delegating the authority and responsibility for performing
environmental review for the Healthy Homes Initiative, LEAP,
and Lead Technical Studies projects and programs to
governmental entities that are familiar with local
environmental conditions, trends and priorities. This delegated
environmental review authority is currently available in the
CDBG, HOPWA, SHOP, SHP, and special projects programs.
The Committee reminds the Department that all funding
provided under this heading is to be competitively awarded as
required under the HUD Reform Act of 1989 and Section 305 under
Administrative Provisions under this title.
Management and Administration
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
2006 recommendation................................... $579,000,000
Transfers FHA/GNMA.................................... 573,535,000
Total............................................. 1,152,535,000
Fiscal Year 2005 appropriation........................ 542,800,000
Transfers............................................. 568,200,000
Fiscal Year 2006 budget request....................... 579,000,000
Transfers............................................. 573,135,000
Total........................................... 1,152,519,000
Comparison with Fiscal year 2005 appropriation;... +36,181,000
Comparison with Fiscal year 2005 budget request;.. +16,000
A single appropriation has been provided to finance all
salaries and related costs associated with administering the
programs of the Department of Housing and Urban Development,
except the Office of Inspector General and the Office of
Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight. These activities include
housing, mortgage credit and secondary market programs
community planning and development programs, departmental
management, legal services, and field direction and
administration.
The Committee recommends total funding of $1,152,100,000
for the salaries and expenses of the Department, the same level
requested.
The committee has provided funding based for the
Department's requested level of FTEs and object classes. The
Department is limited to the object class levels that are
described in the 2006 Congressional Budget Submission (page I-
4.) This is the distribution that HUD must use unless changes
are granted as part of the Department's Operating Plan.
Language is included to allow the department to transfer up
to $15,000,000 from the S&E Account to the Working Capital Fund
after receipt and approval of an Operating Plan change
detailing the uses of the transfers and the object classes
being reduced in this account.
However, the Committee notes that the disparity between the
true workload number as defined by the REAP process and the
number of FTEs requested suggests that the workload model is
not much more than a theoretical construct adhered to in the
abstract rather than in practice. More importantly, the REAP
process is forcing the allocation of FTEs to be prorated across
program areas and administrative offices alike in order to meet
the ceiling established by the funding. This is not a
successful long term staffing plan. Therefore, the Committee is
instructing the department to seek outside expertise to study
alternatives and develop a new long-range staffing plan that
will significantly reduce or offload overhead and
administrative functions, activities and offices in order to
preserve or increase the allocation of FTEs in program offices
that deliver or oversee Congressionally mandated and funded
programs. This new staffing plan should be submitted to the
Committee no later than August 1, 2005.
To better manage and facilitate the allocation of resources
to field offices, language is included instructing the
department to change the mechanism by which field offices are
provided funds for activities in the object classes for
supplies. Funding included for indemnities is at the requested
level but is further limited to non-programmatic litigation and
is limited to the payment of attorney fees only. Program-
related litigation must be paid for from the individual program
office Salary and Expenses allocation. Beginning in fiscal year
2007 the Congressional submission must include program-related
litigation costs as a separate line item request.
Operating Plans/Reprogramming Requirements.--All
Departments within the Subcommittee's jurisdiction are required
to submit operating plans and reprogramming letters and
reorganization proposals for Committee approval. HUD is
reminded that operating plans or reprogramming requirements
apply to any reallocation of resources totaling more than
$500,000 among any program, project or activity as well as to
any significant reorganization within offices or the proposed
creation or elimination of any program or office, regardless of
the dollar amount involved; and any reorganization, regardless
of the dollar amount involved. Object classification changes
above $500,000 also are subject to operating plan or
reprogramming requirements. Unless otherwise specified in this
Act or the accompanying report, the approved level for any
program, project, or activity is that amount detailed for that
program, project, or activity in the Department's annual
detailed Congressional submission. These requirements apply to
all funds provided to the Department. The Department is
expected to make any necessary changes during fiscal year 2006
to its current procedures and systems to ensure that it is able
to meet the necessary operating plan and reprogramming
requirements applied to other agencies funded in the bill.
Budget Submission--. The Committee expects the Department's
fiscal year 2007 submission to be submitted in the identical
format and continues its direction that strategic planning
documents, formats or materials are not to be incorporated into
the submission. Language has been continued under
Administrative Provisions, carried since fiscal year 2004,
setting forth such requirements.
Language is included in the bill, similar to language
carried in prior Acts, which designates amounts provided from
various accounts for salaries and expenses and which requires
the department to implement appropriate funds control and
financial management procedures. Language carried in previous
years regarding limitations on certain positions at the
department is deleted as proposed in the budget.
Working Capital Fund
Fiscal year 2006 recommendation....................... $165,000,000
Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................ 267,840,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request....................... 265,000,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2005 appropriation.... -102,840,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2006 budget request... -100,000,000
The Working Capital Fund was established pursuant to 42
U.S.C. 3535 to provide necessary capital for the development
of, modifications to, and infrastructure for Department-wide
information technology systems, and for the continuing
operation of both Department-wide and program-specific
information technology systems.
The Committee recommends $165,000,000 in direct
appropriation for the Working Capital Fund to support
Department-wide information technology system activities, a
reduction of $102,840,000 below the fiscal year 2005 level and
$100,000,000 below the request. In addition to the direct
appropriation for Department-wide systems, funds are
transferred from various accounts to be used exclusively for
program-specific information technology requirements.
The Committee has included language that precludes the use
of these or any other funds appropriated previously to the WCF
or program offices for transfer to the WCF that would be used
or transferred to any other entity in HUD or elsewhere for the
purposes of implementing Administration's ``e-Gov'' initiative
without the Committee's approval in HUD's operating plan. The
Committee is on record that funds appropriated for specific
projects and activities should not be reduced or eliminated in
order to fund other activities inside and outside of HUD
without the expressed approval of the Committee. HUD is not to
contribute or participate in activities that were specifically
precluded in legislation, unless the Committee agrees to a
change.
The Committee has reduced funding from the request because
the request was submitted before the successful resolution of
the Department's HITS contract dispute. Hence the budget
request, which assumed that the dispute would continue, is no
longer applicable. Full funding for the new contract has been
included based on HUD's latest estimate of the final contract's
costs.
The Committee remains committed to improving HUD's
information technology capacity. To a large extent, both HUD's
and Congress' ability to oversee the effectiveness of HUD's
programs is undermined due to the failure of HUD's information
systems to provide the information necessary to assess program
performance and ensure effective resource management. The
Committee continues to have concerns regarding the Department's
progress in implementing several of its major information
technology projects. The Department is directed to provide an
updated five-year IT plan consistent with such format no later
than November 15, 2005. In addition, the Department is directed
to submit to the Committee no later than September 15, 2005 a
report on updating the status of, funds spent to date, and
estimated fiscal year 2005 funding requirements for the
following major projects: PIH Information Center (PIC), FHA
Subsidiary Ledger, HUD Integrated Financial Management
Improvement Project (HIFMIP), and the Single Family Integration
System. Such report shall include a comparison to the
information submitted to the Committee on November 15, 2005.
Office of Inspector General
(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriation FHA funds Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2006 recommendation........................... $79,000,000 $24,000,000 $103,000,000
Fiscal year 2005 appropriation............................ 79,360,000 24,000,000 103,360,000
Fiscal year 2006 request.................................. 79,000,000 24,000,000 103,000,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2005 appropriation........ -300,000 0 -360,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2006 budget request....... 0 0 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Office of Inspector General provides agency-wide audit
and investigative functions to identify and correct management
and administrative deficiencies that create conditions for
existing or potential instances of fraud, waste and
mismanagement. The audit function provides internal audit,
contract audit, and inspection services. Contract audits
provide professional advice to agency contracting officials on
accounting and financial matters relative to negotiation,
award, administration, re-pricing and settlement of contracts.
Internal audits evaluate all facets of agency operations.
Inspection services provide detailed technical evaluations of
agency operations. The investigative function provides for the
detection and investigation of improper and illegal activities
involving programs, personnel and operations.
The Committee recommends $103,000,000 for the Office of
Inspector General, a decrease of $360,000 below the amount
provided in fiscal year 2005 and the same as the budget
request. Of this amount, $24,000,000 is derived from transfers
from FHA funds.
Language is included in the bill, similar to language
carried in prior Acts, which: (1) designates amounts available
to the Inspector General from other accounts; and (2) clarifies
the authority of the Inspector General with respect to certain
personnel issues.
The Committee has become aware that the IG has advocated
forcing HUD to rescind obligated balances for project based
contracts that have already received appropriations and which
are obligated on live contracts. The Committee is strongly
opposed to the rescission of funds that may still be needed in
the future and which, if enacted, could force the Committee to
appropriate funds a second time.
This situation has now occurred in the Section 236 program
with amounts rescinded in fiscal year 2005 declared in excess
only to have appropriations required in fiscal year 2006. The
IG is instructed to identify, in any audit or non-audit related
decision, recommendation or conclusion that refers to excess
funds available for rescission, those funds, which are
obligated on live contracts. Further the IG is to include in
its operating plan any proposed evaluation of live programs,
contracts or projects instituted for the purpose of identifying
excess funds for rescission.
The Committee also recommends language that precludes the
audit of GNMA on any terms and conditions other than those
currently in effect, and which have been in effect for years.
GNMA does not belong under credit reform rules and has never
been subjected to those rules in any previous audit.
The Committee directs the IG to increase its audits and
investigative efforts related to Public Housing Agencies'
administration of the Section 8 voucher program. The Committee
requests that the IG provide a work plan for these activities
no later than January 1, 2006.
office of federal housing enterprise oversight salaries and expenses
(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
Fiscal year 2006 recommendation...................... $60,000,000
Fiscal year 2005 appropriation....................... 58,735,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request...................... 60,000,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2005 appropriation... +1,265,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2005 budget request.. 0
The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO)
was established in 1992 to regulate the financial safety and
soundness of the two housing government-sponsored enterprises
(GSEs)--the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae)
and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac).
The office was authorized in the Federal Housing Enterprises
Financial Safety and Soundness Act of 1992, which also provided
the regulator enhanced authority to enforce these standards. In
addition to financial regulation, the OFHEO monitors the GSEs
compliance with affordable housing goals that were contained in
the Act.
The Committee recommends a total of $60,000,000 for OFHEO,
as requested and to be derived from fees assessed to the GSEs
and deposited into the Federal Housing Enterprises Oversight
Fund.
OFHEO received an additional $5 million in 2005
supplemental funds, which will be available to augment the 2006
appropriation.
Administrative Provisions
The bill contains a number of administrative provisions.
Section 301 relates to the division of financing adjustment
factors, as requested.
Section 302 prohibits available funds from being used to
investigate or prosecute lawful activities under the Fair
Housing Act, which was proposed for deletion.
Section 303 continues language to correct an anomaly in the
HOPWA formula that results in the loss of funds for certain
States.
Section 304 authorizes the Secretary to waive certain
requirements related to an assisted living pilot project, as
requested.
Section 305 continues language requiring funds appropriated
to be distributed on a competitive basis in accordance with the
Department of Housing and Urban Development Reform Act of 1989.
Section 306 continues language, carried in previous years,
regarding the availability of funds subject to the Government
Corporation Control Act and the Housing Act of 1950.
Section 307 continues language, carried in previous years,
regarding allocation of funds in excess of the budget
estimates.
Section 308 continues language, carried in previous years,
regarding the expenditure of funds for corporations and
agencies subject to the Government Corporation Control Act.
Section 309 continues language, carried in previous years,
requiring submission of a spending plan for technical
assistance, training and management improvement activities
prior to the expenditure of funds.
Section 310 continues language requiring the Secretary to
provide quarterly reports on uncommitted, unobligated and
excess funds in each departmental program and activity.
Section 311 continues language requiring the Secretary to
maintain Section 8 assistance on certain properties occupied by
elderly or disabled families.
Section 312 extends a technical amendment included in the
fiscal year 2000 Appropriations Act relating to the allocation
of HOPWA funds in the Philadelphia and Raleigh-Cary
metropolitan areas. A proviso is added to allow a state to
administer the HOPWA program in the event that a local
government is unable to undertake the HOPWA grants management
functions.
Section 313 continues language allowing the Secretary to
maintain and dispose of certain elderly and disabled projects
upon foreclosure.
Section 314 continues language requiring HUD to report on
voucher utilization and costs.
Section 315 continues language setting certain requirements
for the Department's annual congressional justification of
appropriations.
Section 316 continues language carried in previous years
elsewhere in this title requiring public housing authorities to
continue to reserve incremental vouchers funded in previous
years for persons with disabilities upon turnover.
Section 316 clarifies an equitable title issue for the
Section 202 program.
Section 317 relates to state authority regarding
participation on housing boards.
Section 318 continues language in previous acts specifying
the allocation of Indian Block grants to Native Alaskan
recipients.
Section 319 requires that the 2005 audit of the National
Mortgage Association continue in its current business-oriented
format.
Section 320 includes language to clarify the use of
mortgage insurance with respect to health care facilities.
Section 321 requires that the holders of mortgages in the
Section 236 program submit invoices electronically.
Section 322. The new definition of nonprofit organization
was enacted on December 27, 2000. The amendment clarifies that
the projects selected by HUD for Section 202b assistance prior
to December 1, 2003 are also be eligible to use the limited
partnership ownership structure. No more than three commercial
properties are authorized to receive grants under section 202b
of the Housing Act of 1959.
The Committee does not recommend several new administrative
provisions requested in the budget to amend various housing
authorization statutes.
TITLE IV--THE JUDICIARY
The funds recommended by the Committee in Title IV of the
accompanying bill are for the operation and maintenance of
United States Courts and include the salaries of judges,
magistrates, probation and pretrial services officers, and
supporting personnel and other expenses of the Federal
Judiciary.
In addition to direct appropriations, the Judiciary
collects fees and has various carryover authorities. The
Judiciary uses these non-appropriated funds to offset its
direct appropriation requirements. Consistent with prior year
practices, the Committee expects the Judiciary to submit a
financial plan, allocating all sources of available funds
including appropriations, fee collections, and carryover
balances. The Judiciary should consider this financial plan to
be the baseline for determining if reprogramming notification
is required. The Committee expects the plan to be submitted
within 45 days after enactment of this Act.
Supreme Court of the United States
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $57,372,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 60,730,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 60,730,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +3,358,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. ................
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $60,730,000
for fiscal year 2005 for the salaries and expenses of personnel
and the cost of operating the Supreme Court, excluding the care
of the building and grounds. The recommendation is $3,358,000
above the fiscal year 2005 level and is the same as the request
for this account. The recommendation provides inflationary and
other standard adjustments and supports additional security
staff to support operations of the Court. The Committee expects
this funding will be more than sufficient to provide for
security needs for the foreseeable future.
The Committee has included bill language making $2,000,000
available until expended for the purpose of making information
technology investments. The Committee directs the Supreme Court
to provide an annual report, to be included in its budget
justification materials, showing information technology carry-
over balances and describing each expenditure made in the
previous fiscal year.
As noted in the fiscal year 2005 and 2006 budget hearings
for the Supreme Court, the Committee wants to ensure that the
public is provided sufficient insight into the Supreme Court's
operations. The Committee commends the Supreme Court and the
American Bar Association for posting transcripts of proceedings
and certain briefs on the Internet.
Care of the Building and Grounds
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $9,846,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 5,624,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 5,624,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... -4,222,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. ................
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $5,624,000 for
fiscal year 2006 for personnel and other services relating to
the Supreme Court building and grounds, which is supervised by
the Architect of the Capitol (AoC). The recommendation is the
same as the request and $4,222,000 below the fiscal year 2005
level. The Committee appreciates the restraint the Supreme
Court has shown in adhering to its construction budget and
schedule, and urges the Supreme Court and the AoC to remain
diligent in their efforts to control the costs of the project.
However, if any changes to the scope of the original project
are made, the Committee expects to be informed. Language in the
bill allows funds to remain available until expended.
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $21,520,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 26,462,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 24,613,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +3,350,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. -1,849,000
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $24,613,000
for fiscal year 2006 for the salaries and expenses of the
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The
recommendation is $3,350,000 above the fiscal year 2005
appropriation and $1,849,000 below the request.
The recommendation includes funding for inflationary
adjustments and increased contractual costs for Court Security
Officers. The Committee denies funding for all requested
program increases.
United States Court of International Trade
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $14,713,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 15,480,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 15,480,000
Bill compared with: ................
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +767,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. ................
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $15,480,000
for fiscal year 2006 for the salaries and expenses of the
United States Court of International Trade. The Committee
recommendation is the same as the budget request and $767,000
above the fiscal year 2005 level.
Courts of Appeals, District Courts, and Other Judicial Services
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................ $4,125,321,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006............... 4,460,939,000
Recommended in the bill........................ 4,348,780,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005............ +223,459,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006........... -112,159,000
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,348,780,000
for the operations of the regional courts of appeals, district
courts, bankruptcy courts, the Court of Federal Claims, and
probation and pretrial services offices. The recommendation is
$112,159,000 below the request and $223,459,000 above the
fiscal year 2005 appropriation.
The Committee understands that the Judiciary's staffing,
operations and maintenance, and information technology
resources are allocated to the courts according to formulas
used to equitably distribute resources based on the actual
workload of each district. The Committee believes this is the
optimal method of making such allocations and expects the
Judiciary to continue to allocate its resources using the
formulas approved by the Judicial Conference. The Committee
also expects the Administrative Office to periodically update
the formulas to ensure their accuracy.
vaccine injury compensation trust fund
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $3,254,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 3,833,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 3,833,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +579,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. ................
The Committee recommends a reimbursement of $3,833,000 for
fiscal year 2006 from the Special Fund to cover expenses of the
Claims Court associated with processing cases under the
National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986. This amount is
$579,000 above the amount available in fiscal year 2005 and
equal to the request.
DEFENDER SERVICES
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $667,351,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 768,064,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 721,919,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +54,568,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. -46,145,000
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $721,919,000
for fiscal year 2006. The recommendation is $54,568,000 above
the fiscal year 2005 level and $46,145,000 below the request.
This account provides funding for the operation of the
Federal Public Defender and Community Defender organizations
and for compensation and reimbursement of expenses of panel
attorneys appointed pursuant to the Criminal Justice Act (CJA)
for representation in criminal cases.
FEES OF JURORS AND COMMISSIONERS
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $60,713,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 71,318,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 60,053,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... -660,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. -11,265,000
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $60,053,000
for payments to jurors, which is $660,000 below the fiscal year
2005 level and $11,265,000 below the request. The Committee
does not provide the $10,000,000 requested for payments to
jurors for cases related to the recent Supreme Court Booker/
Fanfan decision based on reports from the Judiciary that these
funds are not needed.
COURT SECURITY
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $327,565,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 389,626,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 379,461,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +51,896,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. -10,165,000
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $379,461,000
for Court Security for fiscal year 2006 to provide for
necessary expenses of security and protective services for the
United States Courts in courtrooms and adjacent areas. This is
an increase of $51,896,000 above the fiscal year 2005 level and
$10,165,000 below the request. The Committee has made this
reduction in consultation with the Judiciary, which has
indicated costs for court security officers will be less than
originally anticipated.
The recommendation provides for inflationary increases, for
additional equipment and security systems, and for new contract
court security officers. The recommendation also funds the
program increase for additional staff to assist the USMS in
managing the judicial facility security program as well as home
security programs for Federal judges.
Bill language is included allowing up to $15,000,000 to
remain available until expended.
Administrative Office of the United States Courts
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $67,289,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 72,198,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 70,262,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +2,973,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. -1,936,000
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $70,262,000
for the salaries and expenses of the Administrative Office of
the United States Courts (AO), which is $2,973,000 above the
fiscal year 2005 level and $1,936,000 below the request.
The AO provides administrative and management support to
the United States Courts, including the probation and
bankruptcy systems. It also supports the Judicial Conference of
the United States in determining Judiciary policies, developing
methods to allow the courts to conduct business efficiently and
economically, and enhancing the use of information technology
in the courts.
Federal Judicial Center
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $21,447,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 22,876,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 22,249,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +802,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. -627,000
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $22,249,000
for the salaries and expenses of the Federal Judicial Center
for fiscal year 2006, which is $802,000 above the fiscal year
2005 level and $627,000 below the request.
The Center improves the management of Federal judicial
dockets and court administration through education for judges
and staff, and research, evaluation, and planning assistance
for the courts and the Judicial Conference.
Judicial Retirement Funds
PAYMENT TO JUDICIARY TRUST FUNDS
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $36,700,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 40,600,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 40,600,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +3,900,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. ................
The Committee provides $40,600,000 for payments to the
Judicial Officers' Retirement Fund, the Judicial Survivors'
Annuities Fund, and the Claims Court Judges Retirement Fund for
fiscal year 2006. This amount is the same as the budget request
and $3,900,000 above the fiscal year 2005 level. These payments
are considered mandatory for budget scorekeeping purposes.
These funds cover the estimated annuity payments to be made
to retired bankruptcy judges, magistrate judges, Claims Court
judges, and spouses and dependent children of deceased judicial
officers.
United States Sentencing Commission
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $13,126,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 14,700,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 14,046,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +920,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. -654,000
The Committee recommends $14,046,000 for the salaries and
expenses of the United States Sentencing Commission for fiscal
year 2006, which is $920,000 above the fiscal year 2005
appropriation and $654,000 below the request.
The purpose of the Commission is to establish, review, and
revise sentencing guidelines, policies, and practices for the
Federal criminal justice system. The Commission is also
required to monitor the operation of the guidelines and to
identify and report necessary changes to the Congress.
Administrative Provisions--The Judiciary
Sec. 401. The Committee continues language to permit funds
in the bill for salaries and expenses for the Judiciary to be
available for employment of experts and consultant services as
authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109.
Sec. 402. The Committee continues language that permits up
to 5 percent of any appropriation made available for fiscal
year 2006 to be transferred between Judiciary appropriations
accounts provided that no appropriation shall be decreased by
more than 5 percent or increased by more than 10 percent by any
such transfer except in certain circumstances. In addition, the
language provides that any such transfer shall be treated as a
reprogramming of funds under section 810 of the accompanying
bill and shall not be available for obligation or expenditure
except in compliance with the procedures set forth in that
section.
