[Senate Report 109-293]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]



                                                       Calendar No. 535
109th Congress                                                   Report
                                 SENATE
 2d Session                                                     109-293

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



 
TRANSPORTATION, TREASURY, HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, THE JUDICIARY, 
             AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2007
                                _______
                                

                 July 26, 2006.--Ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

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

                              R E P O R T

                        [To accompany H.R. 5576]

    The Committee on Appropriations, to which was referred the 
bill (H.R. 5576) 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, 2007, and for other 
purposes, reports the same to the Senate with an amendment and 
recommends that the bill as amended do pass.
    The Committee on Appropriations reports the bill (S. 0000) 
making appropriations for the Departments of Transportation and 
the Treasury; the Executive Office of the President; and 
certain independent agencies for the fiscal year ending 
September 30, 2006, and for other purposes, reports favorably 
thereon and recommends that the bill do pass. deg.



Amounts of new budget (obligational) authority for fiscal year 2007

Total of bill as reported to the Senate................. $89,389,989,000
Amount of 2006 appropriations \1\....................... 102,948,146,000
Amount of 2007 budget estimate..........................  86,748,272,000
Amount of House allowance \2\...........................  86,656,536,000
Bill as recommended to Senate compared to--
    2006 appropriations................................. -13,558,157,000
    2007 budget estimate................................  +2,641,717,000
    House allowance.....................................  +2,654,889,000

\1\ Includes $20,685,563,000 in emergency appropriations.
\2\ Excludes $575,200,000 considered by the House for the District of 
Columbia.


                            C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page

Program, Project, and Activity...................................     4
Reprogramming Guidelines.........................................     4
Relationship With Budget Offices.................................     5
Congressional Budget Justifications..............................     5
House Appropriations.............................................     7
Title I: Department of Transportation:
    Office of the Secretary......................................     8
    Federal Aviation Administration..............................    21
    Federal Highway Administration...............................    39
    Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration..................    51
    National Highway Traffic Safety Administration...............    57
    Federal Railroad Administration..............................    66
    Federal Transit Administration...............................    72
    Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation................    87
    Maritime Administration......................................    88
    Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration.......    92
    Research and Innovative Technology Administration............    94
    Bureau of Transportation Statistics..........................    95
    Office of Inspector General..................................    95
    Surface Transportation Board.................................    97
    Administrative Provisions--Department of Transportation......    98
Title II: Department of the Treasury:
    Departmental Offices.........................................   100
    Financial Crimes Enforcement Network.........................   107
    Financial Management Service.................................   108
    Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau.....................   109
    Bureau of Engraving and Printing.............................   109
    Bureau of the Public Debt....................................   110
    Community Development Financial Institutions Fund............   111
    United States Mint...........................................   112
    Internal Revenue Service.....................................   112
    Department of the Treasury: Administrative Provisions........   122
Title III: Department of Housing and Urban Development:
    Tenant-based Rental Assistance...............................   124
    Project-based Rental Assistance..............................   127
    Public Housing Capital Fund..................................   128
    Public Housing Operating Fund................................   128
    Revitalization of Severely Distressed Public Housing [HOPE 
      VI]........................................................   129
    Native American Housing Block Grant..........................   130
    Indian Housing Loan Guarantee Fund Program Account...........   131
    Community Planning and Development...........................   132
    Housing Programs.............................................   158
    Government National Mortgage Association.....................   164
    Policy Development and Research..............................   165
    Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity...........................   166
    Office of Lead Hazard Controln...............................   167
    Management and Administration................................   168
    Office of Inspector General..................................   169
        Working Capital Fund.....................................   170
    Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight...............   170
    Administrative Provisions....................................   171
Title IV: The Judiciary:
    Supreme Court of the United States...........................   173
    United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.......   174
    U.S. Court of International Trade............................   175
    Courts of Appeals, District Courts, and Other Judicial 
        Services.................................................   175
    Defender Services............................................   178
    Fees of Jurors and Commissioners.............................   179
    Court Security...............................................   179
    Administrative Office of the United States Courts............   180
    Federal Judicial Center......................................   181
    Judicial Retirement Funds....................................   182
    United States Sentencing Commission..........................   182
    Administrative Provisions--The Judiciary.....................   182
Title V: Executive Office of the President and Funds Appropriated 
  to the President:
    Compensation of the President................................   184
    White House Office...........................................   184
    Executive Residence at the White House.......................   185
    Council of Economic Advisers.................................   186
    Office of Policy Development.................................   186
    National Security Council....................................   187
    Office of Administration.....................................   187
    Office of Management and Budget..............................   188
    Office of National Drug Control Policy.......................   189
    Funds Appropriated to the President..........................   191
    Unanticipated Needs..........................................   195
    Special Assistance to the President..........................   195
    Official Residence of the Vice President.....................   196
Title VI: Independent Agencies:
    Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board...   197
    Consumer Product Safety Commission...........................   198
    Election Assistance Commission...............................   198
    Federal Election Commission..................................   199
    Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation........................   199
    Federal Labor Relations Authority............................   200
    Federal Maritime Commission..................................   200
    General Services Administration..............................   201
    Merit Systems Protection Board...............................   210
    Morris K. Udall Scholarship and Excellence in National 
      Environmental Policy Foundation............................   211
    National Historical Publications and Records Commission......   214
    National Credit Union Administration.........................   215
    National Transportation Safety Board.........................   217
    Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation........................   218
    Office of Government Ethics..................................   219
    Office of Personnel Management...............................   219
    Office of Special Counsel....................................   223
    Selective Service System.....................................   225
    United States Interagency Council on Homelessness............   225
    United States Postal Service.................................   227
    United States Tax Court......................................   229
    Statement Concerning General Provisions......................   229
Title VII: General Provisions This Act...........................   230
Title VIII: General Provisions, Departments, Agencies, and 
  Corporations...................................................   232
Title IX: Air Transportation to and From Love Field..............   235
Compliance With Paragraph 7, Rule XVI, of the Standing Rules of 
  the Sen- 
  ate............................................................   236
Compliance With Paragraph 7(c), Rule XXVI, of the Standing Rules 
  of the Senate..................................................   237
Compliance With Paragraph 12, Rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of 
  the Senate.....................................................   238
Budgetary Impact Statement.......................................   249
Comparative Statement............................................   250

                     PROGRAM, PROJECT, AND ACTIVITY

    During fiscal year 2007, 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'' [PPA] shall mean any item for which a dollar amount 
is contained in appropriations acts (including joint 
resolutions providing continuing appropriations) or 
accompanying reports of the House and Senate Committees on 
Appropriations, or accompanying conference reports and joint 
explanatory statements of the committee of conference. This 
definition shall apply to all programs for which new budget 
(obligational) authority is provided, as well as to 
discretionary grants and discretionary grant allocations made 
through either bill or report language. In addition, the 
percentage reductions made pursuant to a sequestration order to 
funds appropriated for facilities and equipment, Federal 
Aviation Administration, shall be applied equally to each 
budget item that is listed under said account 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.

                        REPROGRAMMING GUIDELINES

    The Committee includes a provision (sec. 710) establishing 
the authority by which funding available to the agencies funded 
by this Act may be reprogrammed for other purposes. The 
provision specifically requires the advanced approval of the 
House and Senate Committees on Appropriations of any proposal 
to reprogram funds that: (1) creates a new program; (2) 
eliminates a program, project, or activity [PPA]; (3) increases 
funds or personnel for any PPA for which funds have been denied 
or restricted by the Congress; (4) proposes to redirect funds 
that were directed in such reports for a specific activity to a 
different purpose; (5) augments an existing PPA in excess of 
$5,000,000 or 10 percent, whichever is less; (6) reduces an 
existing PPA by $5,000,000 or 10 percent, whichever is less; or 
(7) creates, reorganizes, or restructures offices different 
from the congressional budget justifications or the table at 
the end of the Committee report, whichever is more detailed.
    The Committee retains the requirement that each agency 
submit an operating plan to the House and Senate Committees on 
Appropriations not later than 60 days after enactment of this 
Act to establish the baseline for application of reprogramming 
and transfer authorities provided in this act. Specifically, 
each agency should provide a table for each appropriation with 
columns displaying the budget request; adjustments made by 
Congress; adjustments for rescissions, if appropriate; and the 
fiscal year enacted level. The table shall delineate the 
appropriation both by object class and by PPA. The report must 
also identify items of special congressional interest.
    The Committee expects the agencies and bureaus to submit 
reprogramming requests in a timely manner and to provide a 
thorough explanation of the proposed reallocations, including a 
detailed justification of increases and reductions and the 
specific impact the proposed changes will have on the budget 
request for the following fiscal year. Except in emergency 
situations, reprogramming requests should be submitted no later 
than June 30.
    The Committee expects each agency to manage its programs 
and activities within the amounts appropriated by Congress. The 
Committee reminds agencies that reprogramming requests should 
be submitted only in the case of an unforeseeable emergency or 
a situation that could not have been anticipated when 
formulating the budget request for the current fiscal year. 
Further, the Committee notes that when a Department or agency 
submits a reprogramming or transfer request to the Committees 
on Appropriations and does not receive identical responses from 
the House and Senate, it is the responsibility of the 
Department to reconcile the House and Senate differences before 
proceeding, and if reconciliation is not possible, to consider 
the request to reprogram funds unapproved.
    The Committee would also like to clarify that this section 
applies to Working Capital Funds and Forfeiture Funds and that 
no funds may be obligated from such funds to augment programs, 
projects or activities for which appropriations have been 
specifically rejected by the Congress, or to increase funds or 
personnel for any PPA above the amounts appropriated by this 
Act.

                    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, 
offices, and commissions. The Committee has often pointed to 
the natural affinity and relationship between the budget 
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 any 
office or officer in the departments, agencies, and 
commissions, the primary conjunction between the Committee and 
these entities must be through the budget offices. To help 
ensure the Committee's ability to perform its responsibilities, 
the Committee insists on having direct, unobstructed, and 
timely access to the budget offices and expects to be able to 
receive forthright and complete responses from that office and 
its employees.