Sec. 403. The Committee continues language authorizing not
to exceed $11,000 to be used for official reception and
representation expenses incurred by the Judicial Conference of
the United States.
TITLE V--DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Federal Payments
Federal Payment for Resident Tuition Support
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $25,359,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 33,200,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 33,200,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +7,805,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. ................
The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $33,200,000
for the resident tuition support program, $7,805,000 above the
fiscal year 2005 appropriation and the same as the budget
request. These funds are to be used on behalf of eligible
District of Columbia residents to pay an amount based upon the
difference between in-State and out-of-State tuition at
eligible public and private institutions of higher education.
The program was created by the District of Columbia College
Access Act of 1999 to provide District college-bound students
the opportunity to expand their higher education choices. The
program receives its funding through a Federal appropriation
which is deposited into a dedicated account under the control
of the District of Columbia Chief Financial Officer.
Federal Payment for Emergency Planning and Security Costs
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $14,880,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 15,000,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 15,000,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +120,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. ................
The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $15,000,000
for emergency planning and security costs, $120,000 above the
fiscal year 2005 appropriation and the same as the President's
request. These funds are for emergency planning and security
costs related to the presence of the Federal government in the
District of Columbia and surrounding jurisdictions.
Federal Payment to the District of Columbia Courts
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $189,274,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 221,693,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 221,693,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +32,419,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. ................
The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $221,693,000
for operation of District of Columbia Courts, including the
Family Court, $32,419,000 above the fiscal year 2005
appropriation and the same as the President's request. This
amount includes $9,198,000 for the Court of Appeals,
$87,342,000 for the Superior Court, $41,643,000 for the Court
System, and $83,510,000 for capital improvements to courthouse
facilities.
Defender Services in the District of Columbia Courts
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $38,192,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 45,000,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 45,000,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +6,808,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. ................
The Committee recommends $45,000,000 for Defender Services
in District of Columbia Courts, $6,808,000 above the fiscal
year 2005 appropriation and the same as the President's
request. These funds provide payment for counsel appointed in
proceedings in the Family Court of the Superior Court and under
the District of Columbia Guardianship, Protective Proceedings,
and Durable Power of Attorney Act of 1986.
Federal Payment to the Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency
for the District of Columbia
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $178,560,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 203,388,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 203,388,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +24,828,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. ................
The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $178,560,000
for the Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency (CSOSA)
and the Public Defender Service for the District of Columbia,
$24,828,000 above the fiscal year 2005 appropriation and the
same as the President's request.
Federal Payment to the District of Columbia Water and Sewer Authority
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $4,762,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... ................
Recommended in the bill............................... 10,000,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +5,238,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. +10,000,000
The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $10,000,000
to the District of Columbia Water and Sewer Authority (WASA),
$5,238,000 above the fiscal year 2005 appropriation and over
the President's request. These funds are to continue
implementation of the Combined Sewer Overflow Long-Term Plan
and are to be matched 100 percent by WASA.
The District's combined sewer system was designed and
constructed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in the late
1800's and serves about a third of the District. The capacity
of the system is exceeded during storms with the excess flow
being discharged to the Anacostia and Potomac Rivers, Rock
Creek, and tributary waters. WASA has developed a long-term
plan to control these overflows and improve the water quality
of the rivers. The plan is estimated to cost $1.3 billion and
take between 15 to 40 years to complete depending on how much
Federal assistance is obtained. While the Committee is
supportive of the project and is providing funding for it in
the bill, the Committee does not have the resources to provide
the level of funding WASA is seeking from the Federal
government. Therefore, the Committee strongly encourages WASA
to pursue other sources of public and private funding.
Federal Payment for the Anacostia Waterfront Initiative
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $2,976,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 5,000,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 5,000,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +2,024,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. ................
The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $5,000,000
for the Anacostia Waterfront Initiative, $2,024,000 over the
fiscal year 2005 appropriation and the same as the President's
request. These funds are for the design and construction of a
continuous pedestrian and bicycle trail system from the Potomac
River to the District's border with Maryland.
The Anacostia Waterfront Initiative is a multi-year, multi-
project initiative to revitalize the Anacostia River and its
waterfront communities. The design and construction of a
continuous pedestrian and bicycle trail system from the Potomac
River to the District's border with Maryland is one such
project. The Committee provides $5,000,000 to continue
construction in fiscal year 2006.
Federal Payment to the Criminal Justice Coordinating Council
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $1,290,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 1,300,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 1,300,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +10,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. ................
The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $1,300,000 to
the Criminal Justice Coordinating Council, $10,000 above the
fiscal year 2005 appropriation and the same as the President's
request. These funds are to support initiatives related to the
coordination of Federal and local criminal justice resources in
the District of Columbia.
The Committee recognizes the Criminal Justice Coordinating
Council (CJCC) as an important agency within the law
enforcement and criminal justice community in the District of
Columbia. Federal and local agencies are expected to
demonstrate accountability on the initiatives undertaken each
year to improve public safety in the city. To this end, we
request the CJCC collect and analyze data that measures
progress made on the individual CJCC initiatives and to include
these measures in the annual report.
Federal Payment to the Office of Chief Financial Officer of the
District of Columbia
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $32,240,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... ................
Recommended in the bill............................... 20,000,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... -12,240,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. +20,000,000
The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $20,000,000
for the Chief Financial Officer of the District of Columbia,
$12,240,000 below the fiscal year 2005 appropriation and
$20,000,000 above the President's request. These funds are for
education, public safety, health, economic development, and
infrastructure initiatives in the District of Columbia.
Federal Payment for School Improvement
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $39,680,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 41,616,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 41,616,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... $1,936,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. ................
Committee Recommendation
The Committee recommends $41,616,000 for the Federal
payment for school improvement, $1,936,000 above fiscal year
2005 and the same as the budget request. These funds are
allocated as follows: $13,525,000 to improve public school
education in the District of Columbia, and $14,566,000 to the
Secretary of Education for opportunity scholarships for low-
income children in the District of Columbia, of which
$1,000,000 is for administrative expenses.
Federal Payment for Bioterrorism and Forensics Laboratory
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $7,936,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 7,200,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 7,200,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +736,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. ................
The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $7,200,000
for costs associated with the continued construction of a
bioterrorism and forensics laboratory in the District of
Columbia, the same funding level as the budget request and
$736,000 below the fiscal year 2005 appropriation. The Federal
payment is contingent upon the District providing $1,500,000 in
local funds for this project.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA FUNDS
The Committee recommends a total of $8,700,158,000 for the
operating expenses of the District of Columbia as contained in
the fiscal year 2006 proposed budget and financial plan
submitted to the Congress by the Government of the District of
Columbia on June 6, 2005. Of the total, $5,007,344,000 is from
local funds, $1,921,287,000 is from Federal grant funds,
$1,754,399,000 is from other funds, $17,129,000 is from private
funds, and $163,116,000 is from prior year funds. The Committee
directs that any changes to the financial plan as submitted by
the District must follow the reprogramming guidelines.
The Committee has included two administrative provisions
that would allow the mayor, upon certification by the chief
financial officer, to expend local and other funds of the
District not identified in this bill should there be an
unanticipated growth in revenue. The additional funds are
subject to the administrative provisions of this title and the
normal reprogramming procedures contained in section 505 of
this title. The Committee makes this recommendation based on
the leadership and efforts of the past control boards, the
mayor, and the chief financial officer, with the cooperation of
the city council to bring about financial reform to the
District. The Committee is optimistic that the District's
leadership will continue on the course of building financial
growth and soundness. The Committee will revisit these
provisions in consideration of the fiscal year 2007 bill.
Should the District government fail to adhere to the
notification and reprogramming requirements, or fail to create
and implement a plan to address the dire state of DC's capital
infrastructure, or the cost of services rise without reason,
the Committee will not consider favorably the continuation of
the provisions.
With the expanded authority to use District funds, the
Committee expects the District government to first and foremost
address capital infrastructure needs.
The following tables detail the revenue and expenses plans
of the District for fiscal year 2006:
The Committee is concerned about the number of erroneous
parking violation citations from the District of Columbia. In
many of these instances the vehicles owned by non-District
residents do not match the vehicles described in the citations.
Many times, when non-District residents have attempted to
resolve the issue, often by providing a notarized affidavit
that their vehicle does not match the description on the Notice
of Unsatisfied Parking Ticket, they have serious difficulty
navigating the District's appeal process and are eventually
still found responsible for the erroneous charge. Within 120
days of enactment of this Act, the District of Columbia is
instructed to file a written report with the Committee
detailing a plan to improve the process through which these
appeals are resolved and a plan to improve the ticket issuing
process so that the frequency of these errors is decreased.
ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS
Section 501. The Committee continues the provision that
specifies that an appropriation for a particular purpose or
object shall be considered as the maximum amount that may be
expended for said purpose or object.
Section 502. The Committee continues the provision that
permits funds for travel and payment of dues.
Section 503. The Committee continues the provision that
appropriates funds for refunding overpayments of taxes
collected and for paying settlements and judgments against the
District of Columbia government.
Section 504. The Committee continues the provision that
prohibits the use of appropriation for publicity or propaganda
purposes.
Section 505. The Committee continues the provision that
establishes reprogramming and transfer requirements.
Section 506. The Committee continues the provision that
prohibits use of funds only to the objects for which the
appropriations were made.
Section 507. The Committee continues the provision that
clarifies the pay setting authority for District employees as
the District's Merit Personnel Act rather than title 5 of the
United States Code.
Section 508. The Committee continues the provision that
directs the Mayor of the District of Columbia to submit new
fiscal year 2006 revenue estimates as of the end of such
quarter.
Section 509. The Committee continues the provision that
prohibits the District government from renewing or extending
sole source contracts without opening them to the competitive
bidding process as set forth in section 303 of the District of
Columbia Procurement Practices Act of 1985.
Section 510. The Committee continues the provision that
prohibits the use of Federal funds for salaries, expenses, or
other costs associated with the offices of U.S. Senator or
Representative under section 4(d) of the D.C. Statehood
Constitutional Convention Initiatives of 1979.
Section 511. The Committee continues the provision that
prohibits Federal funds made available in this Act from being
used to implement or enforce any system of registration for
unmarried cohabitating couples.
Section 512. The Committee continues the provision that
allows the mayor to accept, obligate, and expend Federal,
private, and other grants received by the District government
that are not reflected in the amounts appropriated in this Act.
Section 513. The Committee continues the provision that
restricts the use of official vehicles to official duties and
not between a residence and workplace, except in the case of a
police officer who resides in the District of Columbia at the
discretion of the Chief, an officer or employee of the D.C.
Fire and Emergency Medical Services Department who resides in
the District of Columbia and is on call 24 hours a day, the
Mayor of the District of Columbia, and the Chairman of the
Council of the District of Columbia.
Section 514. The Committee continues the provision that
prohibits the use of funds for the audit of the District
government's annual financial statements unless the DC
Inspector General either conducts, or contracts for, the audit.
Section 515. The Committee continues the provision that
prohibits the use of appropriated funds by the Corporation
Counsel or any other officer or entity of the District
government to provide assistance for any petition drive or
civil action which seeks to require Congress to provide for
voting representation in Congress for the District of Columbia.
Section 516. The Committee continues the provision that
prohibits the use of any funds in this Act to carry out any
program of distributing sterile needles or syringes for the
hypodermic injection of any illegal drug.
Section 517. The Committee continues the provision that
requires the Chief Financial Officers of the District of
Columbia to certify that they understand the duties and
restrictions applicable to their agency as a result of this
Act.
Section 518. The Committee continues the provision that
includes a ``conscience clause'' on legislation that pertains
to contraceptive coverage by health insurance plans.
Section 519. The Committee continues the provision that
requires the Mayor of the District of Columbia to submit
quarterly reports on various issues pertaining to the District
of Columbia.
Section 520. The Committee continues the provision that
requires the CFO to submit a revised appropriated funds
operating budget in the format of the budget that the District
government submitted pursuant to section 442 of the DC Home
Rule Act for all agencies no later than 30 calendar days after
the date of enactment of this Act.
Section 521. The Committee continues the provision that
prohibits the transfer of Federal funds to any department,
agency, or instrumentality of the U.S. government, except
pursuant to a transfer made by, or transfer authority provided
in, this or any other appropriation Act.
Section 522. The Committee continues the provision that
requires the District of Columbia Courts to transfer all fines
levied and collected by the Courts in cases charging Driving
Under the Influence and Driving While Impaired to the general
treasury of the District of Columbia to remain available until
expended and used by the Office of the Corporation Counsel for
enforcement and prosecution of District traffic alcohol laws.
Section 523. The Committee continues the provision that
prohibits the use of any funds in the Act to: (1) pay the fees
of an attorney who represents a party in an action or any
attorney who defends any action, including an administrative
proceeding, brought against D.C. Public Schools under the
Individuals With Disabilities Act (IDEA) in excess of $4,000
for that action; (2) pay the fees of an attorney or firm whom
the CFO determines to have a pecuniary interest, either through
an attorney, officer or employee of the firm, in any special
education diagnostic services, schools, or other special
education service providers; and (3) require all savings to be
used to expand special education services within the District.
Section 524. The Committee continues the provision that
requires attorneys in special education cases brought under
IDEA to comply with several reporting requirements and allow
the Inspector General to conduct investigations to determine
the accuracy of the certifications.
Section 525. The Committee continues the provision that
allows for appropriations in this Act to be increased by no
more than $42,000,000 from unexpended general funds, and may be
used only for one-time expenditures, to avoid deficit spending,
for debt reduction, for program needs, or to avoid revenue
shortfalls.
Section 526. The Committee recommends a new provision that
makes a technical correction under the heading of ``Federal
Payment for School Improvement'' in Public Law 108-355 (118
Stat. 1327).
Section 527. The Committee recommends a new provision that
allows for the obligation of additional ``Other Funds'' and
``Local Funds'' under certain circumstances.
Section 528. The Committee recommends a new provision that
allows for short-term borrowing from the emergency and
contingency reserve funds established under section 450A of the
District of Columbia Home Rule Act (Public Law 98-198; D.C.
Official Code, sec. 1-204.50a) under certain circumstances.
Section 529. The Committee continues the provision that
maintains funding for the District of Columbia Inspector
General.
Section 530. The Committee continues the provision
prohibiting funds to change the legality of marijuana use.
Section 531. The Committee continues the provision relating
to abortion.
The Committee has not included a proposed provision
allowing the District to implement activities to improve tax
collections. While the Committee supports strongly any efforts
by the District to collect properly and account for taxes owed,
there was not adequate time to evaluate such a proposal prior
to consideration of this bill. The Committee directs the mayor
to submit a report by October 1, 2005 providing the details of
such an initiative, the amount of additional revenue collected,
and the costs associated with any initiative. The Committee
encourages the District to consider activities that would yield
a greater return on the investment than as proposed in the
provision.
TITLE VI--EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT AND FUNDS APPROPRIATED TO
THE PRESIDENT
These funds provide for the compensation of the President
as well as official expenses of the Executive Office of the
President, as authorized by title 3, United States Code.
Compensation of the President
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $450,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006 \1\.................. 450,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 450,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... 0
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. 0
\1\ Proposed in a consolidated appropriation titled ``The White House''.
These funds provide for the compensation of the President,
including an expense allowance as authorized by 3 U.S.C. 102.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $450,000 for
Compensation of the President, including an expense allowance
of $50,000. These are the same as amounts as appropriated in
fiscal year 2005 and the same as requested by the President.
The bill specifies that none of the funds for official expenses
shall be considered as taxable to the President, and any unused
amount shall revert to the Treasury consistent with 31 U.S.C.
1552.
White House Office
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriation, fiscal year 2006....................... $61,504,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006 \1\.................. 53,830,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 53,830,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... -8,424,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. 0
\1\ Proposed in a consolidated appropriation titled ``The White House''.
The Salaries and Expenses account of the White House Office
supports staff and administrative services necessary for the
direct support of the President, including costs for the
Homeland Security Council.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $53,830,000
for the White House Office, the same as in the Administration's
request. This account also includes $750,000 for the Privacy
and Civil Liberties Oversight Board, newly established within
the White House Office. The Committee's recommendation
transfers funding for the White House Communications Agency to
the Department of Defense's Defense Information Agency.
Executive Residence at the White House
OPERATING EXPENSES
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $12,658,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006 \1\.................. 12,436,000
Recommended in the bill;.............................. 12,436,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... -222,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. 0
\1\ Proposed in a consolidated appropriation titled ``The White House''.
These funds provide for the care, maintenance, and
operation of the Executive Residence, including official and
ceremonial functions of the President.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $12,436,000
for the operating expenses of the Executive Residence, a
decrease of $222,000 from the amounts appropriated in fiscal
year 2005 and the same as the amounts requested by the
President. The bill includes the same restrictions on
reimbursable expenses for use of the Executive Residence as
were enacted in fiscal year 2005.
White House Repair and Restoration
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $1,885,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006 \1\.................. 1,700,000
Recommended in the bill;.............................. 1,700,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... -185,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. 0
\1\ Proposed in a consolidated appropriation titled ``The White House''.
To provide for the repair, alteration, and improvement of
the Executive Residence at the White House, a separate account
was established in fiscal year 1996 to program and track
expenditures for capital improvement projects at the Executive
Residence at the White House.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,700,000 for
White House Repair and Restoration, a decrease of $185,000
below the amount enacted in fiscal year 2005 and the same as
the amount requested by the President.
Council of Economic Advisers
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $4,008,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006 \1\.................. 4,040,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 4,040,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +32,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. 0
\1\ Proposed in a consolidated appropriation titled ``The White House''.
The Council of Economic Advisers analyzes the national
economy and its various segments, advises the President on
economic developments, recommends policies for economic growth
and stability, appraises economic programs and policies of the
Federal Government, and assists in preparation of the annual
Economic Report of the President to Congress.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,040,000 for
the Council of Economic Advisers, an increase of $32,000 from
the amount enacted in fiscal year 2005 and the same as
requested by the President. The Committee continues the CEA
rental costs as part of the Enterprise Services activity in the
Office of Administration.
Office of Policy Development
Salaries and Expenses
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $2,282,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006 \1\.................. 3,501,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 3,500,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... 1,218,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. 1,000
\1\ Proposed in a consolidated appropriation titled ``The White House''.
The office of policy development supports the National
Economic Council and the Domestic Policy Council in carrying
out their responsibilities to advise and assist the President
in the formulation, coordination, and implementation of
economic and domestic policy. The office of policy development
also provides support for other domestic policy development and
implementation activities, as directed by the President.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,500,000 for
the office of policy development, an increase of $1,218,000
above amount enacted in fiscal year 2005and $1,000 below the
request.
National Security Council
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $8,860,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006 \1\.................. 8,705,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 8,705,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... -155,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 0
\1\ Proposed in a consolidated appropriation titled ``The White House''.
The National Security Council advises the President on the
integration of domestic, foreign, and military policies
relating to national security.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $8,705,000 for
the National Security Council, a decrease of $155,000 below the
amount appropriated in fiscal year 2005 and the same as
requested by the President. The committee continues the
realignment of GSA rental payments and other costs to the
Office of Administration as part of the enterprise services
program. The number of full-time equivalent staff years remains
at the fiscal year 2005 enacted level of 71.
Office of Administration
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $91,530,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006 \1\.................. 98,609,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 89,322,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... -2,208,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. -9,287,000
\1\ Proposed in a consolidated appropriation titled ``The White House''.
The Office of Administration is responsible for providing
cost-effective, administrative services to the Executive Office
of the President. These services, defined by Executive Order
12028 of 1977, include financial, personnel, library and
records services, information management systems support, and
general office services.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $89,322,000
for the Office of Administration, a decrease of $2,208,000
below the amount appropriated in fiscal year 2004 and a
decrease of $9,287,000 below the amount requested by the
President.
Enterprise services program.--The Committee continues the
Enterprise Services Program for most White House Offices. Funds
for GSA rental payments for the Office of Management and Budget
($6,646,000) and for the Office of National Drug Control Policy
($2,641,000) proposed for funding through the Enterprise
Services activities for fiscal year 2006 have not been
included. These funds have been placed back in their respective
organizations and have been placed in those offices in the
amounts that the Administration would have requested for each.
The Committee is taking this action to avoid the possibility
that Report and bill language affecting those Offices would
inappropriately apply to other White House offices if left in
the centralized Enterprise Services Program. All other Offices
have their GSA costs in the Enterprise Services Program, as
requested.
The Committee recommends funding for all other Office of
Administration activities at the requested level for each
activity in fiscal year 2006.
Office of Management and Budget
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $67,864,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 68,411,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 76,930,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +9,066,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. +8,519,000
The Office of Management and Budget assists the President
in the discharge of budgetary, economic, management, and other
executive responsibilities.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $76,930,000
for the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), an increase of
$9,066,000 above the amount appropriated in fiscal year 2005
and $8,519,000 above the amount requested by the President.
Recommended adjustments to the budget estimate are:
Staffing adjustment.--The fiscal year 2006 budget estimate
provides sufficient funding for 500 FTEs, a net increase of 10
FTEs over the fiscal year 2005 estimated FTE utilization. The
Committee's review of the historic OMB staffing data indicates
that FTEs (work years) dedicated to the development and
preparation of the President's budget have declined over the
past several years. The Committee believes that instead,
resources have been diverted to other activities and
initiatives that have not been approved by or specifically
funded by the Congress. Therefore, the Committee directs
increased FTEs and funding to the four major program areas
listed below to emphasize that the principal responsibility for
which funds are being provided, is the development and the
execution of the Federal budget. But the net increase in FTEs
is intended to recognize that there has also been a major
growth in program content and the number of individual programs
funded in the areas of Defense, Homeland Security, and Natural
Resources and Human Resources.
Total funding for Object classes 12.1, 21, 22, 23.3, 24,
25, 26, and 31 is $27,321,000. Of this amount, not to exceed
$3,000 shall be for Official Entertainment in object class 26.
The Committee provides funding at or above the levels requested
for all other object classes to reflect the higher FTE
allocation and restores $7,000,000 in proposed GSA rental
payments rather than in the Office of Administration as
proposed. The Director of OMB may reallocate operating funds
among these object classes, except where funding is expressly
prohibited. The reprogramming of funds among these object
classes should be based on the new allocation of staffing
resources. OMB must include the revised allocation in its
Operating Plan. Furthermore, any subsequent transfer of funds
between or among object classes in excess of $250,000 should be
submitted to the Committee in a revised Operating Plan.
Reception and representation expenses.--The bill limits
reception and representation (R&R) expenses to $3,000 as
requested by the Administration.
Operating Plan and PART Analysis.--Besides the requirements
noted above, OMB is also required to include a detailed
description of each program or activity or project that OMB
intends to subject to its Performance Assessment Rating Tool
(PART) study process for the 2007 and 2008 budgets. Included in
the description shall be the specific methodology that will be
used to conduct each study, the data that will be used in the
analysis for each program studied, and office responsible for
providing OMB with information and analysis. The Operating Plan
relevant to the PART studies shall be provided to, and be
considered approved only after the relevant subcommittee has
agreed to the study criteria and methodology. OMB is encouraged
to work with the subcommittees in advance of the Operating Plan
to ensure that the process can continue without disruption.
For studies agreed to by the Committee all scores, results
and recommendations may be included in departmental budget
submissions in addition to the materials submitted as part of a
traditional budget. With respect to those not agreed to in
OMB's Operating Plan no information relating to the study may
be included in Department or Agency Budget Requests.
Operating Plan and ``E-Gov'' initiative.--The Committee has
expressed serious concerns about the continued forced
implementation of this initiative on Departments and Agencies.
Many aspects of this initiative are fundamentally flawed,
contradict underlying program statutory requirements and have
stifled innovation by forcing conformity to an arbitrary
government standard. Most importantly, the implementation of
this initiative has forced departments and agencies and offices
and bureaus within each to transfer funds without the consent
of the Committee and has used funds for activities for which
funding was not specifically appropriated.
Therefore, language is included as a government-wide
provision in this Act which states that no funds are to be
allocated to the ``e-Gov'' initiatives in OMB or any other
department or agency and no funds are to be transferred from
any department or agency for these initiatives, unless and to
the extent approved in the OMB Operating Plan. The Operating
Plan shall detail the amount proposed for transfer from each
department and agency, (by program, office, bureau or activity,
as appropriate) the specific use of funds, the relevance of
that use to that department of agency and each bureau or office
within, which is contributing funds, and a description of those
activities for which funds were appropriated that will not be
implemented or only partially implemented by the department or
agency as a result of the proposed transfer. The Committee
urges the OMB to work directly with the individual
subcommittees in advance of the Operating Plan so that approved
initiatives can move forward without disruption.
Office of National Drug Control Policy
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $26,784,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 24,224,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 26,908,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +124,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. +2,684,000
The Office of National Drug Control Policy Reauthorization
Act of 1998 charges the Office of National Drug Control Policy,
established by the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988, with developing
policies, objectives and priorities for the National Drug
Control Program as defined by the Act and Executive Order
12880.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $26,908,000
for the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP), a
$2,684,000 increase over the President's request.
Funding is directed as follows: Operations--$25,592,000;
Policy Research--$1,316,000.
Staffing.--The Committee provided the requested level of
123 FTEs.
Counterdrug Technology Assessment Center
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $41,664,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 30,000,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 30,000,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... -11,664,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. 0
Pursuant to the Office of National Drug Control Policy
Reauthorization Act of 1998 (title VII of Division C of Public
Law 105-277), the Counter drug Technology Assessment Center
serves as the central counter drug research and development
organization for the United States Government.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $30,000,000
for the Counterdrug Technology Assessment Center, a decrease of
$11,664,000 from the fiscal year 2005 enacted levels and the
same as the President's request. Included in the appropriation
is $18,000,000 for supply and demand reduction research to be
allocated at the discretion of the ONDCP and $12,000,000 for
the Technology Transfer Program.
The Committee agrees that it is time to review and assess
the future of this program and determine which reforms are
needed and where to emphasize future funding, ONDCP is
instructed to prepare an analysis of options and
recommendations for the future course of counter drug
technology research and submit the report with the fiscal year
2007 budget submission to the Committee.
High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas Program
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $226,523,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 0
Recommended in the bill............................... 227,000,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +477
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. +227,000,000
The High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas (HIDTA) Program
was established by the Director of ONDCP pursuant to section
1005 of the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988, and now as
reauthorized by section 707 of the Office of National Drug
Control Policy Act of 1998 to provide assistance to Federal and
State and local law enforcement entities operating in those
areas most adversely affected by drug trafficking.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $227,000,000
for the HIDTA Program, an increase of $227,000,000 above the
President's request. The Committee rejects the Administration's
proposal to shift HIDTA funding to the Department of Justice
and to reduce funding by more than 50 percent. The increase
above the fiscal year 2005 enacted amounts is to ensure full
funding for all existing HIDTA program activity, to expand
existing HIDTAs where such expansion is justified, and to fund
new HIDTAs as appropriate. The Committee directs that no less
than $208,000,000 is for base funding for the HIDTA program.
Recommended funding levels are as follows:
HIDTA base allocation $219,650,000
Discretionary funds for new counties $2,000,000
Discretionary funds for CPOT $2,000,000
Audit $2,000,000
The HIDTA program serves to enhance and coordinate drug
control effects among local, State, and Federal law enforcement
agencies in order to eliminate or reduce drug trafficking, and
the Committee supports a vigorous HIDTA program. To achieve its
mission, the HIDTA program must continue to enhance individual
and national performance and work to develop a system that
enhances the synchronization of drug control efforts. The
Committee continues to direct that HIDTAs existing in fiscal
year 2006 shall receive funding at least equal to the fiscal
year 2005 initial allocation level, which does not include
funding provided through the CPOT initiative.
The Committee is aware of areas facing increased drug
trafficking that may be appropriate candidates for designation
as a HIDTA, inclusion in an existing HIDTA, or increased
funding. The Committee recognizes the strong pressure to add
new HIDTAs and expand those currently existing, and underscores
the need for performance-based management to ensure that HIDTAs
demonstrate both effectiveness and need and are provided
adequate resources.
Prior to submitting any future budget requests, the
Committee encourages the Director of ONDCP to review the
outcome-oriented performance measures developed in 2004 by the
HIDTA Directors Committee. This performance data will assist
during future PART ratings and clearly should be used to inform
budget decisions.
Other Federal Drug Control Programs
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $211,990,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... $213,300,000
Recommended in the bill............................... $213,292,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +1,302,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. -8,000
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee has provided the funds as requested for each
of the programs funded in this Account and directs that funding
be allocated as proposed on Page 63 of the ONDCP fiscal year
2006 Congressional submission with the exception that $992,000
shall be allocated to the National Alliance for Model State
Drug Laws instead of no funds requested and that $1,000,000
shall be allocated to establishing improved performance measure
for each program instead of the $2,000,000 requested.
The Committee directs ONDCP to maintain funding for non-
advertising services for the Media Campaign at no less than the
Fiscal year 2003 ratio of service funding to total funds and to
continue the corporate outreach program as it operated prior to
its cancellation.
The Committee has supported past education efforts to
demonstrate the consequences of using performance-enhancing
drugs. Although this program was successful, all professional
sports, including Major League Baseball, must undertake a
comprehensive campaign to educate youth on the dangers of
steroid use. Professional sports must work closely with U.S.
Anti-doping Administration (USADA) to educate high school,
middle school and grade school children on the dangers of
performance enhancing drugs.
Unanticipated Needs
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $993,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 1,000,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 1,000,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +7,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. 0
These funds enable the President to meet unanticipated
exigencies in support of the national interest, security, or
defense.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends $1,000,000 for unanticipated
needs, as requested. Expenditures from this account may be
authorized by the President.
Special Assistance to the President and the Official Residence of the
Vice President
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $4,534,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 4,455,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 4,455,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... -79,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. 0
These funds support the official duties and functions of
the Office of the Vice President.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,455,000 for
the Office of the Vice President, a decrease of $79,000 below
the amount enacted for fiscal year 2005 and the same as
requested by the President.
Operating Expenses
(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $330,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 325,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 325,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... -5,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. 0
These funds support the care and operation of the Vice
President's residence and specifically support equipment,
furnishings, dining facilities, and services required to
perform and discharge the Vice President's official duties,
functions and obligations.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $325,000 for
the Operating Expenses of the Vice President's residence, a
decrease of $5,000 below the amount enacted in fiscal year 2005
and the same as requested by the President.
TITLE VII--INDEPENDENT AGENCIES
Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $5,641,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 5,941,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 5,941,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +300,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. ................
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, 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.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends $5,941,000 for the operations of
the Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board,
an increase of $300,000 over fiscal year 2005 and the same as
the budget request.
Consumer Product Safety Commission
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $62,149,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 62,449,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 62,449,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +300,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. ................
The Consumer Product Safety Act established the Consumer
Product Safety Commission (CPSC), an independent Federal
regulatory agency, to reduce unreasonable risk of injury
associated with consumer products. Its primary responsibilities
and overall goals are: to protect the public against
unreasonable risk of injury associated with consumer products;
to develop uniform safety standards for consumer products,
minimizing conflicting State and local regulations; and to
promote research into prevention of product-related deaths,
illnesses, and injuries.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $62,449,000
for fiscal year 2006, the same level as requested and a
decrease of $201,000 below fiscal year 2005.
Election Assistance Commission
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $13,888,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 17,612,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 15,877,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +1,989,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. -1,735,000
The Election Assistance Commission was established by the
Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA) and is charged with
implementing provisions of that Act relating to the reform of
Federal election administration throughout the United States,
including the development of voluntary voting systems
guidelines, the certification and testing of voting systems,
studies of election administration issues, and the
implementation of election reform payments to states as well as
grant programs related to election reform.
The Committee urges the EAC to provide $250,000 for the
HAVA college program during the 2006 elections. This program,
first implemented during the 2004 election, recruits and trains
young people in colleges, universities, and community colleges
to serve as nonpartisan poll workers, helping to address a
nationwide pollworker shortage.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $15,877,000
for the Election Assistance Commission, an increase of
$1,989,000 above the fiscal year 2005 enacted level and
$1,735,000 below the budget request. The Committee provides the
budget request for research and development activities,
including the transfer of $2,800,000 to the National Institute
of Standards and Technology.
The Committee recommends the following major changes to the
budget request:
Reduce information technology/equipment purchases..... -350,000
Deny funding for four additional FTE.................. -622,000
Reduce funding for printing and reproduction.......... -501,000
Reduce funding for travel............................. -400,000
Increase funding for external auditing services....... +200,000
Inspector General services.--The Committee recommendation
provides an additional $200,000 above the budget request for
contract auditing services for a total auditing program level
of $2,105,000, an increase of more than $2,009,000 above the
fiscal year 2005 enacted level. The Committee has been
concerned about the lack of Inspector General services at EAC,
particularly given the vast sums of money that have been
distributed to date. The Committee is aware that EAC has been
seeking contract IG services, and expects that such services
will be in place by January 1, 2006.
Staffing increases.--The Committee is concerned that EAC
has requested an additional four FTE, particularly given the
short-term nature of EAC's activities with respect to reviewing
state spending plans for HAVA funds. Increased funding has been
provided for contract services, which the Committee believes is
sufficient to manage audit functions. Accordingly, the
Committee does not approve the hire of four additional FTE.
Military voting.--The Committee is aware that technologies
now exist to allow overseas military personnel to vote via a
secure e-mail system. The Committee encourages EAC to examine
this technology and, if warranted, develop appropriate
guidelines in time for the 2006 election.
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL
(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $29,884,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 29,965,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 29,965,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +81,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. 0
Funding for the Office of the Inspector General at the
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation is provided pursuant to
31 U.S.C. 1105(a)(25), which requires a separate appropriation
account for appropriations for each Office of Inspector General
of an establishment defined under section 11(2) of the
Inspector General Act of 1978.
The Committee recommendation, the same as the budget
request, provides for the transfer of $29,965,000 from the Bank
Insurance Fund, the Savings Association Insurance Fund, and the
FSLIC Resolution Fund to finance the Office of Inspector
General for fiscal year 2004.
Federal Election Commission
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $51,742,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 54,600,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 54,700,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +2,958,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. +100,000
The Commission administers the disclosure of campaign
finance information, enforces limitations on contributions and
expenditures, supervises the public funding of Presidential
elections, and performs other tasks related to Federal
elections.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $54,700,000
for the Federal Election Commission (FEC), an increase of
$2,958,000 over amounts appropriated in fiscal year 2005 and an
increase of $100,000 over the request.
Federal Labor Relations Authority
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $25,468,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 25,468,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 25,468,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... ................
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. ................
The Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA), established
by the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978, serves as a neutral
party in the settlement of disputes that arise between unions,
employees, and agencies on matters outlined in the Federal
Service Labor Management Relations statute, decides major
policy issues, prescribes regulations, and disseminates
information appropriate to the needs of agencies, labor
organizations, and the public. Establishment of the FLRA gives
full recognition to the role of the Federal Government as an
employer. Pursuant to the Foreign Service Act of 1980, FLRA
also supports the Foreign Service Impasse Disputes Panel and
the Foreign Service Labor Relations Board.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $25,468,000
for the Federal Labor Relations Authority, the same funding
level as the fiscal year 2005 enacted level and the same as the
budget request.
Federal Maritime Commission
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $19,340,032
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 20,499,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 20,499,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +1,158,968
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. ................
The Federal Maritime Commission (FMC) was established in
1961 as an independent government agency, responsible for the
regulation of international waterborne commerce of the United
States. In addition, FMC has responsibility for licensing and
bonding ocean transportation intermediaries and assuring that
vessel owners or operators establish financial responsibility
to pay judgment for death or injury to passengers, or
nonperformance of a cruise, on voyages from U.S. ports. It
monitors the activities of ocean common carriers, who operate
in the U.S./foreign commerce to ensure just and reasonable
practices, maintains a trade monitoring and enforcement
program, monitors the laws and practices of foreign governments
which could have a discriminatory or other impacts on shipping
conditions in the U.S., among other activities. The principal
shipping statutes administered by the FMC are the Shipping Act
of 1984 (46 USC app. 1710 et seq.), the Foreign Shipping
Practices Act of 1988 (46 USC app. 1701 et seq.), and section
19 of the Merchant Marine Act, 1920 (46 USC app. 876).
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $20,499,000
for the Federal Maritime Commission, a total of $1,158,968 (6
percent) above the fiscal year 2005 level and equal to the
budget request for fiscal year 2006.
General Services Administration
FEDERAL BUILDINGS FUND
Limitations on Availability of Revenue:
Limitation on availability, fiscal year 2005.......... ($7,217,043,000)
Limitation on availability, budget estimate, fiscal (7,768,795,000)
year 2006............................................
Recommended in the bill............................... (7,768,795,000)
Bill compared with:
Availability limitation, fiscal year 2005......... (+551,752,000)
Availability limitation, fiscal year 2006 estimate ................
The Federal Buildings Fund (FBF) finances the activities of
the Public Buildings Service, which provides space and services
for Federal agencies in a relationship similar to that of
landlord and tenant. The FBF, established in 1975, replaces
direct appropriations by using income derived from rent
assessments, which approximate commercial rates for comparable
space and services. The Committee makes funds available through
a process of placing limitations on obligations from the FBF as
a way of allocating funds for various FBF activities. The
Committee may also appropriate funds into the FBF as a way of
covering the difference between the total revenues coming into
the FBF and the total limitation on the expenditure from the
FBF.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends a limitation of $7,768,795,000 for
the fund, an increase of $551,752,000 above the fiscal year
2005 enacted levels.
The Committee notes that a total of $34,857,000 has been
provided within the federal buildings fund in past years for
construction, including funds for sites and expenses and
associated design and construction services, for the Detroit,
Michigan Ambassador Bridge Border Station. Further, the
Committee notes that the General Services Administration (GSA)
and the private sector companies who own and operate the
Ambassador Bridge have reached agreement on innovative private
financing/lease back arrangements to accerlerate the
establishment of critically important new border inspection
facilities on the Ambassador Bridge site.
The Committee instructs the GSA to continue to make the
full $34,857,000 available only for border station improvement
initiatives at the Ambassador Bridge in Detroit, Michigan until
the GSA receives an accurate cost estimate for making the
improvements under the lease back arrangement.
CONSTRUCTION AND ACQUISITION
Limitations on Availability of Revenue:
Limitation on availability, fiscal year 2005.......... ($708,542,000)
Limitation on availability, budget estimate, fiscal (708,106,000)
year 2006............................................
Recommended in the bill............................... (708,106,000)
Bill compared with:
Availability limitation, fiscal year 2005......... (-436,000)
Availability limitation, fiscal year 2006 estimate (---)
The construction and acquisition activity funds site,
design, construction, and management and inspection costs for
construction of new Federal facilities.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends a limitation of $708,106,000 for
construction and acquisition, a decrease of $436,000 below the
fiscal year 2005 enacted level. Fiscal year 2006 is the first
year of a two-year moratorium imposed by the Judiciary for new
major courthouse construction projects. The Committee provides
funding for two courthouse projects on the Judiciary's priority
list which can be awarded in fiscal year 2006, consistent with
the Judiciary's policy.
REPAIRS AND ALTERATIONS
Limitations on Availability of Revenue:
Limitation on availability, fiscal year 2005.......... ($980,222,000)
Limitation on availability, budget estimate, fiscal (961,376,000)
year 2006............................................
Recommended in the bill............................... (961,376,000)
Bill compared with:
Availability limitation, fiscal year 2005......... (-18,846,000)
Availability limitation, fiscal year 2006 estimate (---)
The repairs and alterations activity funds design,
construction and management and inspection for the repair,
alteration, and modernization of existing real estate assets.
It funds projects to improve health and safety, recapture
vacant non-revenue producing Government-owned and leased space,
and various special programs.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends a limitation of $961,376,000 for
repairs and alterations, a decrease of $18,846,000 from the
fiscal year 2005 enacted level. The Committee directs GSA to
embark on the projects included in the budget request in
priority order, starting with those projects that address
safety and health needs and moving next to the projects with
completed designs.
INSTALLMENT ACQUISITION PAYMENTS
Limitations on Availability of Revenue:
Limitation on availability, fiscal year 2005.......... ($161,442,000)
Limitation on availability, budget estimate, fiscal (168,180,000)
year 2006............................................
Recommended in the bill............................... (168,180,000)
Bill compared with:
Availability limitation, fiscal year 2005......... (+6,738,000)
Availability limitation, fiscal year 2006 estimate (---)
The installment acquisition payments activity funds
interest payment for facilities constructed under the Public
Building Amendment of 1972 and lease-purchase agreements since
1987, a total of 80 projects.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends a limitation of $168,180,000 for
installation acquisition payments, an increase of $6,738,000
above the fiscal year 2005 enacted level and the same as the
budget request. Based on this funding level, 68 of the original
80 projects will be paid off, leaving 12 projects remaining.
RENTAL OF SPACE
Limitations on Availability of Revenue:
Limitation on availability, fiscal year 2005.......... ($3,657,315,000)
Limitation on availability, budget estimate, fiscal (4,046,031,000)
year 2006............................................
Recommended in the bill............................... (4,046,031,000)
Bill compared with:
Availability limitation, fiscal year 2005......... (+388,716,000)
Availability limitation, fiscal year 2006 estimate (---)
The rental of space program funds lease payments, temporary
space for Federal employees during major repair and alteration
projects, and relocations from Federal buildings due to forced
moves and relocations as a result of health and safety
conditions.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends a limitation of $4,046,031,000 for
rental of space, an increase of $388,716,000 above the fiscal
year 2005 enacted level and the same as the budget request.
BUILDING OPERATIONS
Limitations on Availability of Revenue:
Limitation on availability, fiscal year 2005.......... ($1,709,522,000)
Limitation on availability, budget estimate, fiscal (1,885,102,000)
year 2006............................................
Recommended in the bill............................... (1,885,102,000)
Bill compared with:
Availability limitation, fiscal year 2005......... (+175,580,000)
Availability limitation, fiscal year 2006 estimate (---)
The building operations activity funds cleaning,
maintenance, utilities, fuel, grounds, maintenance, space
acquisitions and assignment services in government-owned
facilities and in leased space when not provided by the lessor.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends a limitation of $1,885,102,000 for
building operations, an increase of $175,580,000 above the
fiscal year 2005 enacted level and the same as the budget
request.
General Activities
GOVERNMENT-WIDE POLICY
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $61,603,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 52,796,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 52,796,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... -8,807,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. ---
This appropriations account provides for government-wide
policy and evaluation activities associated with the management
of real and personal property assets and certain administrative
services; government-wide policy support responsibilities
relating to acquisition, telecommunications, information
technology management, and related technology activities; and
services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommendation provides $52,796,000, a
reduction of $8,807,000 from fiscal year 2005 levels, for these
purposes. This funding level assumes that the office of
government-wide policy will refocus its activities on core
policy and regulatory activities that support statutory mission
requirements, and eliminate activities that are not clearly
policy-related. This funding level and realignment assumes a
reduction of 92 full time equivalents, 45 of which will be
transferred. GSA states that this funding level will not
trigger a reduction-in-force.
OPERATING EXPENSES
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $91,438,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 99,890,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 99,890,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +8,452,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. ---
This appropriations account provides for government-wide
activities associated with the utilization and donation of
surplus personal property; disposal of real property;
telecommunications, information technology management, and
related technology activities; agency-wide policy direction and
management; ancillary accounting, records management, and other
support services; services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109; and
other related operational expenses.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $99,890,000
for operating expenses, an increase of $8,452,000 above the
fiscal year 2005 enacted level and the same as the budget
request.
Office of Inspector General
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $42,012,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 43,410,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 43,410,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +1,398,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. ---
This appropriation provides agency-wide audit and
investigative functions to identify and correct GSA management
and administrative deficiencies that create conditions for
existing or potential instances of fraud, waste, and
mismanagement. The audit function provides internal audit and
contract audit services. Contract audits provide professional
advice to GSA contracting officials on accounting and financial
matters relative to the negotiation, award, administration,
repricing, and settlement of contracts. Internal audits review
and evaluate all facets of GSA operations and programs, test
internal control systems, and develop information to improve
operating efficiencies and enhance customer services. The
investigative function provides for the detection and
investigation of improper and illegal activities involving GSA
programs, personnel, and operations.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $43,410,000
for the office of inspector general, an increase of $1,398,000
above the fiscal year 2005 enacted level and the same as the
budget request.