                  CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET JUSTIFICATIONS

    While the Committee supports the concept of the Program 
Assessment Rating Tool [PART] as a method for evaluating 
programs by linking performance, goals, and benchmarks with 
funding decisions, the process has failed largely through the 
inability of the administration to establish meaningful 
benchmarks and program goals that can be used as a valid 
measure for the success of a program and its funding 
requirements/needs. In too many cases, the PART analysis 
appears to be overly subjective and designed to reach certain 
preconceived conclusions about a program's validity and 
accomplishments and its budget needs.
    This approach reduces PART's value as a tool for measuring 
the contributions of a program and to what extent a program 
should be funded. More troubling, OMB and Federal agencies have 
tended to accommodate an increasing amount of PART performance 
data in the budget justifications by eliminating fundamental 
and objective programmatic budget data that is critical to the 
work of the Committee. This trend has made it increasingly 
difficult for the Committee to perform a meaningful review of 
budget justifications, including the ability to conduct 
necessary budget oversight work as well as the ability to reach 
valid and comprehensive funding decisions absent a substantial 
amount of additional review and budget analysis.
    Budget justifications are prepared not for the use of the 
agency, but instead are the primary tool used by the House and 
Senate Committees on Appropriations to evaluate the resource 
requirements and fiscal needs of agencies. The Committee is 
aware that the format and presentation of budget materials is 
largely left to the agency within presentation objectives set 
forth by OMB. In fact, OMB Circular A-11, part 6 specifically 
states that the ``agency should consult with your congressional 
committees beforehand to ensure their awareness of your plans 
to modify the format of agency budget documents.'' The 
Committee is disappointed that none of the agencies funded 
under this act have recently heeded this direction. 
Nevertheless, the Committee expects all the budget 
justification to provide the data needed to make appropriate 
and meaningful funding decisions.
    While the Committee values the inclusion of performance 
data and presentations, it is important to ensure that, in the 
implementation of the PART analysis, vital budget information 
that the Committee needs is not lost. Therefore, the Committee 
directs that justifications submitted with the fiscal year 2008 
budget request by agencies funded under this act must contain 
the customary level of detailed data and explanatory statements 
to support the appropriations requests at the level of detail 
contained in the funding table included at the end of the 
report. Among other items, agencies shall provide a detailed 
discussion of proposed new initiatives, proposed changes in the 
agency's financial plan from prior year enactment, and detailed 
data on all programs and comprehensive information on any 
office or agency restructurings. At a minimum, each agency must 
also provide adequate justification for funding and staffing 
changes for each individual office and materials that compare 
programs, projects, and activities that are proposed for fiscal 
year 2008 to the fiscal year 2007 enacted level.
    The Committee is aware that the analytical materials 
required for review by the Committee are unique to each agency 
in this act. Therefore, the Committee expects that the each 
agency will coordinate with the House and Senate Committees on 
Appropriations in advance on its planned presentation for its 
budget justification materials in support of the fiscal year 
2008 budget request.

                          HOUSE APPROPRIATIONS

    The Senate Committee recommendation excludes District of 
Columbia appropriations items that were funded by the House in 
this bill. The Committee believes that it is appropriate to 
fund those items in a separate bill. For ease of comparison, 
the Committee report excludes in the ``House allowance'' those 
items that are addressed in the District of Columbia 
Appropriations Act, 2007, an original Senate bill.

                                TITLE I

                      DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

                        Office of the Secretary

    Section 3 of the Department of Transportation Act of 
October 15, 1966 (Public Law 89-670) provides for establishment 
of the Office of the Secretary of Transportation [OST]. The 
Office of the Secretary is comprised of the Secretary and the 
Deputy Secretary immediate and support offices; the Office of 
the Under Secretary of Transportation for Policy, including the 
offices of the Assistant Secretary for Aviation and 
International Affairs and the Assistant Secretary for 
Transportation for Policy; three Assistant Secretarial offices 
for Budget and Programs, Governmental Affairs, and 
Administration; and the Offices of Small and Disadvantaged 
Business Utilization, Intelligence, Security and Emergency 
Response, Chief Information Officer, the General Counsel and 
Public Affairs. The Office of the Secretary also includes the 
Department's Office of Civil Rights and the Department's 
Working Capital Fund.

                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2006....................................     $84,051,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................      92,742,000
House allowance.........................................      65,973,000
Committee recommendation................................      92,742,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    This appropriation finances the costs of policy development 
and central supervisory and coordinating functions necessary 
for the overall planning and direction of the Department. It 
covers the immediate secretarial offices and the offices of the 
under secretary, assistant secretaries, general counsel and 
other support offices.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends a total of $92,742,000 for 
salaries and expenses of the Office of the Secretary of 
Transportation, including $60,000 for reception and 
representation expenses. The recommendation is equal to the 
budget request and $8,691,000 more than the fiscal year 2006 
enacted level.
    The accompanying bill authorizes the Secretary to transfer 
up to 5 percent of the funds from any Office of the Secretary 
to another. The Committee recommendation continues language 
that permits up to $2,500,000 of fees to be credited to the 
Office of the Secretary for salaries and expenses.
    The following table summarizes the Committee's 
recommendation in comparison to the fiscal year 2006 enacted 
level and the budget estimate:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                         Fiscal year--
                                                              ----------------------------------    Committee
                                                                 2006 enacted                     recommendation
                                                                     \1\          2007 request
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Immediate Office of the Secretary............................       $2,176,000       $2,255,000       $2,255,000
Office of the Deputy Secretary...............................          691,000          717,000          717,000
Office of the General Counsel................................       15,031,000       15,681,000       15,681,000
Office of the Under Secretary of Transportation for Policy...       11,534,000       11,934,000       11,934,000
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Budget and Programs....        8,400,000       10,002,000       10,002,000
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Governmental Affairs...        2,270,000        2,319,000        2,319,000
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration.........       21,811,000       25,108,000       25,108,000
Office of Public Affairs.....................................        1,891,000        1,932,000        1,932,000
Executive Secretariat........................................        1,428,000        1,478,000        1,478,000
Board of Contract Appeals....................................          690,000          707,000          707,000
Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization.......        1,252,000        1,286,000        1,286,000
Office of Intelligence, Security, and Emergency Response.....        5,102,000        7,041,000        7,041,000
Office of the Chief Information Officer......................       11,776,000       12,281,000       12,281,000
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Total, Salaries and Expenses...........................       84,051,000       92,742,000       92,742,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Includes reduction pursuant to division B, title III, chapter 8 of Public Law 109-148.

    The Committee allows funds made available in the fiscal 
year 2006 appropriations act under this section for the 
Missouri Transportation Institute to cover costs incurred 
retroactive to October 1, 2005.

                   IMMEDIATE OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Secretary of Transportation provides leadership and has 
the primary responsibility to provide overall planning, 
direction, and control of the Department.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $2,255,000 for fiscal year 2007 
for the Immediate Office of the Secretary. The recommendation 
is the same as the budget request and $79,000 greater than the 
fiscal year 2006 enacted level.

                IMMEDIATE OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY SECRETARY

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Deputy Secretary has the primary responsibility of 
assisting the Secretary in the overall planning and direction 
of the Department.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $717,000 for the Immediate Office 
of the Deputy Secretary, which is identical to the budget 
request and $26,000 greater than the fiscal year 2006 enacted 
level.

                     OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Office of the General Counsel provides legal services 
to the Office of the Secretary including the conduct of 
aviation regulatory proceedings and aviation consumer 
activities and coordinates and reviews the legal work in the 
chief counsels' offices of the operating administrations. The 
General Counsel is the chief legal officer of the Department of 
Transportation and the final authority within the Department on 
all legal questions.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $15,681,000 for expenses of the 
Office of the General Counsel for fiscal year 2007, equal to 
the budget request and $650,000 greater than the fiscal year 
2006 enacted level.

       OFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION FOR POLICY

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Under Secretary for Policy is the chief policy officer 
of the Department and is responsible to the Secretary for the 
analysis, development, and review of policies and plans for 
domestic and international transportation matters. The Office 
administers the economic regulatory functions regarding the 
airline industry and is responsible for international aviation 
programs, the essential air service program, airline fitness 
licensing, acquisitions, international route awards, 
computerized reservation systems, and special investigations 
such as airline delays.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    For fiscal year 2007, the Committee recommends $11,934,000 
for the Office of the Under Secretary for Policy, the same as 
the budget request and $400,000 more than the fiscal year 2006 
enacted level. The Committee denies the transfer of two FTEs 
from the Office of Intelligence, Security and Emergency 
Response.

       OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR BUDGET AND PROGRAMS

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Assistant Secretary for Budget and Programs is the 
principal staff advisor to the Secretary on the development, 
review, presentation, and execution of the Department's budget 
resource requirements, and on the evaluation and oversight of 
the Department's programs. The primary responsibilities of this 
office are to ensure the effective preparation and presentation 
of sound and adequate budget estimates for the Department, to 
ensure the consistency of the Department's budget execution 
with the action and advice of the Congress and the Office of 
Management and Budget, to evaluate the program proposals for 
consistency with the Secretary's stated objectives, and to 
advise the Secretary of program and legislative changes 
necessary to improve program effectiveness.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $10,002,000 for the Office of the 
Assistant Secretary for Budget and Programs, the same as the 
budget request and $1,602,000 over the fiscal year 2006 enacted 
level.

       OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Assistant Secretary for Governmental Affairs advises 
the Secretary on all congressional and intergovernmental 
activities and on all departmental legislative initiatives and 
other relationships with Members of Congress. The Assistant 
Secretary promotes effective communication with other Federal 
agencies and regional Department officials, and with State and 
local governments and national organizations for development of 
departmental programs; and ensures that consumer preferences, 
awareness, and needs are brought into the decision-making 
process.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends a total of $2,319,000 for the 
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Governmental Affairs, an 
amount equal to the budget request and $49,000 over the fiscal 
year 2006 enacted level.

          OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR ADMINISTRATION

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Assistant Secretary for Administration is responsible 
for establishing policies and procedures, setting guidelines, 
working with the operating administrations to improve the 
effectiveness and efficiency of the Department in human 
resource management, security and administrative management, 
real and personal property management, and acquisition and 
grants management.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $25,108,000 for the Office of the 
Assistant Secretary for Administration, the same as the budget 
request and $3,297,000 above the fiscal year 2006 enacted 
level.

                        OFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Director of Public Affairs is the principal advisor to 
the Secretary and other senior departmental officials and news 
media on public affairs questions. The Office issues news 
releases, articles, fact sheets, briefing materials, 
publications, and audiovisual materials. It also provides 
information to the Secretary on opinions and reactions of the 
public and news media on transportation programs and issues. It 
arranges news conferences and provides speeches, talking 
points, and byline articles for the Secretary and other senior 
departmental officials, and arranges the Secretary's 
scheduling.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $1,932,000 for the Office of 
Public Affairs, which is the same amount as the budget request 
and $41,000 more than the fiscal year 2006 enacted level.

                         EXECUTIVE SECRETARIAT

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Executive Secretariat assists the Secretary and the 
Deputy Secretary in carrying out their management functions and 
responsibilities by controlling and coordinating internal and 
external written materials.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $1,478,000 for the Executive 
Secretariat. The recommendation is identical to the budget 
request and $50,000 more than the fiscal year 2006 enacted 
level.

                       BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The primary responsibility of the Board of Contract Appeals 
is to provide an independent forum for the trial and 
adjudication of all claims by, or against, a contractor 
relating to a contract of any element of the Department, as 
mandated by the Contract Disputes Act of 1978, 41 U.S.C. 601.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $707,000 for the Board of Contract 
Appeals, the same as the budget request and $17,000 greater 
than the fiscal year 2006 enacted level.

         OFFICE OF SMALL AND DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS UTILIZATION

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization 
has primary responsibility for providing policy direction for 
small and disadvantaged business participation in the 
Department's procurement and grant programs, and effective 
execution of the functions and duties under sections 8 and 15 
of the Small Business Act, as amended.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $1,286,000, an amount equal to the 
budget request and $34,000 more than the fiscal year 2006 
enacted level.

        OFFICE OF INTELLIGENCE, SECURITY AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Office of Intelligence, Security and Emergency Response 
keeps the Secretary and his advisors informed on intelligence 
and security issues pertaining to transportation. The office 
also provides support to the Secretary for his statutory and 
administrative responsibilities in the areas of emergency 
preparedness, response, and recovery functions. Further, the 
office ensures that transportation policy and programs support 
the national objectives of general welfare, economic growth and 
stability, and the security of the Unites States.
    The Office of Intelligence, Security and Emergency Response 
is at the forefront of the Department's response to 
transportation-related emergencies. To prepare for such events, 
the office coordinates and conducts the Department's 
participation in national and regional exercise and training 
for emergency personnel; administers the Department's 
Continuity of Government and Continuity of Operations programs; 
and coordinates DOT's role in select international contingency 
plan and response initiatives. Additionally, the office 
provides direct emergency response and recovery support through 
the National Response Plan [NRP] and operates the Department's 
Crisis Management Center [CMC], a facility that monitors the 
Nation's transportation system 24 hours a day, 7 days a week 
and is the Department's focal point during emergencies.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $7,042,000 for the Office of 
Intelligence, Security and Emergency Response. The 
recommendation is equal to the request and $1,940,000 more than 
the fiscal year 2006 enacted level. The Committee approves the 
request for two additional FTEs to carry out the emergency 
response functions of the office, and denies the request to 
transfer two FTEs to the Office of the Under Secretary of 
Transportation Policy.

                OFFICE OF THE CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Office of the Chief Information Officer [OCIO] serves 
as the principal adviser to the Secretary on matters involving 
information resources and information systems management.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $12,281,000, an amount equal to 
the budget request and $505,000 greater than the fiscal year 
2006 enacted level.

                         OFFICE OF CIVIL RIGHTS

Appropriations, 2006....................................      $8,464,500
Budget estimate, 2007...................................       8,820,900
House allowance.........................................       8,821,000
Committee recommendation................................       8,820,900

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

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

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends a funding level of $8,820,900 for 
the Office of Civil Rights for fiscal year 2007. The 
recommendation is identical to the budget request and is 
$356,400 more than the fiscal year 2006 enacted level.

           TRANSPORTATION PLANNING, RESEARCH, AND DEVELOPMENT

Appropriations, 2006....................................     $14,850,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................       8,910,000
House allowance.........................................       4,910,000
Committee recommendation................................       9,334,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Office of the Secretary performs those research 
activities and studies which can more effectively or 
appropriately be conducted at the departmental level. This 
research effort supports the planning, research and development 
activities needed to assist the Secretary in the formulation of 
national transportation policies. The program is carried out 
primarily through contracts with other Federal agencies, 
educational institutions, nonprofit research organizations, and 
private firms.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $9,334,000 for transportation 
planning, research, and development, $5,516,000 less than the 
fiscal year 2006 enacted level and $424,000 more than the 
President's budget request. The Committee directs funding to be 
allocated to the following projects that are listed below:

                                  TPR&D
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        Committee
                  Project name                        recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Missouri Department of Transportation and the                 $1,000,000
 Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance Education
 Training Program..............................
St. Louis University Advanced Neurosurgical                    1,000,000
 Innovation Center [SANIC], Missouri...........
Virtual Accident and Injury Reconstruction                     2,500,000
 Center, Mississippi State University,
 Mississippi...................................
Maritime Fire and Safety Association,                            485,000
 Washington....................................
Agriculture Freight Supply Chain Analyses,                       170,000
 WSDOT.........................................
SR-520 Innovative Water Quality Protection                       679,000
 Project, Washington...........................
UVM Advanced Ground Penetrating Radar Systems,                 1,000,000
 Vermont.......................................
Staten Island North/West Shore Rail Plan Study,                1,000,000
 New York......................................
Tracking Methods for Intermodal Containerized                  1,500,000
 Freight, Oklahoma.............................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          WORKING CAPITAL FUND

Limitation, 2006........................................  ($118,014,000)
Budget estimate, 2007 \1\...............................................
House allowance.........................................   (120,000,000)
Committee recommendation................................   (123,418,000)

\1\ Proposed without limitation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Working Capital Fund [WCF] provides common 
administrative services to the Department's operating 
administrations and other Federal entities. The services are 
centrally performed in the interest of economy and efficiency 
and are funded through negotiated agreements with Department 
operating administrations and other Federal customers and are 
billed on a fee-for-service basis to the maximum extent 
possible.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends a limitation of $123,418,000 on 
activities financed through the Working Capital Fund. The 
budget request proposes to remove the obligation limitation on 
the Working Capital Fund for services to the operating 
administrations of the Department. The Committee, however, 
insists that the discipline of an annual limitation is 
necessary to keep assessments and services of the Working 
Capital Fund in line with costs. As in past years, the bill 
specificies that the limitation shall apply only to the 
Department and not to services provided by other entities. The 
Committee directs that services shall be provided on a 
competitive basis to the maximum extent possible.

               MINORITY BUSINESS RESOURCE CENTER PROGRAM

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          Limitation on
                                        Appropriations  guaranteed loans
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2006.................         $891,000     ($18,367,000)
Budget estimate, 2007................          891,000      (18,367,000)
House allowance......................  ...............      (18,367,000)
Committee recommendation.............          891,000      (18,367,000)
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Minority Business Resource Center of the Office of 
Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization provides 
assistance in obtaining short-term working capital for 
disadvantaged, minority, and women-owned businesses. The 
program enables qualified businesses to obtain loans at prime 
interest rates for transportation-related projects. As required 
by the Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990, this account records 
the subsidy costs associated with guaranteed loans for this 
program as well as administrative expenses of this program.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $891,000 to 
cover the subsidy costs for guaranteed loans and $396,000 for 
administrative expenses to carry out the guaranteed loan 
program. The recommendation is the same as the budget estimate 
and is equal to the fiscal year 2006 enacted level. The 
Committee also recommends a limitation on guaranteed loans of 
$18,367,000, the same amount as the budget request and the 
fiscal year 2006 enacted level.

                       MINORITY BUSINESS OUTREACH

Appropriations, 2006....................................      $2,970,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................       2,970,000
House allowance.........................................       2,970,000
Committee recommendation................................       2,970,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    This appropriation provides contractual support to assist 
small, women-owned, Native American, and other disadvantaged 
business firms in securing contracts and subcontracts arising 
out of transportation-related projects that involve Federal 
spending. It also provides support to historically black and 
Hispanic colleges. Separate funding is requested by the 
administration since this program provides grants and contract 
assistance that serves Department-wide goals and not just OST 
purposes.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $2,970,000 for grants and 
contractual support provided under this program for fiscal year 
2007. The recommendation is the same as the budget request and 
the fiscal year 2006 enacted level.

                       NEW HEADQUARTERS BUILDING

Appropriations, 2006....................................     $49,500,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................      59,400,000
House allowance.........................................................
Committee recommendation................................      59,400,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    This appropriation finances the tenant-related costs for a 
new Department of Transportation headquarters building. The 
proposed concept would consolidate all of the department's 
headquarters operating administration functions (except FAA), 
from various locations in the Washington, DC, metropolitan area 
into leased buildings within the central employment area of the 
District of Columbia.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $59,400,000 for tenant-related 
costs for new headquarters building. The recommendation is 
equal to the budget estimate and $9,900,000 more than fiscal 
year 2006 enacted level.
    Headquarters Security.--The Committee encourages the 
Secretary to explore purchasing the requisite software, 
hardware and installation services necessary to meet Homeland 
Security Presidential Directive-12 standards. The Secretary 
should explore smart card and biometric authentication for 
access to critical networks and applications as well as 
ingress/egress points in the new DOT headquarters building. In 
addition, the Secretary is encouraged to utilize small business 
concerns in meeting this requirement.