Electronic Government (E-Gov) Fund
(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $2,976,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 5,000,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 3,000,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +24,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. -2,000,000
The appropriation provides support for interagency
electronic government initiatives that utilize the Internet or
other electronic methods as a means to increase Federal
government accessibility, efficiency, and productivity.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,000,000 for
the electronic government fund, an increase of $24,000 above
the fiscal year 2005 enacted level and $2,000,000 below the
budget request.
The Committee's recommendation does not include a general
provision proposed in the fiscal year 2005 budget request
allowing the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to use
$40,000,000 of surplus funds in the general supply fund to
finance OMB's list of e-gov initiatives across government. The
Committee refuses to relinquish oversight of the development
and procurement of information technology projects of the
various agencies under its jurisdiction. If the general supply
fund is running a $40,000,000 or greater surplus, the Committee
directs GSA to evaluate the pricing structure of its services
to Federal agencies to determine if GSA is overcharging its
Federal clients. Further, if OMB seeks funding for an
initiative under its direction, OMB should request those funds
under its own appropriation complete with a comprehensive
budget justification.
Allowances and Office Staff for Former Presidents
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $3,081,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 2,952,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 2,952,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... -129,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. ................
This appropriation provides support consisting of pensions,
office staffs, and related expenses for former Presidents
Gerald R. Ford, Jimmy Carter, George Bush and Bill Clinton and
for pension and postal franking privileges for the widow of
former President Lyndon B. Johnson. Also, this appropriation is
authorized to provide funding for security and travel related
expenses for each former President and the spouse of a former
President pursuant to section 531 of Public Law 103-329.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,952,000 for
allowances and office staff of former Presidents, a decrease of
$129,000 below the fiscal year 2005 enacted level and the same
as the budget request. The following table describes the
distribution of the funds:
FISCAL YEAR 2006 BUDGET ALLOWANCES AND OFFICE STAFF FOR FORMER PRESIDENTS
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ford Carter Bush Clinton Widows Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Personal Compensation......................... 96 96 96 96 0 384
Personnel Benefits............................ 22 2 51 64 0 139
Benefits for Former Presidents................ 184 184 184 192 20 764
Travel........................................ 45 2 54 63 0 164
Rental Payments to GSA........................ 105 102 175 473 0 855
Communications, Utilities and Miscellaneous
Charges:
Telephone................................. 15 10 15 75 0 115
Postage................................... 9 15 13 15 8 60
Printing.................................. 5 5 14 9 0 33
Other Services............................ 38 76 65 111 0 290
Supplies and Materials.................... 17 5 14 16 0 52
Equipment................................. 6 7 47 11 0 71
Total Obligations..................... 542 504 728 1,125 28 2,927
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Citizen Information Center Fund
Appropriations, fiscal year 2005...................... $14,787,744
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 15,030,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 15,030,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +242,256
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. ---
The Consumer Information Center (CIC) was established
within the General Services Administration (GSA) by Executive
Order on October 26, 1970, to help Federal departments and
agencies promote and distribute consumer information collected
as a byproduct of the Government's program activities.
The Federal Information Center (FIC) program was
established within the General Services Administration in 1966,
and was formalized by Public Law 95-491 in 1980. The program's
purpose is to provide the public with direct information about
all aspects of Federal programs, regulations, and services. To
accomplish this mission, contractual services are used to
respond to public inquiries via a nationwide toll-free
telephone call center.
In 2000, the Consumer Information Center assumed
responsibility for the operations of the FIC program with the
resulting organization being officially named the Federal
Consumer Information Center. The Federal Consumer Information
Center combines the nationwide toll-free telephone assistance
program and the database of the FIC with the CIC website and
publications distribution programs.
During fiscal year 2002, the Federal Consumer Information
Center became part of GSA's newly established Office of Citizen
Services and Communications and was renamed the Federal Citizen
Information Center (FCIC). The new Office serves as a central
federal gateway for citizens, businesses, other governments,
and the media to obtain information and services from the
government. FCIC assumed operational control of the
FirstGov.gov website in fiscal year 2002.
Public Law 98-63, enacted July 30, 1983, established a
revolving fund for the CIC. Under this fund, FCIC activities
are financed from the following: annual appropriations from the
general funds of the Treasury, reimbursements from agencies for
distribution of publications, user fees collected from the
public, and any other income incident to FCIC activities. All
are available as authorized in appropriation acts without
regard to fiscal year limitations. The bill includes a
limitation of $18,000,000 on the availability of the revolving
fund. Any revenues accruing to this fund in excess of this
amount shall remain in the fund and are not available for
expenditure except as authorized in appropriation Acts.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
For fiscal year 2006, the Committee recommends $15,030,000,
an increase of $242,256 over the level for fiscal year 2005 and
the same as the budget request.
The appropriation will be augmented by reimbursements from
Federal agencies for distribution of consumer publications,
user fees from the public, and other income.
General Provisions--General Services Administration
Section 701. The Committee continues the provision that
provides that costs included in rent received from government
corporations for operation, protection, maintenance, upkeep,
repair and improvement shall be credited to the Federal
Buildings Fund.
Section 702. The Committee continues the provision
providing authority for the use of funds for the hire of motor
vehicles.
Section 703. The Committee continues the provision
providing that funds made available for activities of the
Federal Buildings Fund may be transferred between
appropriations with advance approval of the Congress.
Section 704. The Committee continues the provision
prohibiting the use of funds for developing courthouse
construction requests that do not meet GSA standards and the
priorities of the Judicial Conference.
Section 705. The Committee continues the provision
providing that no funds may be used to increase the amount of
occupiable square feet, provide cleaning services, security
enhancements, or any other service usually provided, to any
agency which does not pay the requested rent.
Section 706. The Committee continues the provision that
permits GSA to pay small claims (up to $250,000) made against
the government.
Section 707. The Committee prohibits funding in the Act for
activities related to conveyance of a property in Phoenix,
Arizona in order to ensure that current postal activities are
continued at the property.
Merit Systems Protection Board
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $37,005,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 37,005,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 38,205,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +1,200,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. +1,200,000
The Merit Systems Protection Board performs the
adjudicatory functions necessary to maintain the civil service
merit system. These include hearing appeals on adverse actions,
reduction-in-force actions, and retirement. The Board reports
to the President on whether merit systems are sufficiently free
from prohibited personnel practices to protect the public
interest.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $38,205,000
for the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB), an increase of
$1,200,000 above the amount appropriated in fiscal year 2005
and an increase of $1,200,000 above the budget request, in
order to accommodate additional appeals cases resulting from
the DoD and DHS decision to maintain MSPB as arbitrator and to
accommodate relocation expenses. The Committee has instead made
available the amount of no more than $2,605,000 for adjudicated
appeals through an appropriation from the trust fund consistent
with past practice.
MORRIS K. UDALL SCHOLARSHIP AND EXCELLENCE IN NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL
POLICY FOUNDATION
Morris K. Udall Scholarship and Excellence in National Environmental
Policy Trust Fund
(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $1,980,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 0
Recommended in the bill............................... 2,000,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +20,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. +2,000,000
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends $2,000,000 for the activities of
the Morris K. Udall Foundation, $20,000 above the fiscal year
2005 enacted level. The Committee also continues bill language
to allow a percentage of the appropriation to be used for the
Native Nations Institute.
ENVIRONMENTAL DISPUTE RESOLUTION FUND
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $1,299,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... (700,000)
Recommended in the bill............................... 1,900,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +601,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. +1,200,000
Public Law 105-156 established the United States Institute
for Environmental Conflict Resolution as part of the Morris K.
Udall Scholarship and Excellence in National Environmental
Policy Foundation. It also established in the Treasury an
Environmental Dispute Resolution Fund to be available to
establish and operate the Institute. The purpose of the
Institute is to conduct environmental conflict resolution and
training.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,900,000 for
the Environmental Dispute Resolution Fund, an increase of
$601,000 above the fiscal year 2005 enacted level.
NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS ADMINISTRATION
Operating Expenses
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $264,809,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 280,975,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 283,975,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +19,166,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. +3,000,000
This appropriation provides the National Archives and
Records Administration (NARA) with funds for its basic
operations dealing with management of the Government's archives
and records, operation of Presidential libraries, and for the
review for declassification of classified security information.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $283,975,000
for the operating expenses of NARA, an increase of
$19,166,000,000 above the fiscal year 2005 enacted level and
$3,000,000 above the budget request. The Committee provides
$2,930,000 to make the initial move of Nixon Presidential
materials from College Park, MD to Yorba Linda, CA and to
provide for initial staffing and operations of the library.
Electronic Records Archive
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $35,627,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 35,914,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 35,914,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +287,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. ................
The electronic records archive appropriations supports all
direct NARA actions and activities associated with this major
project for preserving digitally created records for archival
purposes, storing and managing them electronically, and
ensuring appropriate long-term access. The appropriation
supports a program office, research partnerships, and
information technology analysis and design.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $35,914,000
for the electronic records archive of the National Archives and
Records Administration (NARA), an increase of $287,000 above
the fiscal year 2005 enacted level and the same as the budget
request.
As stated in the Committee's report for fiscal year 2005,
NARA is directed to submit to the House and Senate Committees
on Appropriations quarterly reports on the cost, schedule, and
performance of the Electronic Records Administration (ERA)
project. These quarterly reports should provide information on
the status of the project's schedule, budget, and expenditures
as measured against a reported baseline; a prioritization of
project risks and their mitigation efforts; and corrective
actions taken to manage identified schedule slippages, cost
overruns, or quality problems should they occur.
Repairs and Restoration
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $13,325,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 6,182,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 6,182,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... -7,143,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. ................
This appropriation provides for the repair, alteration, and
improvement of Archives facilities and Presidential libraries
nationwide. It enables the National Archives to maintain its
facilities in proper condition for visitors, researchers, and
employees, and also maintain the structural integrity of the
buildings.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $6,182,000 for
repairs and restoration, a decrease of $7,143,000 below the
fiscal year 2005 enacted level and the same as the budget
request.
National Historical Publications and Records Commission Grants Program
(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $4,960,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... ................
Recommended in the bill............................... 7,500,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... 2,540,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. +7,500,000
This program provides for grants funding that the
Commission makes, nationwide, to preserve and publish records
that document American history. Administered within the
National Archives and Records Administration, which preserves
federal records, the NHPRC helps state, local, and private
institutions preserve non-federal records, helps publish the
papers of major figures in American history, and helps
archivists and records managers improve their techniques,
training, and ability to serve a range of information users.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $7,500,000 for
the National Historical Publications and Research Commission
grants program, an increase of $2,540,000 above the fiscal year
2005 enacted level and $7,500,000 above the budget request of
which, $2,000,000 shall be transferred to the operating
expenses account for the staffing and operating expenses of the
National Historical Publications and Records Administration.
National Credit Union Administration
CENTRAL LIQUIDITY FACILITY
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Limitation on
Limitation on administrative
direct loans expenses
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2006 recommendation... (1,500,000,000) $323,000)
Fiscal year 2005 appropriation.... (1,500,000,000) (310,000)
Fiscal year 2006 budget request... (1,500,000,000) $323,000)
Comparison with fiscal year (0) (+13,000)
2005 appropriation...............
Comparison with fiscal year (0) (0)
2006 request.....................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Committee recommends a limitation of $1,500,000,000 on
CLF lending activity to member credit unions from borrowed
funds. This limitation represents the same level as fiscal year
2005 and the same as the budget request. The Committee expects
to be kept apprised of CLF lending activity.
The Committee recommends the budget request of not more
than $323,000 for administrative expenses, an increase of
$13,000 above the fiscal year 2005 enacted level and the same
as the budget request.
Community Development Revolving Loan Fund
Fiscal year 2006 recommendation....................... $950,000
Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................ 992,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request....................... 950,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2005 appropriation.... -42,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2006 request.......... 0
The Community Development Revolving Loan Fund Program
(CDRLF) was established in 1979 to assist officially designated
``low-income'' credit unions in providing basic financial
services to low-income communities. Low-interest loans and
deposits are made available to assist these credit unions.
Loans or deposits are normally repaid in five years, although
shorter repayment periods may be considered. Technical
assistance grants are also available to low-income credit
unions. Earnings generated from the CDRLF are available to fund
technical assistance grants in addition to funds provided for
specifically in appropriations acts. Grants are available for
improving operations as well as addressing safety and soundness
issues.
For fiscal year 2006 the Committee recommends $950,000 for
the National Credit Union Administration's Community
Development Revolving Loan Fund for technical assistance
grants. While the Administration and NCUA have not requested
additional funds for loans in fiscal year 2006, the Committee
expects the CDRLF to continue making loans from their available
funds derived from repaid loans and interest earned on previous
loans to designated credit unions. The Committee encourages
NCUA to support small low-income credit unions that seek
professional development through programs such as those offered
by the CDCU Institute.
National Transportation Safety Board
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $76,086,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 76,700,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 76,700,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +614,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. ................
Under the Independent Safety Board Act, the National
Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) is responsible for improving
transportation safety by investigating accidents, conducting
special studies, developing recommendations to prevent
accidents, evaluating the effectiveness of the transportation
safety programs of other agencies, and reviewing appeals of
adverse actions involving airman and seaman certificates and
licenses, and civil penalties issued by the Department of
Transportation. In addition, the NTSB operates the NTSB Academy
in Ashburn, Virginia.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $76,700,000
for salaries and expenses of the National Transportation Safety
Board, an increase of $614,000 above the fiscal year 2005
enacted level and the same as the fiscal year 2006 budget
request. Further, the Committee is aware of NTSB's shortage of
accident investigators and will maintain the requested level in
order to allow NTSB to sustain its safety mission.
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
(RESCISSION)
Rescission, fiscal year 2005.......................... -$8,000,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... -1,000,000
Recommended in the bill............................... -1,000,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +7,000,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. ................
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends a rescission of $1,000,000 from
funds provided in P.L. 106-246 for the investigation of Egypt
Air 990 and Alaska Air 261 accidents. The Board has determined
the causes of these accidents and the funding is no longer
required.
Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation
PAYMENT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD REINVESTMENT CORPORATION
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $114,080,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 118,000,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 118,000,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +3,920,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. 0
The Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation, established by
title VI of Public Law 95-557 in October 1978, is committed to
promoting reinvestment in older neighborhoods by local
financial institutions working cooperatively with the community
and local government. This is primarily accomplished by
assisting community-based partnerships (NeighborWorks
organizations) in a range of local revitalization efforts.
Increase in homeownership among lower-income families is a key
revitalization tool. Neighborhood Housing Services of America
(NHSA) supports lending activities of the NeighborWorks
organizations through a national secondary market that
leverages its capital with private sector investment.
The Committee recommends a funding level of $118,000,000
for fiscal year 2005, the same amount as the budget request and
an increase of $3,920,000 when compared to the fiscal year 2005
appropriation.
Office of Government Ethics
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $11,148,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 11,148,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 11,148,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... 0
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. 0
The Office of Government Ethics (OGE), established by the
Ethics in Government Act of 1978, provides overall direction of
executive branch policies designed to prevent conflicts of
interest and insure high ethical standards. The OGE discharges
its responsibilities to preserve and promote public confidence
in the integrity of executive branch officials by developing
rules and regulations pertaining to conflicts of interest, post
employment restrictions, standards of conduct, and public and
confidential financial disclosure in the executive branch. It
monitors compliance with public and confidential financial
disclosure requirements of the Ethics in Government Act of 1978
and the Ethics Reform Act of 1989, to determine possible
violations of applicable laws or regulations and recommending
appropriate corrective action. OGE also consults with and
assists various officials in evaluating the effectiveness of
applicable laws and the resolution of individual problems, and
prepares formal advisory opinions, informal letter opinions,
policy memoranda, and Federal Register entries on how to
interpret and comply with the requirements on conflicts of
interest, post employment, standards of conduct, and financial
disclosure. Finally, OGE issues and amends regulations
implementing the procurement integrity provisions relating to
negotiating for employment, post employment, and gratuities in
the Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act Amendments of
1988, P.L. 100-679.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $11,148,000
for the Office of Government Ethics, the same amount as enacted
in fiscal year 2005 and as the budget request.
Office of Personnel Management
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $124,496,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 124,521,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 119,952,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... -4,544,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. -4,569,000
The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) is the Federal
Government agency responsible for management of Federal human
resources policy and oversight of the merit civil service
system. Although individual agencies are increasingly
responsible for personnel operations, OPM provides a
Government-wide policy framework for personnel matters, advises
and assists agencies (often on a reimbursable basis), and
ensures that agency operations are consistent with requirements
of law, with emphasis on such issues as veterans preference.
OPM oversees examining of applicants for employment, issues
regulations and policies on hiring, classification and pay,
training, investigations, and many other aspects of personnel
management, and operates a reimbursable training program for
the Federal Government's managers and executives. OPM is also
responsible for administering the retirement, health benefits
and life insurance programs affecting most federal employees,
retired federal employees, and their survivors.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $119,952,000
for the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), a decrease of
$4,544,000 below the enacted fiscal year 2005 level and
$4,569,000 below the budget request.
The Committee's recommendation includes $6,983,000 for the
enterprise human resources integration project; $1,450,000 for
the e-human resources line of business project; $500,000 for
the e-training project; and $1,412,000 for the e-payroll
project as proposed in the budget request. The recommendation
also provides $102,679,000 from appropriate trust funds to OPM.
The Committee's recommendation makes the following changes
to the budget request:
-$2,649,000 from the Strategic Human Resources Policy
Annual Performance Goal 7. The Committee directs OPM to
continue the implementation and refining of the new
human resources management systems at the Department of
Defense and the Department of Homeland Security before
bringing the system to other agencies and departments.
-$3,000,000 from the Center for Financial Services
for the costs of performance measurement, program
evaluation and research projects. The budget materials
do not support such a request.
+$680,000 for the Call to Service Recruitment
Initiative with the Partnership for Public Service to
identify successful recruitment models across different
college campuses that can be replicated across the
Federal Government.
+$400,000 for activities as required by the Voting
Rights Act of 1965
Operating Plans.--The Committee directs the office to
submit an operating plan for fiscal year 2006, signed by the
director for review by the Committees on Appropriations of both
the House and Senate within 60 days of the bill's enactment.
The operating plan must include funding levels for the various
offices, centers, programs, and initiatives covered in the
budget justification and supporting documents referenced in the
House and Senate appropriations reports, and the statement of
the managers.
Budget Justifications.--While the budget justification
materials are much improved over the fiscal year 2005
submission, there is still a good deal of improvement to be
done. For example, OPM is requesting to use fiscal year 2004
carry-over funds to assist the duties and requirements of the
Voting Rights Act of 1965 in fiscal year 2005. While the
Committee is supportive of activities to uphold the Voting
Rights Act of 1965, there is no mention of these activities in
the fiscal year 2005 or fiscal year 2006 budget justifications.
The Committee directs OPM to include these activities in future
budget justifications.
In addition, the Committee notes that the budget references
a large number of initiatives, offices, centers, and councils,
but the budget fails to include specific funding and resource
information for the references items. Further, the budget
describes the ``success'' or indicators of the programs only as
``deadlines met,'' ``milestones met,'' ``positive evaluation,''
or ``green.'' While the Committee recognizes the prerogative of
the administration to internally establish outcomes and
measures, those measures are not translated adequately in the
budget justification to meet the needs of the Committee in its
role of overseeing spending. The Committee directs OPM to
include in the budget justification for the Committees on
Appropriations clear, detailed, and concise information on how
the programs will be funded and how they will be measured.
The Committee is concerned that the participation rate of
veterans and disabled veterans in the Federal workforce is
lower than estimated and job availability has shrunk in recent
years. The Committee directs the Office of Management and
Budget and the Office of Personnel Management to submit a
report to Congress within 90 days after enactment on how many
veterans and disabled veterans are employed in the Federal
government by department and agency, including in the Executive
Office of the President, the barriers that exist to hiring
veterans and disabled veterans, and ways to increase the number
of veterans and disabled veterans employed in the Federal
Government to the level employed at the time of the Civil
Service Reform Act of 1978.
Office of Inspector General
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $1,614,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 1,614,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 1,614,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... ................
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. ................
This appropriation provides agency-wide audit,
investigative, evaluation, and inspection functions to identify
management and administrative deficiencies, which may create
conditions for fraud, waste and mismanagement. The audits
function provides internal agency audit, insurance audit, and
contract audit services. Contract audits provide professional
advice to agency contracting officials on accounting and
financial matters regarding the negotiation, award,
administration, repricing, and settlement of contracts.
Internal audits review and evaluate all facets of agency
operations, including financial statements. Evaluation and
inspection services provide detailed technical evaluations of
agency operations. Insurance audits review the operations of
health and life insurance carriers, health care providers, and
insurance subscribers. The investigative function provides for
the detection and investigation of improper and illegal
activities involving programs, personnel, and operations.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,614,000 for
the Office of Inspector General of the Office of Personnel
Management, the same as the fiscal year 2005 enacted level and
the budget request. In addition, the recommendation also
provides $16,786,000 from appropriate trust funds to the Office
of Inspector General.
Government Payment for Annuitants, Employees Health Benefits
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $7,219,000,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 8,135,000,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 8,135,000,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +916,000,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. ................
This appropriation covers: (1) the Government's share of
the cost of health insurance for 1,851,000 annuitants as
defined in sections 8901 and 8906 of title 5, United States
Code; (2) the Government's share of the cost of health
insurance for about 12,000 annuitants (who were retired when
the federal employees health benefits law became effective), as
defined in the Retired Federal Employees Health Benefits Act of
1960; and (3) the Government's contribution for payment of
administrative expenses incurred by the Office of Personnel
Management in administration of the Act.
Government Payment for Annuitants, Employees Life Insurance
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $35,000,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 35,000,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 35,000,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... ................
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. ................
This appropriation finances the Government's share of
premiums, which is one-third the cost, for basic life insurance
for annuitants retiring after December 31, 1989, and who are
less than 65 years old.
Payment to Civil Service Retirement and Disability Fund
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $9,987,000,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 9,772,000,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 9,772,000,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... -215,000,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. ................
This appropriation provides for payment of annuities,
including the payment of annuities under special acts for
persons employed on the construction of the Panama Canal or
their widows and widows of employees of the Lighthouse Service;
payment of the Federal government share of retirement costs of
the unfunded liability resulting from any statute authorizing
new or liberalized benefits, extension of retirement coverage,
or pay increases; transfers for interest on unfunded liability
and payment of military service annuities covering interest on
the unfunded liability and annuity disbursements for military
service; payments for spouse equity providing survivor
annuities to eligible former spouses of annuitants who died
between September 1978 and May 1986 and did not elect survivor
coverage; and transfers for payment of FERS supplemental
liability covering annual amortization payments financing
supplemental liabilities for FERS.
Office of Special Counsel
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $15,325,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 15,325,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 15,325,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... ................
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. ................
The Office of Special Counsel: (1) investigates federal
employee allegations of prohibited personnel practices
(including reprisal for whistleblowing) and, when appropriate,
prosecutes before the Merit Systems Protection Board; (2)
provides a channel for whistleblowing by federal employees; and
(3) enforces the Hatch Act. The Office may transmit
whistleblower allegations to the agency head concerned and
require an agency investigation and a report to the Congress
and the President when appropriate.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $15,325,000
for the Office of Special Counsel, the same as the fiscal year
2005 enacted level and the fiscal year 2006 budget request.
Selective Service System
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $26,090,000
Budget Request, fiscal year 2006...................... 25,650,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 24,000,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... -2,090,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. -1,650,000
The Selective Service System was established by the
Selective Service Act of 1948. The basic mission of the System
is to be prepared to supply manpower to the Armed Forces
adequate to ensure the security of the United States during a
time of national emergency. Since 1973, the Armed Forces have
relied on volunteers to fill military manpower requirements,
but selective service registration was reinstituted in July,
1980.
For fiscal year 2006, the Committee recommends $24,000,000
for the Selective Service System, $2,090,000 below the fiscal
year 2005 funding level and $1,650,000 below the budget
request. The Committee directs the Selective Service System to
simply maintain the databases required for a draft as described
in the Selective Service Act of 1948 plus any medical
databases, train draft boards, and respond to inquiries
regarding registration. No funds are provided to the Selective
Service System to expand or augment its services or
capabilities.
U.S. Interagency Council on the Homelessness
OPERATING EXPENSES
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $1,499,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 1,800,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 1,499,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... 0
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. -301,000
The Committee recommends $1,499,000 for operating expenses
of the Interagency Council on Homelessness, the same as the
enacted level for 2005 and $301,000 below the requested amount.
Staff turnover and the continued lack of cooperation between
the Council and the Department of Housing and Urban Development
remains a concern for the Committee. In addition the failure of
the Administration to put forth a comprehensive funding plan
for the elimination of chronic homelessness which includes
other mainstream programs in other Departments indicates that
the Council is not being successful in developing a government-
wide response to this national problem. Therefore, the Council
is instructed to work closely with HUD's Homeless program and
present to the House and Senate Appropriations Committees no
later than July 1, 2006 a comprehensive funding strategy that
demonstrates that the President's initiative to end chronic
homelessness will achieve its result within the 10 year
timeframe originally stated and include the roles that HUD will
have in that effort and the role of the ICH to support the
activities of HUD's homeless programs and to obtain financial
and programmatic input from related departments and agencies.
UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE
Payment to the Postal Service Fund
The Postal Service is funded almost entirely by Postal rate
payers rather than tax payers. Funds provided to the Postal
Service in the Payment to the Postal Service Fund include the
costs of revenue forgone on free and reduced-rate mail for the
blind and overseas voters; reconciliation adjustments for
amounts appropriated for free and reduced rate mail and the
actual amounts required; and partial reimbursement for losses
which the Postal Service incurred as a result of insufficient
appropriations in fiscal years 1991 through 1993 and the
additional revenues it would have received between 1993 and
1998 in the absence of certain rate phasing provisions of the
Revenue Forgone Act of 1993. Congress does not provide funds
for either general operations or capital investments.
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $629,650,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 149,059,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 116,350,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... -451,591,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. +29,000,000
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $116,350,000
in fiscal year 2006 for Payment to the Postal Service Fund, an
increase of $29,000,000 to the President's request. This amount
includes $58,767,000 for revenue forgone on free and reduced-
rate mail, $28,583,000 for reconciliation amounts for past
years pursuant to subsection 39 U.S.C. Sec. 2401 (c), and
$29,000,000 for revenue forgone on free and reduced-rate mail
pursuant to 39 U.S.C. Sec. 2401(d) and $73,000,000 is provided
as an advance appropriation for fiscal year 2007.
The Committee has concerns with the new process implemented
this year by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). In past
years, the OMB would use the Postal Service's audit figures to
base the advance appropriation request for free mailings for
the blind and overseas voters. However, this year it appears
that OMB simply took the average appropriation over a series of
years to derive the President's request, apparently for the
sole reason that the Postal Service's audit figures were higher
than in previous years. This new system could produce funding
amounts that may be either significantly lower or higher than
actual sums that the Postal Service needs. Providing less than
the Postal Service needs will only compound their financial
burdens, something that the Committee has strongly urged the
Postal Service to try and repair. In addition, the Committee
would certainly not want to provide more funding than the
Postal Service actually needs for these activities. The
Committee is concerned that OMB's new use of averages in
determining the amount for free mail is inaccurate and the
Committee urges OMB to continue to use Postal Service audit
figures in the future.
Emergency preparedness.--The Committee is concerned that
OMB, in the fiscal year 2006 budget request, has not given
attention to the safety and security of our nation's mail
system and protections for postal employees against terrorist
threats. The Committee therefore directs OMB to report to the
House and Senate Committees on Appropriations within 90 days of
enactment of this Act the revised estimated amount of Federal
funding that may be necessary to complete the Postal Service's
work to secure the nation's mail system. The Committee further
directs the USPS to provide a report within 90 days of
enactment of this Act on the progress of the mail irradiation
facility being built in the Washington, DC area.
Sauk Village, Illinois.--The Committee recommends that the
United States Postal Service evaluate the need for the
communities of Lynwood, Illinois and Sauk Village, Illinois to
establish a new 604 ZIP Code for these two communities to
share. It is the Committee's understanding that no new
resources or facilities would be needed to approve this change.
The Committee directs the Postal Service to report its findings
to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations upon
completion of the evaluation.
United States Tax Court
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005....................... $40,851,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006...................... 48,998,000
Recommended in the bill............................... 48,998,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 2005................... +8,147,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2006.................. ................
The U.S. Tax Court adjudicates controversies involving
deficiencies in income, estate, and gift taxes. The Court also
has jurisdiction to determine deficiencies in certain excise
taxes to issue declaratory judgments in the areas of
qualifications of retirement plans, exemption of charitable
organizations, and to decide certain cases involving disclosure
of tax information by the Commissioner of the Internal Revenue
Service.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $48,998,000
for the U.S. Tax Court, an increase of $8,147,000 above the
fiscal year 2005 enacted level and the same as the budget
request. Increased funds are provided for critical technology
upgrades.
TITLE VIII--GENERAL PROVISIONS, THIS ACT
Section 801. The Committee continues the provision
requiring pay raises to be funded within appropriated levels in
this Act or previous appropriations Acts.
Section 802. The Committee continues the provision
prohibiting pay and other expenses for non-Federal parties in
regulatory or adjudicatory proceedings funded in this Act.
Section 803. The Committee continues the provision
prohibiting obligations beyond the current fiscal year and
prohibits transfers of funds unless expressly so provided
herein.
Section 804. The Committee continues the provision limiting
consulting service expenditures of public record in procurement
contracts.
Section 805. The Committee continues the provision
prohibiting funds in this Act to be transferred without express
authority.
Section 806. The Committee continues the provision
prohibiting the use of funds to engage in activities that would
prohibit the enforcement of section 307 of the 1930 Tariff Act.
Section 807. The Committee continues the provision
concerning employment rights of Federal employees who return to
their civilian jobs after assignment with the Armed Forces.
Section 808. The Committee continues the provision
concerning compliance with the Buy American Act.
Section 809. The Committee continues a provision
prohibiting the use of funds by any person or entity convicted
of violating the Buy American Act.
Section 810. The Committee modifies a provision specifying
reprogramming procedures by subjecting the establishment of new
offices and reorganizations to the reprogramming process.
Section 811. The Committee continues the provision
providing that fifty percent of unobligated balances may remain
available for certain purposes.
Section 812. The Committee includes a provision providing
that funds used by the Executive Office of the President not be
used to request any official background investigation from the
Federal Bureau of Investigation.
Section 813. The Committee includes a provision requiring
that cost accounting standards not apply to a contract under
the Federal Health Benefits Program.
Section 814. The Committee continues a provision regarding
non-foreign area cost of living allowances.
Section 815. The Committee continues the provision
prohibiting the expenditure of funds for abortions under the
FEHBP.
Section 816. The Committee continues the provision
prohibiting the expenditure of funds for abortions under the
FEHBP unless the life of the mother is in danger or the
pregnancy is a result of an act of rape or incest.
Section 817. The Committee continues a new provision
waiving restrictions on the purchase of non-domestic articles,
materials, and supplies in the case of acquisition by the
Federal Government of information technology.
Section 818. The Committee continues the provision
prohibiting the use of funds for a proposed rule relating to
the determination that real estate brokerage is a financial
activity.
Section 819. The Committee includes a provision that
designates that some of the funds made available in Title I of
this Act under the heading, ``Office of the Secretary,
Transportation Planning, Research, and Development,'' shall be
used to reimburse fixed-based general aviation operators and
the providers of general aviation ground support services at
Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport, and at airports
within fifteen miles of that airport, for their financial
losses incurred while the airports were closed as a result of
the actions of the federal government following the terrorist
attacks on the United States that occurred on September 11,
2001. The funds designated for this purpose are available until
expended and may be used only if the recipients of such funding
release the U.S. Government from all claims arising from the
closing of these aviation facilities.
Section 820. The Committee includes a provision that
extends the Federal Election Commission's administrative fine
program through December 31, 2008.
TITLE IX--GENERAL PROVISIONS
Departments, Agencies, and Corporations
Section 901. The Committee continues the provision
authorizing agencies to pay costs of travel to the United
States for the immediate families of federal employees assigned
to foreign duty in the event of a death or a life threatening
illness of the employee.
Section 902. The Committee continues the provision
requiring agencies to administer a policy designed to ensure
that all of its workplaces are free from the illegal use of
controlled substances.
Section 903. The Committee continues the provision
regarding price limitations on vehicles to be purchased by the
Federal Government.
Section 904. The Committee continues the provision allowing
funds made available to agencies for travel, to also be used
for quarter allowances and cost-of-living allowances.
Section 905. The Committee continues the provision
prohibiting the government, with certain specified exceptions,
from employing non-U.S. citizens whose posts of duty would be
in the continental U.S.
Section 906. The Committee continues the provision ensuring
that agencies will have authority to pay GSA bills for space
renovation and other services.
Section 907. The Committee continues the provision allowing
agencies to finance the costs of recycling and waste prevention
programs with proceeds from the sale of materials recovered
through such programs.
Section 908. The Committee continues the provision
providing that funds may be used to pay rent and other service
costs in the District of Columbia.
Section 909. The Committee continues the provision
prohibiting payments to persons filling positions for which
they have been nominated after the Senate has voted not to
approve the nomination.
Section 910. The Committee continues the provision
prohibiting interagency financing of groups absent prior
statutory approval.
Section 911. The Committee continues the provision
authorizing the Postal Service to employ guards and give them
the same special police powers as certain other federal guards.
Section 912. The Committee continues the provision
prohibiting the use of funds for enforcing regulations
disapproved in accordance with the applicable law of the U.S.
Section 913. The Committee continues the provision limiting
the pay increases of certain prevailing rate employees.
Section 914. The Committee continues the provision limiting
the amount of funds that can be used for redecoration of
offices under certain circumstances.
Section 915. The Committee continues the provision to allow
for interagency funding of national security and emergency
telecommunications initiatives.
Section 916. The Committee continues the provision
requiring agencies to certify that a Schedule C appointment was
not created solely or primarily to detail the employee to the
White House.
Section 917. The Committee continues the provision
requiring agencies to administer a policy designed to ensure
that all workplaces are free from discrimination and sexual
harassment.
Section 918. The Committee continues the provision
prohibiting the payment of any employee who prohibits,
threatens or prevents another employee from communicating with
Congress.
Section 919. The Committee continues the provision
prohibiting Federal training not directly related to the
performance of official duties.
Section 920. The Committee continues the provision
prohibiting the expenditure of funds for implementation of
agreements in nondisclosure policies unless certain provisions
are included.
Section 921. The Committee continues the provision
prohibiting propaganda, publicity and lobbying by executive
agency personnel in support or defeat of legislative
initiatives.
Section 922. The Committee continues the provision
prohibiting any federal agency from disclosing an employee's
home address to any labor organization, absent employee
authorization or court order.
Section 923. The Committee continues the provision
prohibiting funds to be used to provide non-public information
such as mailing or telephone lists to any person or
organization outside the government without the approval of the
Committees on Appropriations.
Section 924. The Committee continues the provision
prohibiting the use of funds for propaganda and publicity
purposes not authorized by Congress.
Section 925. The Committee continues the provision
directing agency employees to use official time in an honest
effort to perform official duties.
Section 926. The Committee continues the provision, with
technical modifications, authorizing the use of funds to
finance an appropriate share of the Joint Financial Management
Improvement Program.
Section 927. The Committee continues the provision, with
technical modifications, authorizing agencies to transfer funds
to the Governmentwide Policy account of GSA to finance an
appropriate share of the Joint Financial Management Improvement
Program and other purposes.
Section 928. The Committee continues the provision, to
prohibit any department or agency from using appropriated funds
to independently contract with private companies to provide
online employment applications and processing services.
Section 929. The Committee continues the provision that
permits breast feeding in a federal building or on federal
property if the woman and child are authorized to be there.
Section 930. The Committee continues the provision that
permits interagency funding of the National Science and
Technology Council and provides for a report on the budget and
resources of the National Science and Technology Council. The
report should include the entire budget of the National Science
and Technology Council.
Section 931. The Committee continues the provision
requiring documents involving the distribution of federal funds
to indicate the agency providing the funds and the amount
provided.
Section 932. The Committee extends the authorization period
for agency franchise funds by striking ``October 1, 2005'' and
inserting ``October 1, 2006'', as requested.
Section 933. The Committee continues the provision
prohibiting the use of funds to monitor personal information
relating to the use of federal internet sites to collect,
review, or create any aggregate list that includes personally
identifiable information relating to access to or use of any
federal internet site of such agency.
Section 934. The Committee continues the provision
requiring health plans participating in the FEHBP to provide
contraceptive coverage and provides exemptions to certain
religious plans.
Section 935. The Committee continues the provision
providing recognition of the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency as the
official anti-doping agency.
Section 936. The Committee continues a provision allowing
funds for official travel to be used by departments and
agencies, if consistent with OMB and Budget Circular A-126, to
participate in the fractional aircraft ownership pilot program.
Section 937. The Committee continues the provision
prohibiting funds from being expended for the purchase of a
product or service offered by Federal Prison Industries, Inc.
unless the agency determines the products to constitute the
best value to the buying agency.
Section 938. The Committee continues a provision
prohibiting funds for implementation of OPM regulations
limiting detailees to the Legislative Branch, and implementing
limitations on the Coast Guard Congressional Fellowship
Program.
Section 939. The Committee continues a provision requiring
agencies to evaluate the creditworthiness of an individual
before issuing the individual a government travel charge card
and limits agency actions accordingly.
Section 940. The Committee continues a provision providing
that restricts the use of funds for federal law enforcement
training facilities.
Section 941. The Committee continues a provision that
allows for transfer authority among certain offices of the
Executive Office of the President.
Section 942. The Committee includes a provision amending
P.L. 105-270.
Section 943. The Committee includes a provision concerning
the use of funds for the ``e-gov'' initiative that were not
appropriated specifically for that purpose.
Section 944. The Committee continues a provision, with
modifications, providing that the adjustment in rates of basic
pay for employees under statutory pay systems taking effect in
fiscal year 2006 shall be an increase of 3.1 percent.
Section 945. The Committee includes a new provision
prohibiting a credit card issuer from adjusting a card holder's
annual percentage rate based on information unrelated to the
account.
Section 946. The Committee continues the provision that
prohibits executive branch agencies from creating prepackaged
news stories that are broadcast or distributed in the United
States unless the story includes a clear notification within
the text or audio of that news story that the prepackaged news
story was prepared or funded by that executive branch agency.
This provision confirms the opinion of the Government
Accountability Office dated February 17, 2005 (B-304272)
Section 947. The Committee includes a new provision
regarding the Trade Sanctions Reform and Export Enhancement Act
of 2000 authorizing the export of U.S. agricultural commodities
to Cuba. Agriculture exports financed by the payment of cash in
advance under the Act totaled more than $1 billion during the
past 4 years. Section 903 of the Act prohibits the imposition
of new restrictions or conditions on this trade absent prior
notice to and approval by Congress. Despite this prohibition,
the Department of Treasury unilaterally imposed a new
restriction on this trade by a ``clarification'' published in a
final rule on February 25, 2005--without notice to or the
approval of Congress. The amendment prevents the use of funds
to administer, implement, or enforce the final rule so that
cash in advance transactions may continue in the manner in
which they had been transacted prior to the administration of
this restrictive new ``clarification''.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES REPORT REQUIREMENTS
The following items are included in accordance with various
requirements of the Rules of the House of Representatives:
Constitutional Authority
Clause 3(d)(1) of the rule XXIII of the Rules of the House
of Representatives states:
Each report of a committee 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 law proposed
by the bill or joint resolution.
The Committee on Appropriations bases its authority to
report this legislation from clause 7 of section 9 of Article I
of the Constitution of the United States of America which
states:
No money shall be drawn from the Treasury but in
consequence of Appropriations made by law . . .
Appropriations contained in this Act are made pursuant to
this specific power granted by the Constitution.
Appropriations Not Authorized by Law
Pursuant to clause 3(f)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, the following table lists the
appropriations in the accompanying bill that are not authorized
by law:
Transfer of Funds
Pursuant to clause 3(f)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, the following statement is submitted
describing the transfers of funds provided in the accompanying
bill.
The Committee recommends the following transfers:
UNDER TITLE I--DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Under the Office of the Secretary, ``Salaries and
expenses'', the Secretary of Transportation is allowed to
transfer amounts among the individual offices of the Office of
the Secretary, subject to certain conditions.
Under the Office of the Secretary, ``Payments to air
carriers,'' the Secretary of Transportation is allowed to
transfer overflight fees collected to the Federal Aviation
Administration to repay funds borrowed during the fiscal year
to fund the essential air service program.
Under Federal Transit Administration, ``Administrative
expenses'', the Administrator is authorized to transfer funds
between offices.
Title I, Sec. 162. The Committee continues the provision
that allows transit funds appropriated before October 1, 2003,
that remain available for expenditure to be transferred.
Under Title I, Administrative Provisions--Department of
Transportation, Sec. 180, the Committee continues a provision
allowing the Secretary of Transportation to transfer unexpended
sums from ``Office of the secretary, salaries and expenses'' to
``Minority business outreach''.
UNDER TITLE II--DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY
Under the Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue
Service, up to $10,000,000 may be transferred to the
Processing, Assistance and Management or Information Systems
account for management of the Interagency Crime and Drug
Enforcement program.
Under the Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue
Service, up to $10,000,000 may be transferred to the
Processing, Assistance and Management or Information Systems
account for management of the Earned Income Tax Credit.
Section 201 allows the transfer of 5 percent of any
appropriation (or 3 percent of the Tax Law Enforcement
appropriation) made available to the IRS to any other IRS
appropriation, subject to prior Congressional approval.
Section 211 authorizes transfers, up to 2 percent, between
the Internal Revenue Service and the Treasury Inspector General
for Tax Administration under certain circumstances.
Section 211 authorizes transfers, up to 2 percent, between
Departmental Offices, Office of the Inspector General,
Financial Management Service, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade
Bureau, Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, and the Bureau of
the Public Debt appropriations under certain circumstances.
UNDER TITLE III--DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
The Committee has included language under the Department of
Housing and Urban Development transferring all uncommitted
prior balances of excess rental charges as of fiscal year 2005
and all collections made during fiscal year 2006 to the
flexible subsidy fund.
The Committee has included language under the Department of
Housing and Urban Development transferring the following
amounts to the salaries and expenses account for administrative
expenses: FHA mutual mortgage insurance and general and special
risk insurance program accounts ($558,767,000); GNMA guarantees
of mortgage-backed securities loan guarantee program account
($10,700,000); community development loan guarantees program
account ($0); Indian housing loan guarantee fund program
account ($250,000); native Hawaiian housing loan guarantee fund
($35,000); and Native American housing block grants account
($150,000).
The Committee has included language under the Department of
Housing and Urban Development transferring up to $12,896,000
from the manufactured housing fees trust fund to the
manufactured housing standards program.
The Committee has included language under the Department of
Housing and Urban Development transferring no less than the
following amounts to the working capital fund under the
salaries and expenses account for development and management of
information technology systems: tenant-based rental assistance
($5,900,000); project-based rental assistance ($1,000,000);
public housing capital fund ($13,230,000); community
development fund ($3,400,000); home investment partnership
program account ($1,000,000); homeless assistance grants
account ($1,000,000); housing for the elderly account
($400,000); housing for persons with disabilities account
($400,000); FHA mutual mortgage insurance program account
($18,281,000); FHA general and special risk insurance program
account ($10,800,000).
The Committee has included language under the Department of
Housing and Urban Development transferring up to $200,000,000
from the Tenant-Based Assistance Account to the Project-Based
Assistance Account
The Committee has included language under the Department of
Housing and Urban Development transferring $24,00,000 from the
various funds of the Federal Housing Administration to the
Office of Inspector General.