                        PAYMENTS TO AIR CARRIERS

                    (AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  Appropriations   Mandatory \1\       Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2006 \1\........................................     $59,400,000     $50,000,000    $109,400,000
Budget estimate, 2007...........................................  ..............      50,000,000      50,000,000
House allowance.................................................      67,000,000      50,000,000     117,000,000
Committee recommendation........................................      67,000,000      50,000,000     117,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ From overflight fees or funds otherwise provided to the Federal Aviation Administration pursuant to 49
  U.S.C. 41742.

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    This appropriation provides additional funding for the 
Essential Air Service [EAS] program, which was created as a 10-
year transition program to continue air service to communities 
that had received federally mandated air service prior to 
deregulation of commercial aviation in 1978. 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. These are commonly known as 
overflight fees. In addition, the act 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.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    For fiscal year 2007, the administration proposes no 
appropriated funds for the EAS program, although the budget 
includes $50,000,000 for the EAS program to be funded by 
overflight fees collected by the FAA. The Committee 
recommendation provides a total of $117,000,000 for the 
Essential Air Service program, which is comprised of an 
appropriation under this heading of $67,000,000 and $50,000,000 
derived from overflight fees or funds otherwise available to 
the FAA. The Committee recommendation is $67,000,000 more than 
the budget estimate and $7,600,000 more than the fiscal year 
2006 enacted level. Based on the latest projections from the 
Department of Transportation, the funding level that the 
Committee recommends is sufficient to continue air service 
during fiscal year 2007 for every community currently receiving 
service through the EAS program as of February 1, 2006.
    EAS Program Growth.--The Committee is concerned about the 
substantial growth of the costs of the EAS program and about 
its ability to continue to provide sufficient funding for 
subsidies so that no community currently in the EAS system 
loses current service levels. The Department will have to renew 
a number of contracts during fiscal year 2007, and costs of the 
new contracts are expected to increase due to higher fuel 
prices and other factors. While the Committee's recommended 
funding level attempts to account for such factors, it is clear 
that the program will face additional pressure during a time of 
extreme fiscal constraint. Although intended as a temporary 
program, many communities depend on this air service. 
Consequently, the Committee directs the Secretary to consider 
implementing section 402 of Vision 100--The Century of Aviation 
Reauthorization Act (Public Law 108-176) which permits an 
increase in the rates of compensation to air carriers due to 
the significant increase in the cost of fuel. This was 
unanticipated and outside the control of air carriers.
    The following table reflects the points currently receiving 
service and the annual rates as of February 1, 2006 in the 
continental United States and Hawaii.

                                SUBSIDIZED EAS COMMUNITIES AS OF FEBRUARY 1, 2006
                                        [Excludes Communities in Alaska]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Avg. Daily
                                                  Est. Miles   Enplnmnts    Ann. Sbsdy               Total Psgrs
               States/Communities                 to Nearest     at EAS    Rates at  2/ Subsidy per   (YE 9/30/
                                                 Hub (S,M,or  Point (YE 9/    1/2006     Passenger       05)
                                                    L) \1\       30/05)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ALABAMA:
    Muscle Shoals..............................           60         17.4   $1,364,697      $125.11       10,908
ARIZONA:
    Kingman....................................          121          6.5   $1,001,989      $245.41        4,083
    Page.......................................          282         14.6   $1,057,655      $115.68        9,143
    Prescott...................................          102         20.3   $1,001,989       $78.91       12,698
    Show Low...................................          154          8.7     $779,325      $142.34    \2\ 5,475
ARKANSAS:
    El Dorado/Camden...........................          107          6.8     $923,456      $218.10        4,234
    Harrison...................................           80         11.6   $1,385,183      $190.35        7,277
    Hot Springs................................           51         10.3     $923,456      $143.73        6,425
    Jonesboro..................................           82          8.4     $923,456      $176.13        5,243
CALIFORNIA:
    Crescent City..............................          223         38.2     $816,025       $34.16       23,885
    Merced.....................................           60         27.5     $645,751       $37.46       17,237
    Visalia....................................           47          4.2     $450,000      $173.14        2,599
COLORADO:
    Alamosa....................................          164         16.9   $1,083,538      $102.29       10,593
    Cortez.....................................          255         25.8     $853,587       $52.77       16,175
    Pueblo.....................................           36          4.9     $780,997      $255.06        3,062
GEORGIA:
    Athens.....................................           72         23.2     $392,108       $27.01       14,516
HAWAII:
    Hana.......................................           35      ( \3\ )     $774,718      ( \3\ )      ( \3\ )
    Kalaupapa..................................  ...........      ( \3\ )     $331,981      ( \3\ )      ( \3\ )
    Kamuela....................................           39      ( \3\ )     $395,053      ( \3\ )      ( \3\ )
ILLINOIS:
    Decatur....................................          126         34.5     $954,404       $44.20       21,594
    Marion/Herrin..............................          123         36.6   $1,251,069       $54.60       22,913
    Quincy.....................................          111         27.4   $1,097,406       $63.91       17,170
IOWA:
    Burlington.................................           74         22.1   $1,077,847       $77.99       13,820
    Fort Dodge.................................           91         26.8   $1,080,386       $64.37       16,784
    Mason City.................................          131         43.6   $1,080,386       $39.59       27,289
KANSAS:
    Dodge City.................................          150         12.5   $1,379,419      $176.22        7,828
    Garden City................................          202         28.4   $1,733,997       $97.53       17,780
    Great Bend.................................          114          2.5     $621,945      $403.08        1,543
    Hays.......................................          175         24.9   $1,540,392       $98.83       15,586
    Liberal/Guymon, OK.........................          138         13.9   $1,008,582      $116.14        8,684
    Manhattan..................................          122         32.3     $360,803       $17.82       20,243
    Salina.....................................           97          7.6     $360,803       $75.75        4,763
KENTUCKY:
    Owensboro..................................          105         10.3   $1,127,453      $175.64        6,419
MAINE:
    Augusta/Waterville.........................           67         14.8   $1,065,475      $114.83        9,279
    Bar Harbor.................................          144         33.4   $1,065,475       $50.91       20,928
    Presque Isle...............................          262         52.9   $1,116,423       $33.73       33,097
    Rockland...................................           81         23.0   $1,065,475       $73.87       14,424
MARYLAND:
    Hagerstown.................................           60         20.6     $649,929       $50.42       12,891
MICHIGAN:
    Escanaba...................................          112         35.9     $290,952       $12.96       22,450
    Iron Mountain/Kingsford....................          105         29.0     $602,761       $33.19       18,163
    Ironwood/Ashland, WI.......................          213         10.4     $409,242       $62.68        6,529
    Manistee/Ludington.........................          110          7.9     $776,051      $156.40        4,962
MINNESOTA:
    Chisholm/Hibbing...........................          199         33.7   $1,279,329       $60.72       21,069
    Thief River Falls..........................          305         15.2     $777,709       $81.73        9,516
MISSISSIPPI:
    Laurel/Hattiesburg.........................           89         48.1   $1,100,253       $36.55       30,106
MISSOURI:
    Cape Girardeau.............................          127         20.3   $1,147,453       $90.15       12,728
    Fort Leonard Wood..........................           85         25.3     $683,201       $43.05       15,869
    Joplin.....................................           70         30.9     $755,762       $39.01       19,374
    Kirksville.................................          137          4.4     $840,200      $306.42        2,742
MONTANA:
    Glasgow....................................          285          6.9     $823,591      $190.25        4,329
    Glendive...................................          222          3.6     $823,591      $368.17        2,237
    Havre......................................          230          5.0     $823,591      $263.55        3,125
    Lewistown..................................          103          2.8     $823,591      $472.78        1,742
    Miles City.................................          145          3.9     $823,591      $341.17        2,414
    Sidney.....................................          272         11.5     $823,591      $114.71        7,180
    West Yellowstone...........................          332         13.8     $418,488       $48.32        8,660
    Wolf Point.................................          293          5.7     $823,591      $229.60        3,587
NEBRASKA:
    Alliance...................................          233          4.5     $655,898      $233.25        2,812
    Chadron....................................          290          4.9     $655,898      $215.54        3,043
    Grand Island...............................          138         24.3   $1,198,396       $78.89       15,190
    Kearney....................................          181         21.1   $1,166,849       $88.32       13,212
    McCook.....................................          256          6.3   $1,502,651      $379.55        3,959
    North Platte...............................          255         24.7     $870,504       $56.29       15,465
    Scottsbluff................................          192         28.5     $494,887       $27.75       17,836
NEVADA:
    Ely........................................          234          6.9     $698,078      $161.33         4327
NEW HAMPSHIRE:
    Lebanon....................................           72         28.4     $998,752       $56.21       17,769
NEW MEXICO:
    Alamogordo/Holoman AFB.....................           89      ( \4\ )     $592,170      ( \4\ )      ( \4\ )
    Carlsbad...................................          149         14.0     $599,671       $68.63        8,738
    Clovis.....................................          102          6.8     $859,057      $201.75        4,258
    Hobbs......................................           90          4.9     $519,614      $168.21        3,089
    Silver City/Hurley/Deming..................          134          6.6     $859,057      $206.85        4,153
NEW YORK:
    Jamestown..................................           68         26.6     $501,937       $30.10       16,676
    Massena....................................          138         10.7     $585,945       $87.85        6,670
    Ogdensburg.................................          105          6.4     $585,945      $146.67        3,995
    Plattsburgh................................           82          4.1     $753,964      $294.17        2,563
    Saranac Lake...............................          132          7.4     $753,964      $161.83        4,659
    Watertown..................................           54         16.7     $585,945       $56.11       10,443
NORTH DAKOTA:
    Devils Lake................................          402          7.2   $1,329,858      $296.18        4,490
    Dickinson..................................          319         16.4   $1,697,248      $165.75       10,240
    Jamestown..................................          333          9.9   $1,351,677      $217.63        6,211
OKLAHOMA:
    Enid.......................................           84          3.5     $636,279      $289.88        2,195
    Ponca City.................................           80          2.6     $636,279      $387.03        1,644
OREGON:
    Pendleton..................................          185         21.6     $649,974       $47.99       13,545
PENNSYLVANIA:
    Altoona....................................          112         20.9     $893,774       $68.16       13,112
    Bradford...................................           77         19.3     $501,937       $41.48       12,102
    Du Bois....................................          112         33.2     $643,818       $31.01       20,764
    Johnstown..................................           84         39.3     $464,777       $18.89       24,610
    Lancaster..................................           69         19.0   $1,611,707      $135.72       11,875
    Oil City/Franklin..........................           85         10.3     $683,636      $105.78        6,463
PUERTO RICO:
    Mayaguez...................................          105         33.3     $688,551       $33.08   \2\ 20,818
    Ponce......................................           77         11.2     $622,056       $88.54    \2\ 7,025
SOUTH DAKOTA:
    Brookings..................................          206          2.5   $1,039,364      $677.11        1,535
    Huron......................................          281          4.6   $1,039,364      $361.27        2,877
    Pierre.....................................          395         20.3     $449,912       $35.43       12,699
    Watertown..................................          207         31.1   $1,211,589       $62.30       19,448
TENNESSEE:
    Jackson....................................           86          7.2   $1,179,026      $261.54        4,508
TEXAS:
    Victoria...................................           93         34.3     $510,185       $23.76       21,470
UTAH:
    Cedar City.................................          179         42.4   $1,068,607       $40.22       26,567
    Moab.......................................          256          3.1     $674,804      $344.99        1,956
    Vernal.....................................          150          4.6     $595,436      $208.56        2,855
VERMONT:
    Rutland....................................           69          6.7     $849,705      $202.89        4,188
VIRGINIA:
    Staunton...................................          113         18.3     $650,123       $56.73       11,460
WASHINGTON:
    Ephrata/Moses Lake.........................          102         11.8   $1,698,922      $230.30        7,377
WEST VIRGINIA:
    Beckley....................................          168          6.3     $977,858      $247.12        3,957
    Bluefield/Princeton........................          133          6.3     $977,858      $247.25        3,955
    Clarksburg/Fairmont........................           96         27.6     $306,109       $17.72       17,270
    Greenbrier/W.SulphSpr/LWB..................          166         15.8     $540,579       $54.50        9,918
    Morgantown.................................           75         35.7     $306,109       $13.68       22,379
    Parkersburg................................          110         52.0     $439,115       $13.50       32,528
WYOMING:
    Laramie....................................          145         27.1     $397,400       $23.44       16,956
    Riverton...................................          305         37.6     $394,046       $16.75       23,519
    Rock Springs...............................          189         45.0     $390,488       $13.85       28,195
    Sheridan...................................          132         42.0     $336,701       $12.79       26,318
    Worland....................................          161          6.1     $797,844      $208.42        3,828
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Hub classifications are subject to change annually based on the changes in enplanement levels at the
  specific hub and at all airports Nationwide.
\2\ 11 months annualized.
\3\ Incomplete traffic data.
\4\ Service hiatus.

  ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS--OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION

    Section 101. The Committee authorizes the Administrator of 
the Federal Aviation Administration to reimburse amounts made 
available pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 41742(a)(1) from fees credited 
under 49 U.S.C. 45303.
    Section 102. The Committee authorizes the Secretary of 
Transportation to transfer to the account called ``Minority 
Business Outreach'' unexpended balances from the bonding 
assistance program funded out of the account ``Office of the 
Secretary, Salaries and Expenses.''
    Section 103. The Committee prohibits the Office of the 
Secretary of Transportation from obligating funds originally 
provided to a modal administration in order to approve 
assessments or reimbursable agreements, unless the Department 
follows the regular process for reprogramming funds, including 
congressional notification.
    Section 104. The Committee prohibits the Department of 
Transportation from amending regulations that define ``actual 
control'' of a domestic air carrier under the proposed ``open 
skies'' policy.

                    Federal Aviation Administration


                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Federal Aviation Administration is responsible for the 
safe movement 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 agency 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 transferred to a new, 
independent agency named the Civil Aeronautics Authority.
    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 [DOT] began its operations in 1967, the Federal 
Aviation Agency was renamed the Federal Aviation Administration 
[FAA] and became one of several modal administrations within 
DOT. The Civil Aeronautics Board was later phased out with 
enactment of the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978, and ceased 
to exist in 1984. Responsibility for the investigation of civil 
aviation accidents was given to the National Transportation 
Safety Board in 1967. 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.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The total recommended program level for the FAA for fiscal 
year 2007 amounts to $8,366,000,000, which is $261,860,000 more 
than the fiscal year 2006 enacted level. The following table 
summarizes the Committee's recommendations:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     Fiscal year--
                                                        --------------------------------------     Committee
                                                            2006 enacted       2007 request      recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Operations.............................................    $8,104,000,000     $8,366,000,000     $8,366,000,000
    General fund appropriation.........................  .................     2,921,000,000      2,921,000,000
    Trust fund appropriation...........................    (5,485,590,000)    (5,445,000,000)    (5,445,000,000)
    Flight service stations transition costs...........      (148,500,000)  .................  .................
Facilities and equipment \1\...........................     2,555,000,000      2,503,000,000      2,549,510,000
Research, engineering, and development.................       136,620,000        130,000,000        135,500,000
Grants-in-aid for airports.............................     3,514,500,000      2,750,000,000      3,520,000,000
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
      Total............................................    14,310,000,000     13,749,000,000     14,571,010,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Does not include emergency appropriation of $40,600,000 in Public Law 108-324.

                               OPERATIONS

Appropriations, 2006....................................  $8,104,141,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................   8,366,000,000
House allowance.........................................   8,360,000,000
Committee recommendation................................   8,366,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    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, commercial space, medical, engineering and 
development programs, as well as policy oversight and agency 
management functions. The operations appropriation includes the 
following major activities: (1) the air traffic organization 
which operates, on a 24-hour daily basis, the national air 
traffic system, including the establishment and maintenance of 
a national system of aids to navigation, the development and 
distribution of aeronautical charts and the administration of 
acquisition, and research and development programs; (2) the 
regulation and certification activities including establishment 
and surveillance of civil air regulations to assure safety and 
development of standards, rules and regulations governing the 
physical fitness of airmen as well as the administration of an 
aviation medical research program; (3) the office of commercial 
space transportation; and (4) headquarters, administration and 
other staff and support offices.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends a total of $8,366,000,000 for FAA 
operations, an increase of $261,860,000 above the level 
provided for fiscal year 2006 and the same as the budget 
estimate. The Committee recommendation derives $5,445,000,000 
of the appropriation from the airport and airway trust fund. 
The level is equal to the budget estimate. The balance of the 
appropriation will be drawn from the general fund of the 
Treasury.
    As in past years, FAA is directed to report immediately to 
the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations in the event 
resources are insufficient to operate a safe and effective air 
traffic control system.
    Second Career Training Program.--The Committee includes 
language which prohibits the use of funds for the second career 
training program.
    Sunday Premium Pay.--The Committee prohibits FAA from 
paying Sunday premium pay, except in those cases where the 
individual actually worked on a Sunday.
    Manned Auxiliary Flight Service Stations.--The Committee 
continues a prohibition against the use of funds for operating 
a manned auxiliary flight service station in the contiguous 
United States.
    Aeronautical Charting and Cartography.--The Committee 
prohibits the use of funds to conduct aeronautical charting and 
cartography [AC&C] activities through the working capital fund 
[WCF]. Public Law 106-181 had authorized the transfer of these 
activities from the Department of Commerce to the FAA.
    Government-issued Credit Cards.--The Committee prohibits 
the use of a government-issued credit card to purchase a store 
gift card or gift certificate.
    The following table summarizes the Committee's 
recommendation in comparison to the budget estimate and fiscal 
year 2006 enacted level:

                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                         Fiscal year--
                                                              ----------------------------------    Committee
                                                                                  2007 budget     recommendation
                                                                 2006 enacted       estimate
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air Traffic Organization.....................................       $6,549,758       $6,704,223       $6,690,108
Aviation Safety..............................................          948,957          981,668          997,718
Commercial Space Transportation..............................           11,641           11,985           11,722
Financial Services...........................................           50,473           94,708           93,620
Human Resource Management....................................           69,244           87,850           87,850
Region and Center Operations.................................          149,237          272,821          272,821
Staff Offices................................................          140,580          175,392          175,655
Information Services.........................................           35,751           36,779           36,506
Flight Service Stations Transition...........................          148,500  ...............  ...............
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL..................................................        8,117,083        8,366,000        8,366,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        AIR TRAFFIC ORGANIZATION