The Committee has included language under the Department of
Housing and Urban Development transferring $60,000,000 from the
federal housing enterprise oversight fund to the office of
federal housing enterprise oversight account.
UNDER TITLE IV--THE JUDICIARY
Under the Judiciary, Courts of Appeals, District Courts,
and Other Judicial Services, funds may be transferred to the
United States Marshals Service for courthouse security.
Sec. 402. The Committee continues a provision permitting
the Judiciary to transfer up to 5 percent of any appropriation
with certain limitations
UNDER TITLE V--DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
The Committee has included language transferring
$29,833,000 from the Court Services and Offender Supervision
Agency to the Public Defender Service.
The Committee has included language transferring fines
collected under DC Official Code section 50-2201.05(b)(1) and
(2) in the general funds to the Office of the Attorney General
of the District of Columbia.
The Committee has included language to allow for a transfer
from the funds identified in the fiscal year 2005 comprehensive
annual financial report as the District's Grant Disallowance
balance.
UNDER TITLE VI--EXECUTIVE OFFICES OF THE PRESIDENT
Language is included under Office of National Drug Control
Policy, ``Counterdrug Technology Assessment Center'' allowing
for the transfer of funds to other Federal departments or
agencies.
Language is included under Federal Drug Control Programs,
``High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas Programs'' which allows
for the transfer of funds to other Federal departments or
agencies.
Language is included under Federal Drug Control Programs,
``Other Federal Drug Control Program'' allowing the transfer of
funds to other Federal departments or agencies.
Language is included under Official Residence of the Vice
President, ``Operating Expenses'' allowing the transfer of
funds to other Federal departments or agencies.
UNDER TITLE VII--INDEPENDENT AGENCIES
Under Title VII Independent Agencies, a number of transfers
are allowed: 1) the GSA allowances and Office Staff for Former
Presidents account may transfer such sums as necessary to the
Department of the Treasury for certain pension benefits, 2) the
GSA Electronic Government Fund may transfer $3,000,000 to
federal departments in pursuit of programs goals, 3) under the
Election Assistance Commission, $2,800,000 to the National
Institute of Standards and Technology, 4) under the National
Archives and Records Administration, $2,000,000 is transferred
from the National Historical Publications and Records
Commission to the operating expenses account, and 5) under
Office of Personnel Management, amounts from certain trust
funds are transferred to salary and expenses accounts for
oversight and administration of the funds.
Title VII, Sec. 703. The Committee continues the provision
providing that funds made available for activities of the
Federal Building Fund may be transferred between appropriations
with advance approval of the Congress.
Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives
Pursuant to clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, the following is a statement of
general performance goals and objectives for which this measure
authorizes funding:
The committee on Appropriations strongly considers program
performance, including a program's success in developing and
attaining outcome-related goals and objectives, in developing
funding recommendations. This includes a review of agency and
departmental performance plans, audits, and investigations of
the U.S. General Accounting Offices of Inspector General, and
other performance-related information. The Committee's goal is
to provide adequate, but not excessive, resources for the
programs covered by this Act, consistent with funding
allocations provided by the Congressional budget process.
Compliance With Rule XIII, Cl. 3(e) (Ramseyer Rule)
In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law
proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new
matter is printed in italics, existing law in which no change
is proposed is shown in roman):
CHAPTER 443 OF TITLE 49, UNITED STATES CODE
CHAPTER 443--INSURANCE
* * * * * * *
Sec. 44302. General authority
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(f) Extension of Policies.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall extend through
August 31, [2005,] 2006, and may extend through
December 31, [2005,] 2006, the termination date of any
insurance policy that the Department of Transportation
issued to an air carrier under subsection (a) and that
is in effect on the date of enactment of this
subsection on no less favorable terms to the air
carrier than existed on June 19, 2002; except that the
Secretary shall amend the insurance policy, subject to
such terms and conditions as the Secretary may
prescribe, to add coverage for losses or injuries to
aircraft hulls, passengers, and crew at the limits
carried by air carriers for such losses and injuries as
of such date of enactment and at an additional premium
comparable to the premium charged for third-party
casualty coverage under such policy.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 44303. Coverage
(a) * * *
(b) Air Carrier Liability for Third Party Claims Arising Out
of Acts of Terrorism.--For acts of terrorism committed on or to
an air carrier during the period beginning on September 22,
2001, and ending on December 31, [2005,] 2006, the Secretary
may certify that the air carrier was a victim of an act of
terrorism and in the Secretary's judgment, based on the
Secretary's analysis and conclusions regarding the facts and
circumstances of each case, shall not be responsible for losses
suffered by third parties (as referred to in section
205.5(b)(1) of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations) that
exceed $100,000,000, in the aggregate, for all claims by such
parties arising out of such act. If the Secretary so certifies,
the air carrier shall not be liable for an amount that exceeds
$100,000,000, in the aggregate, for all claims by such parties
arising out of such act, and the Government shall be
responsible for any liability above such amount. No punitive
damages may be awarded against an air carrier (or the
Government taking responsibility for an air carrier under this
subsection) under a cause of action arising out of such act.
The Secretary may extend the provisions of this subsection to
an aircraft manufacturer (as defined in section 44301) of the
aircraft of the air carrier involved.
* * * * * * *
----------
SECTION 122 OF THE DEPARTMENTS OF COMMERCE, JUSTICE, AND STATE, THE
JUDICIARY, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 1998
(Public law 105-119)
Sec. 122. (a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(g)(1) Notwithstanding any other provision of law and subject
to paragraph (2), the Secretary of the Treasury is authorized
to establish, for a period of [7 years] 8 years from date of
enactment of this provision, a personnel management
demonstration project providing for the compensation and
performance management of not more than a combined total of 950
employees who fill critical scientific, technical, engineering,
intelligence analyst, language translator, and medical
positions in the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms.
* * * * * * *
----------
SECTION 223 OF THE NATIONAL HOUSING ACT
miscellaneous housing insurance
Sec. 223. (a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(f)(1) Notwithstanding any of the provisions of this Act,
the Secretary is authorized, in his discretion, to insure under
any section of this title a mortgage executed in connection
with the purchase or refinancing of an existing multifamily
housing project or the purchase or refinancing of existing debt
of an existing hospital (or existing nursing home, existing
assisted living facility, existing intermediate care facility,
existing board and care home, or any combination thereof).
* * * * * * *
----------
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2005
* * * * * * *
TITLE I--FEDERAL FUNDS
* * * * * * *
Federal Payment for School Improvement
For a Federal payment for a school improvement program in the
District of Columbia, $40,000,000, to be allocated as follows:
for the District of Columbia Public Schools, $13,000,000 to
improve public school education in the District of Columbia;
for the State Education Office, $13,000,000 to expand quality
public charter schools in the District of Columbia, to remain
available until September 30, 2006; for the Secretary of the
Department of Education, $14,000,000 to provide opportunity
scholarships for students in the District of Columbia in
accordance with division C, title III of the District of
Columbia Appropriations Act, 2004 (Public Law 108-199; 118
Stat. 126), of which up to $1,000,000 may be used to administer
and fund assessments: Provided, That of the $13,000,000 for the
District of Columbia Public Schools, not less than $2,000,000
shall be for a new incentive fund to reward high performing or
significantly improved public schools; not less than $2,000,000
shall be to support the Transformation School Initiative
directed to schools in need of improvement: Provided further,
That of the remaining amounts, the Superintendent of the
District of Columbia Public Schools shall use such sums as
necessary to provide grants to schools which are not eligible
for other programs referenced under this heading, and to
contract for management consulting services and implement
recommended reforms: Provided further, That the Comptroller
General shall conduct a financial audit of the District of
Columbia Public Schools: Provided further, That of the
$13,000,000 provided for public charter schools in the District
of Columbia, $2,000,000 shall be for the City Build Initiative
to create neighborhood-based charter schools; $2,750,000 shall
be for the Direct Loan Fund for Charter Schools; $150,000 shall
be for administrative expenses of the Office of Charter School
Financing and Support to expand outreach and support of charter
schools; $100,000 shall be for the D.C. Public Charter School
Association to enhance the quality of charter schools;
[$4,000,000] $4,000,000, to remain available until expended,
shall be for the development of an incubator facility for
public charter schools; $2,000,000 shall be for a charter
school college preparatory program; and [$2,000,000 shall be
for a new incentive fund] $2,000,000, to remain available until
expended, shall be for a new incentive fund to reward high
performing or significantly improved public charter schools:
Provided further, That the District of Columbia government
shall establish a dedicated account for the Office of Charter
School Financing and Support (the Office) that shall consist of
the Federal funds appropriated in this Act, any subsequent
appropriations, any unobligated balances from prior fiscal
years, any additional grants, and any interest and principal
derived from loans made to Charter Schools, and repayment of
dollars utilized to support credit enhancement earned in this
or any fiscal year: Provided further, That the account shall be
under the control of the District of Columbia Chief Financial
Officer who shall use those funds solely for the purposes of
carrying out the Credit Enhancement Program, Direct Loan Fund
Grant Program, and any other charter school financing under the
management of the Office: Provided further, That in this and
subsequent fiscal years the Office of the Chief Financial
Officer shall conduct an annual audit of the funds expended by
the Office and provide an annual financial report to the Mayor,
the Council of the District of Columbia, the Office of the
District of Columbia Treasurer and the Committees on
Appropriations of the House of Representatives and Senate for
these funds showing, by object class, the expenditures made and
the purpose therefor: Provided further, That not more than
$250,000 of the total amount appropriated for this program may
be used for administrative expenses and training expenses
related to the cost of the National Charter School
Conference(s) to be hosted by December 2006; and no more than 5
percent of the funds appropriated for the direct loan fund may
be used for administrative expenses related to the
administration and annual audit of the direct loan, grant, and
credit enhancement programs.
* * * * * * *
----------
SECTION 640 OF THE TREASURY AND GENERAL GOVERNMENT APPROPRIATIONS ACT,
2000
Sec. 640. (a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply with respect to violations that relate to reporting
periods that begin on or after January 1, 2000, and that end on
or before December 31, [2005] 2008.
----------
SECTION 403 OF THE GOVERNMENT MANAGEMENT REFORM ACT OF 1994
(Public Law 103-356)
SEC. 403. FRANCHISE FUND PILOT PROGRAMS.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(f) Termination.--The provisions of this section shall expire
on October 1, [2005] 2006.
----------
SECTION 4 OF THE FEDERAL ACTIVITIES INVENTORY REFORM ACT OF 1998
SEC. 4. APPLICABILITY.
(a) * * *
(b) Exceptions.--This Act does not apply to or with respect
to the following:
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(5) Executive agencies with fewer than 100 full-time
employees as of the first day of the fiscal year.
However, such an agency shall be subject to section 2
to the extent it plans to conduct a public-private
competition for the performance of an activity that is
not inherently governmental.
----------
SECTION 604 OF THE FAIR CREDIT REPORTING ACT
Sec. 604. Permissible purposes of reports
(a) In General.--Subject to subsection (c), any consumer
reporting agency may furnish a consumer report under the
following circumstances and no other:
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(3) To a person which it has reason to believe--
(A) * * *
* * * * * * *
(F) otherwise has a legitimate business need
for the information--
(i) * * *
(ii) subject to subsection (d), to
review an account to determine whether
the consumer continues to meet the
terms of the account.
* * * * * * *
[(d) Reserved.]
(d) Limitation on Use of Consumer Report.--
(1) In general.--A credit card issuer may not use any
negative information contained in a consumer report to
increase any annual percentage rate applicable to a
credit card account, or to remove or increase any
introductory annual percentage rate of interest
applicable to such account, for any reason other than
an action or omission of the card holder that is
directly related to such account.
(2) Notice to consumer.--The limitation under
paragraph (1) on the use by a credit card issuer of
information in a consumer report shall be clearly and
conspicuously described to the consumer by the credit
card issuer in any disclosure or statement required to
be made to the consumer under this title.
* * * * * * *
Changes in the Application of Existing Law
Pursuant to clause 3(f)(1)(A) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, the following statements are
submitted describing the effect of provisions proposed in the
accompanying bill which may be considered, under certain
circumstances, to change the application of existing law,
either directly or indirectly. The bill provides that
appropriations shall remain available for more than one year
for a number of programs for which the basic authorizing
legislation does not explicitly authorize such extended
availability. The bill provides, in some instances, for funding
of agencies and activities where legislation has not yet been
finalized. In addition, the bill carries language, in some
instances, permitting activities not authorized by law, or
exempting agencies from certain provisions of law, but which
has been carried in appropriations acts for many years.
The bill includes limitations on official entertainment,
reception and representation expenses for the Secretary of
Transportation, the Secretary of the Treasury and the National
Transportation Safety Board. Similar provisions have appeared
in many previous appropriations Acts. The bill includes a
number of limitations on the purchase of automobiles,
motorcycles, or office furnishings. Similar limitations have
appeared in many previous appropriations Acts. Language is
included in several instances permitting certain funds to be
credited to the appropriations recommended.
In Title VII of the bill, in connection with the General
Services Administration, certain limitations on availability of
revenue in the federal buildings fund and certain legislative
provisions have been carried forward from last year.
The bill continues a number of general provisions applying
to agencies covered by the bill as well as certain provisions
applying government-wide. These provisions have been carried in
the prior year appropriations bill, and some have been carried
for many years. Additionally, the Committee includes a number
of new general provisions.
TITLE I--DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Language is included under Office of the Secretary,
``Salaries and expenses'' specifying certain amounts for
individual offices of the Office of the Secretary and
specifying transfer authority among offices.
Language is included under Office of the Secretary,
``Salaries and expenses'' which would allow crediting the
account with up to $2,500,000 in user fees.
Language is included under the Office of the Secretary,
``Salaries and expenses'' limiting the use of funds available
for the position of Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs.
Language is included that limits operating costs and
capital outlays of the Working Capital Fund for the Department
of Transportation and limits special assessments or
reimbursable agreements levied against any program, project or
activity funded in this Act to only those assessments or
reimbursable agreements that are presented to and approved by
the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations.
Language is included under the Office of the Secretary,
``Minority business resource center'' limiting the amount of
loans that can be subsidized.
Language is included under Office of the Secretary,
``Minority business outreach'' specifying that funds may be
used for business opportunities related to any mode of
transportation.
Language is included under the Office of the Secretary,
``Payments to air carriers'' that allows the Secretary of
Transportation to repay any funds borrowed from to the Federal
Aviation Administration to fund the essential air service
program.
Language is included under the Office of the Secretary,
``Payments to air carriers'' that allows the Secretary of
Transportation to consider the relative subsidy requirements of
carriers when determining between or among carriers competing
to provide service.
Language is included under the Federal Aviation
Administration, ``Operations'' limiting funds for certain
aviation program activities.
Language is included under the Federal Aviation
Administration, ``Operations'' that prohibits funds to plan,
finalize, or implement any regulation that would promulgate new
aviation user fees not specifically authorized by law after the
date of enactment of this Act.
Language is included under the Federal Aviation
Administration, ``Operations'' that credits funds received from
States, counties, municipalities, foreign authorities, other
public authorities, and private sources for expenses incurred
in the provision of agency services.
Language is included under the Federal Aviation
Administration, ``Operations'' that provides $7,500,000 for the
contract tower cost sharing program.
Language is included under the Federal Aviation
Administration, ``Operations'' permitting the use of funds to
enter into a grant agreement with a nonprofit standard setting
organization to develop aviation safety standards.
Language is included under the Federal Aviation
Administration, ``Operations'' that prohibits the use of funds
for new applicants of the second career training program.
Language is included under the Federal Aviation
Administration, ``Operations'' that prohibits the use of funds
for Sunday premium pay unless an employee actually performed
work during the time corresponding to the premium pay.
Language is included under the Federal Aviation
Administration, ``Operations'' that prohibits funds from being
used to operate a manned auxiliary flight service station in
the contiguous United States.
Language is included under the Federal Aviation
Administration, ``Operations'' that prohibits funds for
conducting and coordinating activities on aeronautical charting
and cartography through the Transportation Administrative
Service Center.
Language is included under the Federal Aviation
Administration, ``Operations'' that prohibits the use of funds
to purchase store gift cards or gift certificates through a
government-issued credit card.
Language is included under Federal Aviation Administration,
``Facilities and equipment'' that allows certain funds received
for expenses incurred in the establishment and modernization of
air navigation facilities to be credited to the account.
Language is included under Federal Aviation Administration,
``Facilities and equipment'' that requires the Secretary of
Transportation to transmit a comprehensive capital investment
plan for the Federal Aviation Administration.
Language is included under Federal Aviation Administration,
``Research, engineering, and development'' that allows certain
funds received for expenses incurred in research, engineering
and development to be credited to the account.
Language is included under Federal Aviation Administration,
``Grants-in-aid for airports'' that limits funds available for
the planning or execution of programs with obligations in
excess of $3,600,000,000.
Language is included under Federal Aviation Administration,
``Grants-in-aid for airports'' ``Liquidation of Contract
Authorization'' that provides liquidating cash.
Language is included under Federal Aviation Administration,
``Grants-in-aid for airports'' that provides not more than
$81,346,000 for administration.
Language is included under Federal Aviation Administration,
``Grants-in-aid for airports'' that allows funds to be used for
airports to procure and install runway incursion prevention
systems and devices.
Language is included under Federal Aviation Administration,
``Grants-in-aid for airports'' that specifies $20,000,000 for
the small community air service pilot program.
Language is included under Federal Aviation Administration,
``Grants-in-aid for airports'' that rescinds fiscal year 2005
contract authority above the obligation limitation.
Section 101 requires FAA to accept airport equipment,
subject to certain criteria.
Section 102 limits the number of workyears on a particular
contract.
Section 103 prohibits FAA from requiring airport to provide
specified items without cost, with some exceptions.
Section 104 prohibits the use of funds for changing weight
restrictions or prior permission rules at Teterboro Airport in
New Jersey.
Section 105 extends the terms and conditions of FAAs
aviation insurance program for one additional year.
Language is included under the Federal Highway
Administration, ``Limitation on administrative expenses'' that
provides a limitation on administrative expenses of the agency.
Language is included under the Federal Highway
Administration, ``Federal-aid highways'' that provides a
limitation on obligations for the Federal-aid highways program
and a limitation on research programs.
Language is included under the Federal Highway
Administration, ``Federal-aid highways'' that allows the
Secretary of Transportation to use fees charged and collected
on applicants for a direct loan, guaranteed loan, or line of
credit as authorized under 23 U.S.C. 183 and 184 and makes the
fees used not subject to any limitation on obligations.
Language is included under the Federal Highway
Administration, ``Federal-aid highways, (Liquidation of
Contract Authorization)'' that provides liquidating cash.
Section 110 distributes obligation authority among the
Federal-aid highway programs.
Section 111 provides that funds received by the Bureau of
Transportation Statistics may be credited to the Federal aid
highways account.
Section 112 allows Nevada and Arizona to reimburse debt
service payment on the Bypass Bridge at Hoover Dam project with
future apportionments, in accordance with title 23, United
States Code.
Language is included under the Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration, ``Motor Carrier Safety Operations and
Programs'' that provides a limitation on obligations and
liquidation of contract authorization for the operating
expenses of the agency and for motor carrier safety research
programs.
Language is included under the Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration, ``National Motor Carrier Safety Program'' that
provides a limitation on obligations and liquidation of
contract authorization for motor carrier safety grant programs.
Section 120 subjects funds appropriated in this Act to the
terms and conditions of section 350 of Public Law 107-87,
including that the Secretary of Transportation submit a report
on Mexico-domiciled motor carriers.
Language is included under National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration, ``Operations and research'' prohibiting the
planning or implementation of any rulemaking on labeling
passenger car tires for low rolling resistance.
Language is included under National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration, ``Highway traffic safety grants'' prohibiting
the use of funds for construction, rehabilitation or remodeling
costs or for office furniture for state, local, or private
buildings.
Language is included under National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration, ``Highway traffic safety grants'' limiting
funding available for grants administration.
Language is included under National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration, ``Highway traffic safety grants'' limiting
funding available for grants administration.
Language is included under National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration, ``Highway traffic safety grants'' limiting the
amount of funds available for technical assistance to states
under section 410.
Section 130 allows states to use funds provided under
section 402 of title 23, U.S.C., to produce and place highway
safety public service messages.
Language is included under Federal Railroad Administration,
``Railroad rehabilitation and improvement program'' authorizing
the Secretary to issue fund anticipation notes necessary to pay
obligations under sections 511 and 513 of the Railroad
Revitalization and Regulatory Reform Act.
Language is included under Federal Railroad Administration,
``Railroad rehabilitation and improvement program'' that
prohibits new direct loans or loan guarantee commitments using
federal funds for credit risk premium under section 502 of the
Railroad Revitalization and Regulatory Reform Act.
Language is included under Federal Railroad Administration,
``Grants to the National Railroad Passenger Corporation''
limiting passenger rail routes that may receive federal
subsidies.
Language is included under Federal Transit Administration,
``Administrative Expenses'' prohibiting funds for a permanent
office of transit security.
Language is included under Federal Transit Administration,
``Formula Grants'' making $2,500,000 available for the National
Transit database.
Language is included under Federal Transit Administration,
``Job Access and Reverse Commute Grants'' making up to
$3,000,000 available for technical assistance.
Section 160 exempts previously made transit obligations
from limitations on obligations.
Section 161 allows unobligated funds for projects under
``Capital Investment Grants'' in prior year appropriations Acts
to be used this fiscal year.
Section 162 allows the transfer of prior year
appropriations from older accounts to be merged in to new
accounts with similar, current activities.
Section 191 prohibits obligations incurred during the
current year from construction funds in excess of the
appropriations and limitation contained in this Act or in any
prior appropriation Act.
Section 192 allows the Maritime Administration to furnish
utilities and services and make repairs to any lease, contract,
or occupancy involving government property under the control of
MARAD and rental payments shall be covered into the Treasury as
miscellaneous receipts.
Language is included under Pipeline and Hazardous Materials
Safety Administration, ``Hazardous materials safety'' which
allows up to $1,200,000 in fees collected under 49 U.S.C.
5108(g) to be deposited in the general fund of the Treasury as
offsetting receipts.
Language is included under Pipeline and Hazardous Materials
Safety Administration, ``Hazardous materials safety'' that
credits certain funds received for expenses incurred for
training and other activities incurred in performed of
hazardous materials exemptions and approval functions.
Language is included under Pipeline and Hazardous Materials
Safety Administration, ``Pipeline safety'' that requires the
agency to fund the one-call state grant program.
Language is included under Research and Special Programs
Administration, ``Emergency preparedness grants'' specifying
the Secretary of Transportation or his designee may obligate
funds provided under this head.
Language is included under Research and Innovative
Technology Administration, ``Research and development'' that
credits to the appropriation funds received from States and
other sources for expenses incurred for training.
Language is included under Office of Inspector General,
``Salaries and expenses'' that provides the Inspector General
with all necessary authority to investigate allegations of
fraud by any person or entity that is subject to regulation by
the Department of Transportation. Language is also included
under Office of Inspector General, ``Salaries and expenses''
that authorizes the Office of Inspector General to investigate
unfair or deceptive practices and unfair methods of competition
by domestic and foreign air carriers and ticket agents.
Language is included under Surface Transportation Board,
``Salaries and expenses'' allowing the collection of $1,250,000
in fees established by the Chairman of the Surface
Transportation Board; and providing that the sum appropriated
from the general fund shall be reduced on a dollar-for-dollar
basis as such fees are received.
Section 170. The Committee continues the provision allowing
the Department of Transportation to use funds for aircraft;
motor vehicles; liability insurance; uniforms; or allowances,
as authorized by law.
Section 171. The Committee continues the provision limiting
appropriations for services authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109 to the
rate for an Executive Level IV.
Section 172. The Committee continues the provision
prohibiting funds in this Act for salaries and expenses of more
than 100 political and Presidential appointees in the
Department of Transportation, and prohibits political and
Presidential personnel assigned on temporary detail outside the
Department of Transportation.
Section 173. The Committee continues the provision
prohibiting funds for the implementation of section 404 of
title 23, United States Code.
Section 174. The Committee continues the provision
prohibiting recipients of funds made available in this Act from
releasing personal information, including social security
number, medical or disability information, and photographs from
a driver's license or motor vehicle record, without express
consent of the person to whom such information pertains; and
prohibits the withholding of funds provided in this Act for any
grantee if a state is in noncompliance with this provision.
Section 175. The Committee continues the provision allowing
funds received by the Federal Highway Administration, Federal
Transit Administration, and the Federal Railroad Administration
from states, counties, municipalities, other public
authorities, and private sources to be used for expenses
incurred for training may be credited to each agency's
respective accounts.
Section 176. The Committee continues the provision
authorizing the Secretary of Transportation to allow issuers of
any preferred stock to redeem or repurchase preferred stock
sold to the Department of Transportation.
Section 177. The Committee continues the provision
prohibiting funds in Title I of this Act from being issued for
any grant unless the Secretary of Transportation notifies the
House and Senate Committees on Appropriations not less than
three full business days before any discretionary grant award,
letter of intent, or full funding grant agreement totaling
$1,000,000 or more is announced by the department or its modal
administrations.
Section 178. The Committee continues a provision for the
Department of Transportation allowing funds received from
rebates, refunds, and similar sources to be credited to
appropriations.
Section 179. The Committee continues a provision allowing
amounts from improper payments to a third party contractor that
are lawfully recovered by the Department of Transportation to
be available to cover expenses incurred in recovery of such
payments.
Section 180. The Committee continues a provision allowing
the Secretary of Transportation to transfer unexpended sums
from ``Office of the secretary, salaries and expenses'' to
``Minority business outreach''.
Section 181. The Committee continues the provision
prohibiting the Office of the Secretary of Transportation from
approving assessments or reimbursable agreements pertaining to
funds appropriated to the modal administrations in this Act,
unless such assessments or agreements have completed the normal
reprogramming process for Congressional notification.
Section 182. The Committee continues the provision
prohibiting the use of funds to implement an essential air
service local cost share participation pilot program.
TITLE II--DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Language has been included for Departmental Offices,
Salaries and Expenses, that provides funds for operation and
maintenance of the Treasury Building and Annex; hire of
passenger motor vehicles; maintenance, repairs, and
improvements of, and purchase of commercial insurance policies
for real properties leased or owned overseas; official
reception and representation expenses; unforeseen emergencies
of a confidential nature; grants to state and local law
enforcement groups to help fight money laundering; and
Treasury-wide financial audits and the transfer of these funds.
Language has been included for the Departmentwide Systems
and Capital Investments Program that provides funds for the
development and acquisition of automated data processing
equipment, software, and services; and providing transfer
authority.
Language has been included for the Office of Inspector
General that provides funds to carry out the provisions of the
Inspector General Act of 1978, the hire of vehicles, official
travel expenses, and unforeseen emergencies.
Language has been included for the Treasury Inspector
General for Tax Administration that provides for the purchase
and hire of motor vehicles, services by 5 U.S.C. 3109, travel
expenses, and unforeseen emergencies.
Language has been included for the Financial Crime
Enforcement Network that provides funds for hire of vehicles;
the travel of non-federal personnel attending conferences or
meetings involving financial law enforcement, intelligence, and
regulation; the purchase of personal services contracts; and
assistance to Federal law enforcement agencies with or without
reimbursement.
Language has been included for the Financial Management
Service that provides multiple year availability for systems
modernization funds.
Language has been included for the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax
and Trade Bureau that provides funds for the hire of passenger
motor vehicles, cooperative research and development; and
laboratory assistance to state and local agencies with or
without reimbursement.
Language has been included for the U.S. Mint that
identifies the source of funding for the operations and
activities of the U.S. Mint; specifies the level of funding for
circulating coinage and protective service capital investments;
and provides reimbursement to the General Accounting Office for
a contract study.
Language has been included for the Bureau of the Public
Debt that provides appropriations from the General Fund will be
reduced as fees are collected, and that a portion of the funds
are to be derived from the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund for
administration of the Fund.
Language is included for the Treasury Inspector General for
Tax Administration that provides for the purchase and hire of
motor vehicles, services authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, travel
and representation expenses, and unforeseen emergencies.
Section 210 allows the Department of the Treasury to
purchase uniforms, insurance, and motor vehicles without regard
to the general purchase price limitation, and enter into
contracts with the State Department for health and medical
services for Treasury employees in overseas locations.
Section 211 authorizes transfers, up to 2 percent, between
Departmental Offices, Office of the Inspector General,
Financial Management Service, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade
Bureau, Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, and the Bureau of
the Public Debt appropriations under certain circumstances.
Section 212 limits funds for purchase of law enforcement
vehicles only if the purchase is consistent with vehicle
management principles.
Section 213 prohibits the Department of the Treasury from
undertaking a redesign of the $1 Federal Reserve note.
Section 214 provides for transfers from and reimbursements
to the Salaries and Expenses appropriation of the Financial
Management Service for the purposes of debt collection.
Section 215 continues the Treasury's franchise fund.
Section 216 requires authorization for the construction and
operation of a museum by the United States Mint.
Section 217 prohibits merging of the Mint and the Bureau of
Engraving and Printing.
Section 218 directs the Secretary to report on Chinese
currency.
Language is included under Internal Revenue Service,
``Processing, Assistance and Management'' dedicating funding
for the Internal Revenue Service Oversight Board.
Language is included for the Internal Revenue Service,
``Processing, assistance, and management'' that provides funds
for management services, rent and utilities, services
authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, and official reception and
representation expenses. Language also has been included that
provides funds for the Tax Counseling for the Elderly program,
low-income taxpayer clinic grants, the IRS Oversight Board and
official representation and reception expenses.
Language is included for Internal Revenue Service, ``Tax
law enforcement'' that provides funds for the purchase and hire
of vehicles; services authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109; and
reimbursement of the Social Security Administration.
Language is included for Internal Revenue Service,
``Information systems'' that provides funds for the hire of
motor vehicles and services authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109.
Language has been included for Internal Revenue Service,
``Business systems modernization'' that provides for the
capital asset acquisition of information technology, including
management and related contractual costs of said acquisitions,
including contractual costs associated with operation
authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109 and that restricts the use of the
funds.
Language is included for the Internal Revenue Service,
``Health insurance tax credit administration'' to implement the
health insurance tax credit included in the Trade Act of 2003
(Public Law 107-210).
Section 202 requires the IRS to maintain a training program
in taxpayer's rights, dealing courteously with taxpayers, and
cross-cultural relations.
Section 203 requires the IRS to institute policies and
procedures, which will safeguard the confidentiality of
taxpayer information.
Section 204 requires the IRS to maintain and improve a 1-
800 help line service for taxpayers.
Section 205 prohibits the use of funds to modify the number
or location of taxpayer assistance centers until certain
criteria are met.
TITLE III--DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban
Development, which designates funds for various programs,
activities, and purposes, and specifies the uses of such funds.
Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban
Development, tenant-based rental assistance, which specifies
the allocation of funds and limits the use of certain funds.
Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban
Development, project-based rental assistance, which specifies
the allocation of funds.
Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban
Development, public housing capital fund, which limits the
delegation of certain waiver authorities and prohibits funds
from being used for certain activities.
Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban
Development, public housing operating fund, which sets the
basis for the allocation of funds.
Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban
Development, housing opportunities for persons with AIDS which
sets forth certain requirements for the allocation of funds.
Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban
Development, community development fund, which specifies the
allocation of certain funds; limits the use of certain funds;
and makes technical changes to the uses of certain funds.
Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban
Development, home investment partnerships program, which
specifies the allocation of certain funds.
Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban
Development, homeless assistance grants, which establishes
certain minimum funding and matching requirements; and requires
grantees to integrate homeless programs with other social
service providers.
Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban
Development, housing for the elderly, which specifies the
allocation of certain funds; designates certain funds to be
used only for certain grants; and allows the Secretary to waive
certain provisions governing contract terms.
Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban
Development, housing for persons with disabilities, which
specifies the allocation of certain funds; allows funds to be
used to renew certain contracts; and allows the Secretary to
waive certain provisions governing contract terms.
Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban
Development, flexible subsidy fund, which permits the use of
excess rental charges.
Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban
Development, manufactured housing fees trust fund, which
permits fees to be modified and permits temporary borrowing
authority from the General Fund of the Treasury.
Language is included under the Department of Housing and
Urban Development, policy development and research, which
specify the use of certain funds.
Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban
Development, fair housing and equal opportunity, which place
restrictions on the use of funds for lobbying activities.
Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban
Development, management and administration, which specifies the
allocation of funds; sets forth certain authorities of, and
requirements on, the office of the Chief Financial Officer.
Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban
Development, Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight,
which permits temporary borrowing authority from the General
Fund of the Treasury.
Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban
Development, administrative provisions; prohibits funds to
investigate or prosecute certain lawful activities; prohibits
funds to be used to change the terms and condition on which the
audit of GNMA is conducted; revises allocations for housing
opportunities for persons with AIDS grant recipients; waives
certain section 8 rental payment limits for a demonstration
program; relates to the expenditures for certain corporations
and agencies; relates to allocations of funds in excess of
budget estimates; requires submission of a spending plan for
certain activities; requires certain reporting requirements
regarding departmental funds; requires maintenance of certain
rental assistance contract; allowing the use of certain funds
for maintenance and disposition of certain properties; sets
forth requirements for submission of budget justifications; and
for allocation of certain assistance.
TITLE IV--THE JUDICIARY
Under Supreme Court, ``Salaries and expenses'' language is
included permitting certain funds to remain available until
expended.
Under Courts of Appeals, District Courts, and other
Judicial Services, Court Security, language is included
regarding additional uses of funds.
Section 401 permits use of funds for activities authorized
by 5 U.S.C. 3109.
TITLE V--DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Language under ``Federal Payment for Resident Tuition
Support'' provides that the amount appropriated shall remain
available until expended.
Language under ``Federal Payment for Emergency Planning and
Security Costs'' provides that the amount appropriated shall
remain available until expended.
Language under ``Federal Payment to the District of
Columbia Courts'': (1) provides that all amounts under this
heading shall be apportioned quarterly by the Office of
Management and Budget and obligated and expended in the same
manner as funds appropriated for salaries and expenses of other
Federal agencies, with payroll and financial services to be
provided on a contractual basis with the General Services
Administration; (2) allows funds made available for capital
improvements to remain available until September 30, 2007; and
(3) provides for the reallocation of funds.
Language under ``Defender Services in the District of
Columbia Courts'': (1) provides that the amount appropriated
shall remain available until expended, (2) provides that all
amounts under this heading shall be apportioned quarterly by
the Office of Management and Budget and obligated and expended
in the same manner as funds appropriated for salaries and
expenses of other Federal agencies, with payroll and financial
services to be provided on a contractual basis with the General
Services Administration.
Language under ``Federal Payment to the Court Services and
Offender Supervision Agency for the District of Columbia'': (1)
provides that all amounts under this heading shall be
apportioned quarterly by the Office of Management and Budget
and obligated and expended in the same manner as funds
appropriated for salaries and expenses of other Federal
agencies, with payroll and financial services to be provided on
a contractual basis with the General Services Administration;
(2) authorizes the Director to accept and use gifts to support
offender and defendant programs and equipment and vocational
training services to educate and train offenders and
defendants, (3) authorizes the Director to charge fees to cover
the costs of training and materials distributed at conferences.
Language under ``Federal Payment to the District of
Columbia Water and Sewer Authority'' provides that the amount
appropriated shall remain available until expended.
Language under ``Federal Payment for the Anacostia
Waterfront Initiative'' provides that the amount appropriated
shall remain available until September 30, 2007.
Language under ``Federal Payment to the District of
Columbia for Capital Development'' provides that the amount
appropriated shall remain available until expended.
Section 501 specifies that an appropriation for a
particular purpose or object shall be considered as the maximum
amount that may be expended for said purpose or object.
Section 502 permits funds for travel and payment of dues.
Section 503 appropriates funds for refunding overpayments
of taxes collected and for paying settlements and judgments
against the District of Columbia government.
Section 504 prohibits the use of appropriation for
publicity or propaganda purposes.
Section 505 establishes reprogramming and transfer
requirements.
Section 506 prohibits use of funds only to the objects for
which the appropriations were made.
Section 507 clarifies the pay setting authority for
District employees as the District's Merit Personnel Act rather
than title 5 of the United States Code.
Section 508 directs the Mayor of the District of Columbia
to submit new fiscal year 2006 revenue estimates as of the end
of such quarter.
Section 509 prohibits the District government from renewing
or extending sole source contracts without opening them to the
competitive bidding process as set forth in section 303 of the
District of Columbia Procurement Practices Act of 1985.
Section 510 prohibits the use of Federal funds for
salaries, expenses, or other costs associated with the offices
of U.S. Senator or Representative under section 4(d) of the
D.C. Statehood Constitutional Convention Initiatives of 1979.
Section 511 prohibits Federal funds made available in this
Act from being used to implement or enforce any system of
registration for unmarried cohabitating couples.
Section 512 allows the mayor to accept, obligate, and
expend Federal, private, and other grants received by the
District government that are not reflected in the amounts
appropriated in this Act.
Section 513 restricts the use of official vehicles to
official duties and not between a residence and workplace,
except in the case of a police officer who resides in the
District of Columbia at the discretion of the Chief, an officer
or employee of the D.C. Fire and Emergency Medical Services
Department who resides in the District of Columbia and is on
call 24 hours a day, the Mayor of the District of Columbia, and
the Chairman of the Council of the District of Columbia.
Section 514 prohibits the use of funds for the audit of the
District government's annual financial statements unless the DC
Inspector General either conducts, or contracts for, the audit.
Section 515 prohibits the use of appropriated funds by the
Corporation Counsel or any other officer or entity of the
District government to provide assistance for any petition
drive or civil action which seeks to require Congress to
provide for voting representation in Congress for the District
of Columbia.
Section 516 prohibits the use of any funds in this Act to
carry out any program of distributing sterile needles or
syringes for the hypodermic injection of any illegal drug.
Section 517 requires the Chief Financial Officers of the
District of Columbia to certify that they understand the duties
and restrictions applicable to their agency as a result of this
Act.
Section 518 includes a ``conscience clause'' on legislation
that pertains to contraceptive coverage by health insurance
plans.
Section 519 requires the Mayor of the District of Columbia
to submit quarterly reports on various issues pertaining to the
District of Columbia.
Section 520 requires the CFO to submit a revised
appropriated funds operating budget in the format of the budget
that the District government submitted pursuant to section 442
of the DC Home Rule Act for all agencies no later than 30
calendar days after the date of enactment of this Act.
Section 521 prohibits the transfer of Federal funds to any
department, agency, or instrumentality of the U.S. government,
except pursuant to a transfer made by, or transfer authority
provided in, this or any other appropriation Act.
Section 522 requires the District of Columbia Courts to
transfer all fines levied and collected by the Courts in cases
charging Driving Under the Influence and Driving While Impaired
to the general treasury of the District of Columbia to remain
available until expended and used by the Office of the
Corporation Counsel for enforcement and prosecution of District
traffic alcohol laws.
Section 523 prohibits the use of any funds in the Act to:
(1) pay the fees of an attorney who represents a party in an
action or any attorney who defends any action, including an
administrative proceeding, brought against D.C. Public Schools
under the Individuals With Disabilities Act (IDEA) in excess of
$4,000 for that action; (2) pay the fees of an attorney or firm
whom the CFO determines to have a pecuniary interest, either
through an attorney, officer or employee of the firm, in any
special education diagnostic services, schools, or other
special education service providers; and (3) require all
savings to be used to expand special education services within
the District.
Section 524 requires attorneys in special education cases
brought under IDEA to comply with several reporting
requirements and allow the Inspector General to conduct
investigations to determine the accuracy of the certifications.
Section 525 allows for appropriations in this Act to be
increased by no more than $42,000,000 from unexpended general
funds, and may be used only for unanticipated one-time
expenditures, to avoid deficit spending, for debt reduction,
for unanticipated program needs, or to avoid revenue
shortfalls.
Section 526 makes a technical correction under the heading
of ``Federal Payment for School Improvement'' in Public Law
108-355 (118 Stat. 1327).
Section 527 allows for the obligation of additional ``Other
Type Funds'' under certain circumstances.
Section 528 allows for the obligation of additional ``Local
Funds'' under certain circumstances.
Section 529 allows for short-term borrowing from the
emergency and contingency reserve funds established under
section 450A of the District of Columbia Home Rule Act (Public
Law 98-198; D.C. Official Code, sec. 1-204.50a) under certain
circumstances.
Section 530 maintains funding for the District of Columbia
Inspector General.
TITLE VI--EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
The Committee has continued language that mandates that
unused amounts of the President's expense allowance will revert
to the Treasury and which provides funds for service authorized
by 5 U.S.C. 3109, subsistence expenses, hire of vehicles,
newspapers, periodicals, teletype news service, travel, and
official entertainment expenses. The Committee has continued
language making funds available for reimbursement to the White
House Communications Agency.
The Committee has continued language that provides funds
for operation and maintenance of the White House for official
entertainment expenses; language specifying the authorized use
of funds; language specifying that reimbursable expenses are
the exclusive authority of the Executive Residence to incur
obligations and receive offsetting collections; language
requiring the sponsors of political events to make advance
payments; language requiring the national committee of the
political party of the President to maintain $25,000 on
deposit; language requiring the Executive Residence to ensure
that amounts owed are billed within 60 days of a reimbursable
event and collected within 30 days of the bill notice; language
authorizing the Executive Residence to charge and assess
interest and penalties on late payments; language authorizing
all reimbursements to be deposited into the Treasury as a
miscellaneous receipt; language requiring a report to the
Committee on the reimbursable expenses within 90 days of the
end of the fiscal year; language requiring the Executive
Residence to maintain a system for tracking and classifying
reimbursable events; and language specifying that the Executive
Residence is not exempt from the requirements of subchapter I
or II of chapter 37 of title 31, United States Code.
The Committee has continued language that provides funds
for the hire of vehicles and funds for a capital investment
plan that provides for the continued modernization of the
information technology infrastructure.
The Committee has continued language that provides funds
for expenses, the hire of vehicles, carrying out provisions of
chapter 35 of 44 U.S.C., directs that funds shall be applied
only to items for which appropriations were made, prohibits the
review of agricultural marketing orders and the alteration of
certain testimony. The Committee has continued language
prohibiting the use of funds for the purpose of OMB
calculating, preparing, or approving any tabular or other
material that proposes the sub-allocation of budget authority
or outlays by the Committees on Appropriations.
The Committee has continued language that provides funds
for expenses, research, official reception and representation
expenses, participation in joint projects, and allows for the
acceptance of gifts. The Committee has continued language
providing funds for model state drug law conferences and policy
research and evaluation and making these funds available until
expended.
The Committee has continued language that provides funds
for counternarcotics research and development and the
technology transfer program.
The Committee has continued language that provides a
certain level of funding for State, local and Federal drug
control efforts, and requires obligation of funds within a
specified period of time. The Committee continues language
regarding the availability of funds.
The Committee has continued language that provides funds
for operation and maintenance of the official residence of the
Vice President, the hire of vehicles, official entertainment
expenses and provides for the transfer of funds as necessary.
The Committee has continued language that enables the Vice
President to provide assistance to the President, services
authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, subsistence, and the hire for
vehicles.
Under the Office of Management and Budget, prohibits the
use for funds to restrict the implementation of marketing
orders issued pursuant to the Agriculture Marketing Agreement
Act.
Under the Office of National Drug Control Policy, prevents
a change from the current allocation of funds for the media
campaign.
TITLE VII--INDEPENDENT AGENCIES
Language has been included for the General Services
Administration Federal Buildings Fund that specifies the
conditions under which funds made available can be used and
designates certain projects that can be undertaken. Many
technical provisions have been included regarding use of funds
in the Federal Buildings Fund that are not specifically
authorized by law. Language has been included that limits
project funds available for construction and repair and
alteration of buildings not authorized by law. A more detailed
analysis of the Federal Buildings Funds can be found in the
General Services Administration chapter of this report.
Language has been included for General Services
Administration government-wide policy that provides funds for
policy and evaluation activities associated with the management
of real and personal property assets and certain administrative
services; support responsibilities relating to acquisition,
telecommunications, information technology management, and
related technology activities; and services authorized by 5
U.S.C. 3109.