    The Committee recommends $6,690,108,000 for the Air Traffic 
Organization to operate and maintain the national air traffic 
control system. The recommended level is $140,350,000 more than 
the fiscal year 2006 enacted level. The Committee is confident 
that the recommended funding level is sufficient to continue 
safe and efficient management of the National Airspace System 
[NAS].
    Air Traffic Controller Contract.--Recently, the FAA 
implemented a new contract for its air traffic controller 
workforce. Under this contract, most current air traffic 
controllers would continue to receive their existing base 
salaries and benefits while newly hired controllers would be 
hired at lower wage rates. The FAA has maintained that this 
contract will result in significant cost savings, freeing up 
resources for other critical agency needs. However, the 
Committee is concerned that the imposition of these new 
contract terms could result in an even larger number of senior 
controllers choosing to retire than was originally contemplated 
by the FAA. Given the overarching need for the agency to retain 
a seasoned and experienced workforce to maintain safety, the 
Committee plans to monitor this situation carefully. As such, 
in addition to the prompt and regular submission of the 
controller workforce staffing plan, the Committee directs FAA 
to report to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations 
on the extent of controller retirements and any trends they are 
experiencing in comparison to the number of retirements 
anticipated by the FAA for the current year and the number of 
retirements experienced in prior years. This report is due no 
later than April 15, 2007.
    FAA Workforce Plans.--The bill includes provisions that 
require the FAA to submit to Congress its annual air traffic 
controller workforce plan by March 1 of each year, and that 
would reduce the appropriation to the FAA's Operations account 
by $100,000 for each day that the report is late. The Committee 
is greatly frustrated by the FAA's failure to transmit an 
update to its workforce plan. The original plan was transmitted 
to Congress in December 2004, and despite promises that the 
plan would be updated annually, the Committee is still waiting 
for the revised plan. On May 4, 2006, the Administrator 
testified before the Committee that an updated report would be 
submitted in a short period of time. The report, however, is 
now seven months late. The Committee directs the FAA to submit 
its 2006 plan immediately. The Committee also notes that half 
of the FAA's inspector workforce is expected to retire by the 
year 2010. The Committee believes that an effective safety 
staff is vital to protecting the public, and that supporting 
this staff is essential to ensuring the safety of an increasing 
complex aviation system. Consequently, the bill includes a 
provision that requires the FAA to submit to Congress a 
workforce plan that describes a strategy for maintaining a 
sufficient aviation safety staff that is similar in its content 
and identical in its format to the air traffic controller 
workforce plan. The Committee expects the aviation safety 
workforce plan will provide a background to the current 
staffing levels, describe the challenges to hiring sufficient 
safety staff, forecast expected attrition, set specific and 
realistic hiring targets over a ten-year period, and detail 
strategies for meeting staffing needs through better management 
practices in the same manner as was utilized in the initial air 
traffic controller workforce plan. The bill includes a 
provision that would reduce the appropriation to the FAA's 
Operations account by $100,000 for each day that the report is 
late.
    Air Traffic Control Supervisor Staffing.--The Committee 
remains concerned that there are not enough Air Traffic Control 
Supervisors in place to assure flight safety. Additional 
supervisors are necessary to reduce operational errors that 
have led to dangerous runway incursions and serious in flight 
errors. To remedy this, Congress mandated in fiscal year 2005 
Transportation Appropriations bill that the FAA have 1,846 
supervisors in place by September 30, 2005. The FAA only had 
1,801 in September and the number has since fallen to 1,777 on 
March 18, 2006 at the same time operational errors continue to 
rise. We are concerned that the FAA is moving in the wrong 
direction and is not promoting controllers to supervisory 
ranks. The Committee expects the FAA to fill supervisor 
vacancies and to meet the mandated floor of 1,846 Supervisors. 
The Committee directs FAA to submit a report by January 31, 
2007, stating how many Air Traffic Control Supervisors are in 
place on September 30, 2006 and the FAA's plan to hire 
additional supervisors to address the problem of increased 
operational errors.
    Alien Species Action Plan [ASAP].--The Committee recommends 
$1,600,000 to continue the implementation of the Alien Species 
Action Plan which was adopted by the FAA as part of its August 
26, 1998, record of decision approving certain improvements at 
Kahului Airport on the Island of Maui. These funds will be used 
to execute capital projects and continue the operational 
requirements imposed by the ASAP.

                            AVIATION SAFETY

    The Committee recommends $997,718,000 for aviation safety. 
The recommendation is $48,761,000 more than the enacted level.
    Aviation Safety Inspectors and Aircraft Certification 
Staff.--The Committee provides $48,711,612 for aviation safety, 
an increase of $16,000,000 over the budget request to increase 
critical safety staff in the Office of Aviation Flight 
Standards [AFS] and the Office of Aircraft Certification [AIR]. 
The bill specifies that $32,474,408--or two-thirds of the total 
funding for aviation safety--shall be used to increase the 
staff of the AFS office and that $16,237,204--or one-third of 
the total--shall be used to increase the staff of the AIR 
office. The bill also prohibits the FAA from reprogramming 
those funds between the two offices or transferring the funds 
to any other activity.
    For fiscal year 2006, the Committee provided $12,000,000 
above the budget request with the expectation that the FAA 
would increase safety staff by 238 new safety personnel. This 
increase in funding included $8,000,000 for AFS inpectors, and 
$4,000,000 for AIR safety inspectors, engineers, pilots, and 
scientists. In May, the Committee was disappointed to learn 
that the FAA would be able to add only 171 new employees to its 
safety staff. The Committee recognizes that the across-the-
board cut and mandatory pay raise enacted for fiscal year 2006 
constrains the FAA's ability to hire more aggressively; 
however, the Committee remains convinced that the staffing 
levels in the offices of flight standards and aircraft 
certification are not satisfactory. The Committee is especially 
concerned that the dearth of safety inspectors limits the FAA's 
ability to protect the safety of our air transportation system.
    Finally, the Committee is frustrated by the FAA's failure 
to provide timely information on its hiring practices. The 
Committee repeatedly requested for information from the FAA on 
the progress the agency was making in increasing its safety 
staff, but never received an adequate response until days 
before the Committee held a hearing on the FAA's budget. 
Furthermore, the Committee notes that FAA has not yet followed 
directions in the Statement of Managers of the 2006 Act that 
instructs the FAA to provide semi-annual reports on its safety 
staff. In light of this communication gap, the bill now 
includes a requirement for the FAA to provide quarterly reports 
on the agency's progress in increasing the staff of its safety 
offices.
    Medallion Program.--The Committee recommends $5,000,000 to 
continue the medallion five star shield program, a key safety 
initiative in the FAA's current strategic plan for reducing 
general aviation accidents in Alaska.

                        FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT

                    (AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)

Appropriations, 2006....................................  $2,514,600,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................   2,503,000,000
House allowance.........................................   3,110,000,000
Committee recommendation................................   2,549,510,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Facilities and Equipment [F&E] appropriation provides 
funding for modernizing and improving air traffic control and 
airway facilities, equipment, and systems. 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. The program aims to keep pace 
with the increasing demands of aeronautical activity and remain 
in accordance with the Federal Aviation Administration's 
comprehensive 5-year capital investment plan [CIP].

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,549,510,000 
for the Facilities and Equipment of the Federal Aviation 
Administration. The Committee recommendation is $46,510,000 
more than the budget estimate and $34,910,000 more than the 
fiscal year 2006 enacted level. The bill provides that 
$2,101,610,000 is available for obligation until September 30, 
2009, and $447,900,000 is available until September 30, 2007.
    The Committee recommendations focus on reinforcing greater 
accountability and mission goals, and strive for better or 
alternative ways of improving and modernizing the system. 
Furthermore, in reviewing the budget estimate for this account, 
the Committee has placed priority on funding programs necessary 
to upgrade current equipment for future capacity requirements 
or programs that will enable the FAA to proceed with 
initiatives to improve safety and initiatives to alleviate 
congestion, reduce aircraft spacing, and increase the 
efficiency of the NAS.
    The Committee reiterates the need for the FAA to take 
immediate steps to control personnel cost growth and to impose 
budget and schedule discipline on major acquisition programs in 
a time of fiscal constraints and declining capital budget 
funding. Our Nation's air traffic control system has failed to 
keep up with the increasing and changing demands of civil 
aviation, and the FAA will not be able to meet future demands 
and needs without changing and improving the ways the agency 
modernizes the NAS. This challenge is unlikely to be met 
without changing the FAA culture. Ultimately, changing the FAA 
culture is a long-term proposition, but the failure to do so 
will harm the aviation industry, inconvenience the flying 
public, and serve as an obstacle to national economic growth.
    Budget Activities Format.--The Committee directs that the 
fiscal year 2008 budget request for the Facilities and 
Equipment account conform to the same organizational structure 
of budget activities.
    The Committee's recommended distribution of funds for each 
of the budget activities funded by the appropriation follows:

                        FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Committee
                                           2007 estimate  recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Activity 1, Engineering, Development,
 Testing and Evaluation:
    Advanced Technology Development and      $45,100,000     $50,100,000
     Prototyping........................
    Safe Flight 21 (SF-21)..............      19,700,000      30,700,000
    Aeronautical Data Link (ADL)               1,000,000       1,000,000
     Applications.......................
    Next Generation VHF Air/Ground            25,000,000      25,000,000
     Communications System (NEXCOM).....
    Traffic Management Advisor (TMA)....      37,600,000      37,600,000
    NAS Improvement of System Support          1,000,000       1,000,000
     Laboratory.........................
    William J. Hughes Technical Center        12,000,000      12,000,000
     Facilities.........................
    William J. Hughes Technical Center         4,200,000       4,200,000
     Infrastructure Sustainment.........
    System-Wide Information Management        24,000,000      24,000,000
     (SWIM).............................
    ADS-B NAS Wide Implementation.......      80,000,000      80,000,000
                                         -------------------------------
      Total, Activity 1.................     249,600,000     265,600,000
                                         ===============================
Activity 2, Procurement and
 Modernization of Air Traffic Control
 Facilities and Equipment:
    En Route Programs:
        En Route Automation                  375,700,000     375,700,000
         Modernization (ERAM)...........
        En Route Systems Modification...      27,500,000      27,500,000
        Next Generation Weather Radar          2,000,000       2,000,000
         (NEXRAD)--Provide..............
        Weather and Radar Processor            7,400,000       7,400,000
         (WARP).........................
        ARTCC Building Improvements/          51,000,000      51,000,000
         Plant Improvements.............
        Air Traffic Management (ATM)....      78,850,000      78,850,000
        Air/Ground Communications             16,500,000      16,500,000
         Infrastructure.................
        ATC Beacon Interrogator (ATCBI)--     16,400,000      16,400,000
         Replacement....................
        Air Traffic Control En route           5,000,000       5,000,000
         Radar Facilities Improvements..
        En Route Communications and            1,883,769       1,883,769
         Control Facilities Improvements
        Integrated Terminal Weather           20,900,000      20,900,000
         System (ITWS)..................
        FAA Telecommunications                28,000,000      28,000,000
         Infrastructure (FTI)...........
        Oceanic Automation System.......      31,350,000      31,350,000
        Air Traffic Operations                 6,000,000       6,000,000
         Management System (ATOMS)......
        Voice Switching and Control           15,000,000      15,000,000
         System (VSCS)..................
        En Route Communications Gateway        4,200,000       4,200,000
         (ECG)..........................
        Volcano Monitoring..............  ..............       5,000,000
    Terminal Programs:
        Airport Surface Detection             63,600,000      63,600,000
         Equipment--Model X (ASDE-X)....
        Terminal Doppler Weather Radar        12,500,000      12,500,000
         (TDWR)--Provide................
        Standard Terminal Automation          49,200,000      49,200,000
         Replacement System (STARS)
         (TAMR Phase  1)................
        Terminal Automation Program.....      13,800,000      13,800,000
        Terminal Air Traffic Control         124,000,000     149,000,000
         Facilities--Replace............
        ATCT/Terminal Radar Approach          44,233,563      44,233,563
         Control (TRACON) Facilities--
         Improve........................
        Terminal Voice Switch                 11,300,000      11,300,000
         Replacement (TVSR)/Enhancement
         Terminal Voice Switch (ETVS)...
        NAS Facilities OSHA and               25,000,000      25,000,000
         Environmental Standards
         Compliance.....................
        Airport Surveillance Radar (ASR-      15,900,000      15,900,000
         9).............................
        Terminal Digital Radar (ASR-11).      44,050,000      44,050,000
        DOD/FAA Facilities Transfer.....       2,300,000       2,300,000
        Precision Runway Monitors.......       2,600,000       2,600,000
        Terminal Radar (ASR)--Improve...       2,022,848       3,532,848
        Terminal Communications--Improve       1,348,887       1,348,887
        Runway Status Lights (RWSL).....      13,700,000      13,700,000
        Terminal Automation                   30,450,000      30,450,000
         Modernization/Replacement
         Program (TAMR Phase 2).........
        National Airspace System Voice         1,000,000       1,000,000
         Switch (NVS)...................
        Weather System Processor (WSP)..       1,000,000       1,000,000
        NAS Infrastructure Management          5,000,000       5,000,000
         System (NIMS)..................
    Flight Service Programs:
        Automated Surface Observing            5,000,000       5,000,000
         System (ASOS)..................
        FSAS Operational and                   8,300,000       8,300,000
         Supportability Implementation
         System (OASIS).................
        Flight Service Station (FSS)           6,000,000       6,000,000
         Modernization..................
    Landing and Nav Aids:
        VHF Omnidirectional Radio Range        5,000,000       5,000,000
         (VOR) with Distance Measuring
         Equipment (DME)................
        Instrument Landing System (ILS)--      4,000,000       8,000,000
         Establish......................
        Wide Area Augmentation System        122,400,000      97,400,000
         (WAAS) for GPS.................
        Runway Visual Range (RVR).......       5,000,000       5,000,000
        LORAN-C.........................  ..............      10,000,000
        Navigation and Landing Aids--          4,270,933       4,270,933
         Improve........................
        Approach Lighting System              12,000,000      22,000,000
         Improvement Program (ALSIP)....
        Distance Measuring Equipment           5,000,000       5,000,000
         (DME)..........................
        Visual Navaids--Establish/Expand       2,000,000       2,000,000
        Instrument Approach Procedures         9,300,000       9,300,000
         Automation (IAPA)..............
        Navigation and Landing Aids--          5,000,000       5,000,000
         Service Life Extension Program
         (SLEP).........................
        VASI Replacement--Replace with         3,000,000       3,000,000
         Precision Approach Indicator...
    Other ATC Facilities Programs:
        Fuel Storage Tank Replacement          5,800,000       5,800,000
         and Monitoring.................
        FAA Buildings and Equipment.....      12,000,000      12,000,000
        Air Navigational Aids and ATC          3,000,000       3,000,000
         Facilities (Local Projects)....
        Aircraft Related Equipment            11,000,000      11,000,000
         Program........................
        Computer Aided Engineering and         1,500,000       1,500,000
         Graphics (CAEG)--Modernization.
        Airport Cable Loop Systems--           5,000,000       5,000,000
         Sustained Support..............
        Alaskan NAS Interfacility              2,240,000       2,240,000
         Communications System (ANICS)..
        Facilities Decommissioning--NDB.      12,600,000      12,600,000
        Electrical Power System--Sustain/     38,000,000      38,000,000
         Support........................
                                         -------------------------------
          Total, Activity 2.............   1,438,100,000   1,468,610,000
                                         ===============================
Activity 3, Procurement and
 Modernization of Non-Air Traffic
 Control Facilities and Equipment:
    Support Programs:
        Hazardous Materials Management..      20,000,000      20,000,000
        Aviation Safety Analysis System       14,500,000      14,500,000
         (ASAS).........................
        Logistics Support Systems and          1,000,000       1,000,000
         Facilities (LSSF)..............
        Test Equipment--Maintenance            1,500,000       1,500,000
         Support for Replacement........
        National Airspace System (NAS)        10,000,000      10,000,000
         Recovery Communications (RCOM).
        Facility Security Risk                25,000,000      25,000,000
         Management.....................
        Information Security............      12,000,000      12,000,000
        System Approach for Safety            17,300,000      17,300,000
         Oversight (SASO)...............
        Aviation Safety Knowledge              4,600,000       4,600,000
         Management Environment (ASKME).
    Training, Equipment and Facilities:
        Aeronautical Center                   13,800,000      13,800,000
         Infrastructure Modernization...
        National Airspace System (NAS)        14,000,000      14,000,000
         Training Facilities............
        Distance Learning...............       1,500,000       1,500,000
                                         -------------------------------
          Total, Activity 3.............     135,200,000     135,200,000
                                         ===============================
Activity 4, Facilities and Equipment
 Mission Support:
    System Support and Support Services:
        System Engineering and                25,900,000      25,900,000
         Development Support............
        Program Support Leases..........      45,000,000      45,000,000
        Logistics Support Services (LSS)       7,900,000       7,900,000
        Mike Monroney Aeronautical            13,500,000      13,500,000
         Center Leases..................
        Transition Engineering Support..      24,700,000      24,700,000
        Frequency and Spectrum                 4,500,000       4,500,000
         Engineering....................
        Technical Support Services            35,000,000      35,000,000
         Contract (TSSC)................
        Resource Tracking Program (RTP).       1,700,000       1,700,000
        Center for Advanced Aviation          70,000,000      70,000,000
         System Development (CAASD).....
        NOTAMS and Aeronautical                4,000,000       4,000,000
         Information Programs...........
                                         -------------------------------
          Total, Activity 4.............     232,200,000     232,200,000
                                         ===============================
Activity 5, Personnel Compensation,
 Benefits, and Travel:
    Personnel and Related Expenses......     447,900,000     447,900,000
                                         -------------------------------
      Total, Activity 5.................     447,900,000     447,900,000
                                         ===============================
      Total, All Activities.............   2,503,000,000   2,549,510,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Advanced Technology Development and Prototyping.--The 
Advanced Technology Development and Prototyping [ATDP] program 
develops and validates technologies that support a range of 
timely and critical initiatives within the Engineering, 
Development, Test and Evaluation activity. The Committee 
recommends $50,100,000 to be distributed as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Committee
                                                          recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Runway incursion reduction program.....................       $8,000,000
System capacity, planning, and improvement.............        5,500,000
General aviation and vertical flight technology program        2,000,000
Operational concept validation.........................        3,000,000
Safer skies............................................        3,600,000
Wake turbulence........................................        1,000,000
Airspace management laboratory.........................        4,000,000
NAS requirements.......................................          800,000
Wind profiling and weather research Juneau.............        1,100,000
Runway obstruction warning system......................        2,000,000
Mobile object infrastructure technology................        3,000,000
Airspace redesign......................................        2,800,000
ATO strategy and evaluation............................        2,000,000
Energy management and efficiency compliance............        5,000,000