Language has been included for General Services
Administration operating expenses that provides funds for
expenses for activities associated with personal and real
property; technology management and activities; information
access activities; agency-wide policy direction and management;
other support services; and official reception and
representation expenses.
Language has been included for the GSA Office of Inspector
General that provides funds for information and detection of
fraud; and for awards in recognition of efforts that enhance
the office.
Language has been included for the GSA electronic
government fund that allows these funds to be transferred.
Language has been included for allowances and office staff
for former Presidents that allow a portion of these funds to be
transferred.
Section 701 provides that costs included in rent received
from government corporations for operation, protection,
maintenance, upkeep, repair and improvement shall be credited
to the Federal Buildings Fund.
Section 702 authorizes the use of funds for the hire of
motor vehicles.
Section 703 provides that funds made available for
activities of the Federal Buildings Fund may be transferred
between appropriations with advance approval of the Congress.
Section 704 prohibits the use of funds for developing
courthouse construction requests that do not meet GSA standards
and the priorities of the Judicial Conference.
Section 705 provides that no funds may be used to increase
the amount of occupiable square feet, provide cleaning
services, security enhancements, or any other service usually
provided, to any agency which does not pay the requested rent.
Section 706 permits GSA to pay small claims (up to
$250,000) made against the government.
Section 707 prohibits GSA from conveying a property in
Phoenix, Arizona.
Language has been included which stipulates that mail for
oversees voting and mail for the blind is free.
Language has been included which stipulates that 6-day
delivery and rural mail delivery shall continue at not less
than the 1983 level
Language has been included which prohibits funds from being
used to charge a fee to a child support enforcement agency
seeking the address of a postal customer.
Under the National Credit Union Administration, language
has been included which limits funds for administrative
expenses at $323,000.
Under the Selective Service System, language has been
included which prohibits funds for being used to induct any
person into the US Armed Forces.
TITLE VIII--GENERAL PROVISIONS, THIS ACT
Section 801. The Committee continues the provision
requiring pay raises to be funded within appropriated levels in
this Act or previous appropriations Acts.
Section 802. The Committee continues the provision
prohibiting pay and other expenses for non-Federal parties in
regulatory or adjudicatory proceedings funded in this Act.
Section 803. The Committee continues the provision
prohibiting obligations beyond the current fiscal year and
prohibits transfers of funds unless expressly so provided
herein.
Section 804. The Committee continues the provision limiting
consulting service expenditures of public record in procurement
contracts.
Section 805. The Committee continues the provision
prohibiting funds in this Act to be transferred without express
authority.
Section 806. The Committee continues the provision
prohibiting the use of funds to engage in activities that would
prohibit the enforcement of section 307 of the 1930 Tariff Act.
Section 807. The Committee continues the provision
concerning employment rights of Federal employees who return to
their civilian jobs after assignment with the Armed Forces.
Section 808. The Committee continues the provision
concerning compliance with the Buy American Act.
Section 809. The Committee continues a provision
prohibiting the use of funds by any person or entity convicted
of violating the Buy American Act.
Section 810. The Committee modifies a provision specifying
reprogramming procedures by subjecting the establishment of new
offices and reorganizations to the reprogramming process.
Section 811. The Committee continues the provision
providing that fifty percent of unobligated balances may remain
available for certain purposes.
Section 812. The Committee includes a provision providing
that funds used by the Executive Office of the President not be
used to request any official background investigation from the
Federal Bureau of Investigation.
Section 813. The Committee includes a provision requiring
that cost accounting standards not apply to a contract under
the Federal Health Benefits Program.
Section 814. The Committee continues a provision regarding
non-foreign area cost of living allowances.
Section 815. The Committee continues the provision
prohibiting the expenditure of funds for abortions under the
FEHBP.
Section 816. The Committee continues the provision
prohibiting the expenditure of funds for abortions under the
FEHBP unless the life of the mother is in danger or the
pregnancy is a result of an act of rape or incest.
Section 817. The Committee continues a new provision
waiving restrictions on the purchase of non-domestic articles,
materials, and supplies in the case of acquisition by the
Federal Government of information technology.
Section 818. The Committee continues the provision
prohibiting the use of funds for a proposed rule relating to
the determination that real estate brokerage is a financial
activity.
Section 819. The Committee continues the provision
prohibiting the use of funds to implement an Essential Air
Service (EAS) local Cost Share Participation pilot program.
Section 820. The Committee includes a provision that
extends the Federal Election Commission's administrative fine
program through December 31, 2008.
TITLE IX--GOVERNMENT-WIDE PROVISIONS
Departments, Agencies, and Corporations
Section 901. The Committee continues the provision
authorizing agencies to pay costs of travel to the United
States for the immediate families of federal employees assigned
to foreign duty in the event of a death or a life threatening
illness of the employee.
Section 902. The Committee continues the provision
requiring agencies to administer a policy designed to ensure
that all of its workplaces are free from the illegal use of
controlled substances.
Section 903. The Committee continues the provision
regarding price limitations on vehicles to be purchased by the
Federal Government.
Section 904. The Committee continues the provision allowing
funds made available to agencies for travel, to also be used
for quarter allowances and cost-of-living allowances.
Section 905. The Committee continues the provision
prohibiting the government, with certain specified exceptions,
from employing non-U.S. citizens whose posts of duty would be
in the continental U.S.
Section 906. The Committee continues the provision ensuring
that agencies will have authority to pay GSA bills for space
renovation and other services.
Section 907. The Committee continues the provision allowing
agencies to finance the costs of recycling and waste prevention
programs with proceeds from the sale of materials recovered
through such programs.
Section 908. The Committee continues the provision
providing that funds may be used to pay rent and other service
costs in the District of Columbia.
Section 909. The Committee continues the provision
prohibiting payments to persons filling positions for which
they have been nominated after the Senate has voted not to
approve the nomination.
Section 910. The Committee continues the provision
prohibiting interagency financing of groups absent prior
statutory approval.
Section 911. The Committee continues the provision
authorizing the Postal Service to employ guards and give them
the same special police powers as certain other federal guards.
Section 912. The Committee continues the provision
prohibiting the use of funds for enforcing regulations
disapproved in accordance with the applicable law of the U.S.
Section 913. The Committee continues the provision limiting
the pay increases of certain prevailing rate employees.
Section 914. The Committee continues the provision limiting
the amount of funds that can be used for redecoration of
offices under certain circumstances.
Section 915. The Committee continues the provision to allow
for interagency funding of national security and emergency
telecommunications initiatives.
Section 916. The Committee continues the provision
requiring agencies to certify that a Schedule C appointment was
not created solely or primarily to detail the employee to the
White House.
Section 917. The Committee continues the provision
requiring agencies to administer a policy designed to ensure
that all workplaces are free from discrimination and sexual
harassment.
Section 918. The Committee continues the provision
prohibiting the payment of any employee who prohibits,
threatens or prevents another employee from communicating with
Congress.
Section 919. The Committee continues the provision
prohibiting Federal training not directly related to the
performance of official duties.
Section 920. The Committee continues the provision
prohibiting the expenditure of funds for implementation of
agreements in nondisclosure policies unless certain provisions
are included.
Section 921. The Committee continues the provision
prohibiting propaganda, publicity and lobbying by executive
agency personnel in support or defeat of legislative
initiatives.
Section 922. The Committee continues the provision
prohibiting any federal agency from disclosing an employee's
home address to any labor organization, absent employee
authorization or court order.
Section 923. The Committee continues the provision
prohibiting funds to be used to provide non-public information
such as mailing or telephone lists to any person or
organization outside the government without the approval of the
Committees on Appropriations.
Section 924. The Committee continues the provision
prohibiting the use of funds for propaganda and publicity
purposes not authorized by Congress.
Section 925. The Committee continues the provision
directing agency employees to use official time in an honest
effort to perform official duties.
Section 926. The Committee continues the provision, with
technical modifications, authorizing the use of funds to
finance an appropriate share of the Joint Financial Management
Improvement Program.
Section 927. The Committee continues the provision, with
technical modifications, authorizing agencies to transfer funds
to the Governmentwide Policy account of GSA to finance an
appropriate share of the Joint Financial Management Improvement
Program and other purposes.
Section 928. The Committee continues the provision, to
prohibit any department or agency from using appropriated funds
to independently contract with private companies to provide
online employment applications and processing services.
Section 929. The Committee continues the provision that
permits breast feeding in a federal building or on federal
property if the woman and child are authorized to be there.
Section 930. The Committee continues the provision that
permits interagency funding of the National Science and
Technology Council and provides for a report on the budget and
resources of the National Science and Technology Council. The
report should include the entire budget of the National Science
and Technology Council.
Section 931. The Committee continues the provision
requiring documents involving the distribution of federal funds
to indicate the agency providing the funds and the amount
provided.
Section 932. The Committee extends the authorization period
for agency franchise funds by striking ``October 1, 2005'' and
inserting ``October 1, 2006'', as requested.
Section 933. The Committee continues the provision
prohibiting the use of funds to monitor personal information
relating to the use of federal internet sites to collect,
review, or create any aggregate list that includes personally
identifiable information relating to access to or use of any
federal internet site of such agency.
Section 934. The Committee continues the provision
requiring health plans participating in the FEHBP to provide
contraceptive coverage and provides exemptions to certain
religious plans.
Section 935. The Committee continues the provision
providing recognition of the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency as the
official anti-doping agency.
Section 936. The Committee continues a provision allowing
funds for official travel to be used by departments and
agencies, if consistent with OMB and Budget Circular A-126, to
participate in the fractional aircraft ownership pilot program.
Section 937. The Committee continues the provision
prohibiting funds from being expended for the purchase of a
product or service offered by Federal Prison Industries, Inc.
unless the agency determines the products to constitute the
best value to the buying agency.
Section 938. The Committee continues a provision
prohibiting funds for implementation of OPM regulations
limiting detailees to the Legislative Branch, and implementing
limitations on the Coast Guard Congressional Fellowship
Program.
Section 939. The Committee continues a provision requiring
agencies to evaluate the creditworthiness of an individual
before issuing the individual a government travel charge card
and limits agency actions accordingly.
Section 940. The Committee continues a provision providing
that restricts the use of funds for federal law enforcement
training facilities.
Section 941. The Committee continues a provision that
allows for transfer authority among certain offices of the
Executive Office of the President.
Section 942. The Committee includes a provision amending
P.L. 105-270.
Section 943. The Committee includes a provision concerning
the use of funds for the ``e-gov'' initiative that were not
appropriated specifically for that purpose.
Section 944. The Committee continues a provision, with
modification, providing that the adjustment in rates of basic
pay for employees under statutory pay systems taking effect in
fiscal year 2006 shall be an increase of 3.1 percent.
Section 945. The Committee includes a new provision
prohibiting a credit card issuer from adjusting a card holder's
annual percentage rate based on information unrelated to the
account.
Section 946. The Committee includes a provision that
prohibits executive branch agencies from creating prepackaged
news stories that are broadcast or distributed in the United
States unless the story includes a clear notification within
the text or audio of that news story that the prepackaged news
story was prepared or funded by the executive branch agency.
Section 947. The Committee includes a new provision
prohibiting funds from implementing a final rule published
February 25, 2005 regarding Cuba exports.
Comparison With the Budget Resolution
Clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives requires an explanation of compliance with
section 308(a)(1)(A) of the Congressional Budget and
Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-344), as
amended, which requires that the report accompanying a bill
providing new budget authority contain a statement detailing
how that authority compares with the reports submitted under
section 302 of the Act for the most recently agreed to
concurrent resolution on the budget for the fiscal year from
the Committee's section 302(a) allocation.
Five-Year Outlay Projections
In compliance with section 308(a)(1)(B) of the
Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974
(Public Law 93-344), as amended, the following table contains
five-year projections associated with the budget authority
provided in the accompanying bill as provided to the Committee
by the Congressional Budget Office.
Financial Assistance to State and Local Governments
In accordance with section 308(a)(1)(C) of the
Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974
(Public Law 93-344), as amended, the Congressional Budget
Office has provided the following estimates of new budget
authority and outlays provided by the accompanying bill for
financial assistance to state and local governments.
ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF HON. DAVID R. OBEY AND HON. JOHN W. OLVER
Several factors contributed to a number of serious problems
in the fiscal year 2006 Transportation, Treasury, HUD,
Judiciary, District of Columbia, and Independent Agencies
Committee reported bill.
President's Budget Was Inadequate
The President's budget request inadequately funded numerous
agencies. The Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program,
the Community Development Financial Institutions (CDFI) fund,
and the High Intensity Drug Trafficking Agencies (HIDTA)
program were all significantly under funded and proposed for
transfer to other Departments. Amtrak was zeroed out creating a
nearly $900 million reduction from the FY05 enacted level. His
budget also featured hundreds of millions of dollars of fee
increases and rescissions for which the Subcommittee also had
to find funding.
Subcommittee Allocation Was Also Inadequate
Although the Subcommittee's 302(b) allocation addressed
some of the shortfalls and gimmicks, overall budget constraints
kept the Appropriations Committee from fully making the
Subcommittee whole. The overall lack of funds to address
national needs such as Amtrak and community development is the
direct result of the Majority's 2006 Budget Resolution. As the
Majority Leader pointed out:
``This is the budget that the American people voted for
when they returned a Republican House, a Republican Senate and
a Republican White House last November.''
Based on the Majority Leader's logic, the American people
voted to kill Amtrak, to cut CDBG and to terminate the HOPE VI,
Youthbuild and Brownfields initiatives at the Department of
Housing and Urban Development.
Committee Reorganization Led to Difficult Tradeoffs
Under the reorganization proposal mandated by the
Republican Leadership, a number of unrelated priorities are now
grouped together in this bill. Instead of simplifying the
process, as the Republican Leadership claimed it would, this
reorganization created a bill that is made up of several
disparate parts without any common theme among them.
Departments and agencies that were key components of five
separate Subcommittees as recently as three years ago have now
been lumped together into a single bill. This structure
inevitably leads to trade-offs among programs that will harm
some agencies at the benefit of others. The Transportation,
Treasury, HUD, the Judiciary, District of Columbia and
Independent Agencies reported bill has essentially become an
Omnibus bill.
The Committee's reorganization placed this Subcommittee in
the unenviable position of having to decide between funding
transportation or housing programs, between funding for the
judicial branch or funding for the White House, between funding
for tax law compliance or election assistance. All are serious
national responsibilities that we are obligated to meet. They
will not all be met by this bill.
Unfortunately, in their vote on the budget resolution
earlier this year, the Majority decided that super-sized tax
cuts for millionaires are more important than properly funding
these priorities. As a result, Amtrak as well as several HUD
programs are zeroed out or significantly under funded.
The Committee Bill Will Shut Down Amtrak
National passenger rail as we know it will cease to exist
if this bill becomes law.
Taken at face value, the Majority's proposal will shut down
nearly half of the routes that Amtrak operates and deny more
than 20 states of Amtrak service. We believe, however, that it
will be impossible for Amtrak to continue to operate even a
limited number of routes under the funding levels and terms of
this bill.
If one were to play out what will happen if this Amtrak
proposal is enacted, Amtrak will be placed in such a financial
bind that it will terminate all intercity passenger rail
service, including the Northeast Corridor. It will even have a
ripple effect of disrupting commuter and freight rail services
throughout the country.
The Majority's calculations with respect to the eighteen
routes that would remain are overly optimistic. The $550
million provided is insufficient to maintain even a limited
level of service. Of this amount, the bill sets forth $500
million for operating costs and $50 million for capital.
Fiscal year 2006 operating expenses cannot be covered for
$500 million--even if Amtrak only operates a reduced number of
routes. The closure of some routes would result in the layoff
of thousands of Amtrak workers. First year severance
obligations to these employees would total as much as $300
million or more and severance costs would continue for several
years. After mandatory debt service payments of $275 million to
$287 million and mandatory labor payments of $300 million or
more are made, no funds would be available to operate even a
few routes and no funds would be available to invest in sorely
needed capital upgrades.
The $50 million set aside for Northeast Corridor capital
projects is also wholly inadequate. The amount provided in the
bill is less than ten percent of Amtrak's fiscal year 2006
capital grant request of $787 million. It is also insufficient
for covering mandatory life safety expenditures including work
on the Penn Station tunnels and repairs on high-speed tracks
required by Federal Railroad Administration track safety
regulations. Under this bill, the Northeast Corridor would
remain in a state of disrepair and Amtrak would continue to be
vulnerable to a bridge or tunnel failure that could have
catastrophic effects for Amtrak, commuter rail and freight rail
operations throughout the Northeast.
The Committee reported bill also fails to provide any
funding for other capital needs outside the Northeast Corridor,
including legally required inspections and maintenance on
equipment and tracks, infrastructure outside the Northeast and
necessary Americans with Disabilities Act accessibility
projects.
If national passenger rail ceases to operate, it will be a
tragedy caused by this Administration. The Amtrak board
consists solely of Bush appointees. The so-called reform
proposals that would obliterate the current system are all
being pushed by President Bush's Department of Transportation.
The inadequate funding provided by this bill will be the final
nail in Amtrak's coffin.
Housing Programs Will Be Severely Impacted
The Committee bill shortchanges many important housing and
community development activities. To say that the Committee has
placed a high priority on funding for our communities and for
housing low-and moderate-income persons would be highly
misleading.
In what amounts to house cleaning, the Chairman chose to
``clear out the underbrush'' at HUD by eliminating or
transferring several smaller programs. The Section 107 programs
were transferred and merged with the activities under Policy
Development and Research. Many other programs are zeroed out by
the subcommittee including: Brownfields, Empowerment Zones,
section 108 loan guarantees, and La Raza activities. All of
these programs have contributed to the improvement of our
communities.
Another program zeroed out in the Chairman's mark deserves
special mention: Youthbuild. Youthbuild provides a valuable
service by building or rehabilitating housing for homeless or
low-income people in their own communities while helping young
people complete their education.
The President proposed that Youthbuild be transferred to
the Department of Labor, but he has not presented to Congress
legislation to carry this out. In the meantime, neither this
Subcommittee, nor the Labor-HHS Subcommittee chose to fund the
program. This very effective and worthwhile program was not
funded simply because two subcommittee chairmen could not agree
on jurisdiction and refused to take responsibility and pay for
it.
While the Committee provided an increase above the
President's request for public housing capital and operating
funds, the amount for the public housing capital fund has
decreased by more than 20 percent since fiscal year 2000 and
the public housing operating fund has increased a mere four
percent in that same time period. The demand remains high and
the need is great. Currently there is a backlog of around $20
billion in public housing capital funding needs and the
operating fund needs continue to grow because of factors like
the high costs of energy.
Additionally, funding for the Revitalization of Severely
Distressed Public Housing--HOPE VI--has been eliminated by the
Committee. HOPE VI transforms the nation's worst public housing
into mixed-income urban communities. These grants serve as the
critical seed capital to leverage additional public and private
sector investment in distressed neighborhoods.
Finally, the two fair housing programs at the Department
were cut in the President's request and agreed to by the
subcommittee--Despite the fact that more than 3.7 million fair
housing violations still occur annually. Incredibly, despite
HUD's advocacy and the fact that homeownership rates are at
all-time high, the homeownership gap between white and blacks
is worse now than in 1940.
Other Aspects of the Bill
Despite the Amtrak and housing problems identified above,
the bill contains a number of items with which we strongly
agree. The Subcommittee provided significant increases for
surface transportation funding (excluding Amtrak) and aviation
programs. Further investment in the transportation
infrastructure is vital for the safety and well-being of all of
our constituents.
The Federal Courts received a significant increase over the
FY05 enacted levels. It is our hope that these funding levels
can be sustained so that court personnel can remain at the
current levels during fiscal year 2006.
The Chairman included language precluding the IRS from
closing Taxpayer Assistance Centers until all the Committee's
serious concerns about the proposal's impact on customer
service are addressed. The Administration's plan to close 68
Taxpayer Assistance Centers seems to be an ill-conceived
initiative driven by budget decisions rather than an exercise
in good management and sound customer service.
The provisions that allow the District of Columbia to
administer locally generated funds are an important step and we
applaud the Chairman for this effort.
Within housing, the Chairman wisely rejected the
President's proposal to transfer the Community Development
Block Grant program to the Department of Commerce and instead
kept the program at the Department of Housing and Urban
Development. Unfortunately, the funding level for the CDBG
formula grants is down by $250 million or six percent from last
year's level.
We are also pleased that the Subcommittee chose to include
direction to the Department regarding the public housing
negotiated rule on operating subsidies. HUD proceeded in
publishing a rule that blatantly disregarded the negotiations
that occurred between stakeholders and HUD. The subcommittee
instructed the Department to use this original negotiated rule.
The Subcommittee also recognized that the ``snapshot''
funding formula used in fiscal year 2005 may have had an
adverse impact on some agencies in the section 8 voucher
program. The subcommittee is to be commended for their initial
effort to correct some of those problems created in 2005 with a
set-aside of $45 million. We look forward to working with the
majority as guidelines for distributing fiscal year 2006
section 8 funds are drafted during conference.
Among independent agencies, the National Historic Records
and Preservation Commission grants program that is administered
by the National Archives and Records Administration is funded
at $7.5 million. This program that is important to historians
and researchers had been zeroed out in the Bush budget. The
Chairman also recognized the importance of the Udall Foundation
by properly funding the environmental mediation and trust fund
accounts.
Conclusion
It is difficult to imagine this is the budget for which the
American people voted. On the whole, the Chairman did the best
he could given the circumstances. But the circumstances were
wholly avoidable.
The President could have presented to the Congress a budget
that was not riddled with gimmicks and new fees designed to
hide the fact that his own fiscal policies are failing the
nation. The Congress could have passed a sensible budget
resolution that asked people making more than $1 million this
year to do with a slightly smaller tax cut so we could fund
important national priorities. That did not happen. So we are
left with a bill that will shut down Amtrak, cut Community
Development Block Grants, and terminate several effective
housing programs, including HOPE VI, Youthbuild and
Brownfields.
We do not believe this is the budget for which the American
people voted. Under the current leadership in the White House
and the Congress, however, this is the budget the American
people are going to get.
Dave Obey.
John W. Olver.