Market based competitive sourcing......................        3,800,000
Dynamic capital planning...............................        2,500,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Runway Obstruction Warning System.--The Committee 
recommends an increase of $2,000,000 for the ATDP budget line 
to continue development, enhancement, and evaluation of the 
Runway Obstruction Warning System at the test bed at Gulfport-
Biloxi Airport.
    Mobile Object Infrastructure Technology.--The Committee 
recommends $3,000,000 to advance technology to pre-deployment 
status and demonstrate the mobile object infrastructure 
technology's ability to provide remote maintenance and 
monitoring; data collection from disparate and unspecified 
sources; quality assurance in a secure and dynamic 
infrastructure; and, to establish one of FAA's labs as an 
official system wide information management node.
    Safe Flight 21.--The Committee supports the Safe Flight 21 
program and recommends $30,700,000, an increase of $11,000,000 
above the budget estimate. The Committee is disappointed that 
the administration has slashed the overall funding for Safe 
Flight 21; a program that is critical to the safety of general 
aviation in Alaska. The Committee urges the administration and 
FAA to be more sensitive to this and other important aviation 
programs.
    System-Wide Information Management [SWIM].--The bill 
includes $24,000,000 for the System Wide Information Management 
[SWIM] program, which will provide the foundation necessary for 
transforming the national airspace system into a network-
centric operation. The Committee urges the FAA not to focus on 
narrowly defined connectivity projects and upgrades for 
existing FAA systems, and instead directs the FAA to use the 
funding provided to continue the developments in the overall 
SWIM architecture, standards, core information services, and 
demonstrations that are underway in the Global Communications, 
Navigation, Surveillance System program. In addition, the 
Committee urges the FAA to align its work on SWIM with the 
efforts of the Joint Planning and Development Office to build 
the next generation air transportation system. The Committee 
directs the FAA to submit a report to the Committee not later 
than January 30, 2007, that details how the agency will spend 
the $24,000,000 provided for SWIM, including how much of the 
funding will be spent directly on SWIM systems architecture, 
standards and core information services. The Committee expects 
that all major information and automation programs in the 
national airspace system will use their existing program funds 
to support connectivity to the SWIM architecture. The Committee 
directs the FAA to highlight its plans and the funds allocated 
for achieving SWIM compliance and connectivity for each 
appropriate item in the Facilities and Equipment account in the 
agency's budget justifications for fiscal year 2008.
    Volcano Monitoring.--The Committee recommendation provides 
$5,000,000 to continue the volcano monitoring program.
    Air Traffic Control Training Simulators.--The Committee 
recommends that the FAA continue to procure control tower 
simulators under an existing Air Force contract, which was a 
full and open competition, in order to continue upgrading their 
training capabilities in order to meet the needs identified in 
the Controller Workforce Plan [CWP] and the Capital Investment 
Plan [CIP]. The Committee understands that the FAA can request 
the Air Force to extend the existing contract by making a 
formal request to the Air Force to extend the time and pricing 
considerations. Currently, there are 121 tower control training 
simulators in place supporting ATC training in the United 
States with the military, the FAA and several universities that 
support the FAA's Collegiate Training Initiative [CTI] program.
    Terminal Air Traffic Control Facilities Replacement.--The 
Committee recommendation includes $149,000,000 for new and 
replacement air traffic control tower [ATCT] and ATCT/TRACON 
consolidation projects, an increase of $25,000,000 from the 
budget request. Funding shall be available for the following 
projects in the corresponding amounts:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                        Location                              Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kalamazoo, MI...........................................      $1,800,000
West Palm Beach, FL.....................................      10,000,000
Reno, NV................................................       2,500,000
Cleveland, OH...........................................       3,700,000
Memphis, TN.............................................      22,400,000
Jeffco, CO..............................................       4,200,000
Palm Springs, CA........................................       2,000,000
Houston, TX.............................................       2,000,000
Gulfport, MS............................................      10,000,000
Las Vegas, NV...........................................      55,000,000
Pensacola, FL...........................................       1,100,000
Boise, ID...............................................       7,000,000
Dayton, OH..............................................       2,200,000
Barnstable, MA..........................................         250,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Reprogramming of Appropriated Funds for Tower and TRACON 
Replacements.--The Committee notes that the FAA has initiated 
an effort to evaluate and prioritize the need to replace 
individual air traffic control towers and terminal radar 
approach control facilities. Part of this effort has included 
the preparation of a long-overdue accounting of prior-
appropriated funds for this activity. Too often in the past, 
the FAA has delayed the construction of necessary projects for 
which funds had already been appropriated in order to reprogram 
resources to alternative projects without congressional 
notification or consultation. Most recently, the FAA has sought 
to alter this practice by seeking a formal reprogramming of 
funds toward the replacement of LaGuardia tower [LGA]. Much of 
this funding proposed to be reprogrammed for the LGA tower is 
to be derived from monies appropriated for some 20 other 
projects in 2004 and 2005.
    At this point in time, the Committee has no choice but to 
approve this reprogramming. Much of the funding proposed for 
reprogramming was initially appropriated in 2004 and is now at 
risk of lapsing due to the agency's failure to spend the 
funding on the projects for which they were intended. For 
example, almost none of the funds that the Committee 
appropriated for fiscal year 2004 for the replacement of towers 
at Las Vegas, Nevada, Missoula, Montana, Traverse City, 
Michigan, Dayton, Ohio, and Kalamazoo, Michigan have been 
spent. The FAA has stated that they are likely to pursue those 
projects some time in the future and, if necessary, seek 
additional funding to complete them either through additional 
reprogrammings or through new requests for appropriations. The 
Committee should not have to appropriate funding twice for the 
same project due to the agency's bureaucratic dithering and its 
failure to rapidly initiate design and construction of the 
projects that have been funded. Moreover, the Committee is 
concerned that the FAA's commitment to seek the necessary 
funding to complete these projects at some later time might 
prove to be a hollow promise, given the administration's 
propensity to propose funding cuts for the aviation capital 
programs and the pressure the FAA will face to fund other 
modernization needs.
    As such, the Committee has appropriated $25,000,000 in this 
bill to immediately replace the funds that have been 
reprogrammed away from tower projects that have not yet been 
completed and will need more funds in the future. These funds 
have been provided in lieu of funding the Administrator's 
request for the Wide Area Augmentation System [WAAS] which the 
Committee views as a lower priority. In making these funds 
available now, the Committee directs the Administrator to move 
out immediately with the completion of these projects. The 
Committee expects the Administrator to revisit her schedule for 
initiating design and construction for the projects cited 
above. The Committee has no intention of waiting until 2010 or 
later to see construction contracts awarded for tower 
replacement projects that received initial appropriations as 
long ago as 2001. In the future, baring any unusual 
circumstance, the Committee expects the FAA to restrict funding 
for any specific tower replacement to the facility for which it 
is appropriated.
    Terminal Digital Radar (ASR-11).--The Committee recommends 
$44,050,000, the same amount as the budget request. The ASR-11 
program will replace 100 existing FAA radar systems at low-to-
medium density terminal facilities.
    The Committee is aware of the desire for a terminal radar 
to serve the regions of Utah County, Utah and Las Vegas, 
Nevada. The Committee encourages the FAA to work with Utah 
County, Utah and Las Vegas, Nevada to improve radar coverage 
for both areas.
    Terminal Radar [ASR]--Improve.--The Committee has provided 
$3,532,848 for the improvement of terminal radar [ASR] 
infrastructure throughout the NAS. Within the amount provided, 
$600,000 shall be for in-service engineering and $1,422,848 
shall be for radar improvements in Tulsa, Oklahoma; Dallas-Fort 
Worth, Texas; Tampa, Florida; Azle, Texas, Denver, Colorado; 
and Roanoke, Virginia. The remaining $1,510,000 shall be for 
the relocation of the ASR-8 radar at Bismarck, North Dakota.
    Instrument Landing System [ILS] Establishment.--The 
Committee recommends $8,000,000 for establishment of instrument 
landing systems. The Committee directs funds to be distributed 
as follows:
    $1,300,000 to establish an ILS at Aiken Municipal Airport, 
South Carolina;
    $750,000 to establish and ILS at Alliance Municipal Airport 
in Alliance, Nebraska;
    $2,200,000 To upgrade ILS to Category III on Runway 31, 
Atlantic City, New Jersey; and
    $2,400,000 To acquire and install ILS at Council Bluffs 
Municipal Airport, Iowa.
    Approach Lighting System Improvement Program [ALSIP].--The 
Committee recommends $22,000,000 for the procurement and 
installation of frangible approach lighting equipment including 
high intensity approach lighting system with sequenced flashing 
lights [ALSF-2] and medium intensity approach lighting system 
[MALSR]. The amount provided is $8,000,000 more than the budget 
request. The Committee expects that $4,000,000 of the amount 
provided above the request shall be used to install previously 
procured MALSR systems presently stored in the FAA depot, 
utilizing the same four-phase approach presently being utilized 
for the installation of these systems: $1,000,000, the 
Committee expects the FAA to procure two Low Cost MALSR systems 
for the continued evaluation of this new technology system, 
which will reduce life cycle costs; and the recommendation 
includes $5,000,000 to continue the program of providing 
lighting systems at rural airfields throughout Alaska.
    Loran-C.--The Committee recommends $10,000,000 to continue 
the program to modernize the Loran-C navigation system. The 
Committee is aware that recapitalization of the loran 
radionavigational system in the contiguous United States has 
largely been completed, but notes that substantial work remains 
in Alaska. Ultimately there needs to be a resolution between 
the GPS system and Loran-C. The best system deserves concrete 
investment. The Committee strongly believe there should be a 
worldwide system subject to rational criteria.
    Stand Alone Weather Sensors.--The Committee notes that the 
budget does not request funding for the Stand Alone Weather 
Sensors program. The Committee is concerned that significant 
taxpayer funds have been spent on this program only to have the 
FAA warehouse important weather monitoring stations for class C 
airports nationwide. The Committee directs the FAA 
Administrator to submit a report by March 15, 2007, to the 
Committee detailing the number of SAWS systems purchased and 
deployed, improvements in flight safety at deployed airports, 
safety impacts at class C airports yet to receive SAWS systems, 
accounting of current class C airports, and the FAA's plan to 
proceed with the original intent of SAWS deployment at all 
class C airports.
    FAA Telecommunications Infrastructure.--The purpose of the 
FTI program is to replace seven existing FAA-owned and -leased 
telecommunications networks with a single new network that 
would cost less to operate. FTI is an important program because 
it is expected to reduce FAA's growing operations costs and 
provide the backbone for several initiatives associated with 
the next generation air traffic management system. The 
Committee is concerned about delays to this program and 
diminishing benefits.
    Specifically, the Committee was greatly dismayed to learn 
from the DOT Inspector General that the FAA failed to realize 
roughly $33,000,000 in anticipated operating savings from the 
FTI program in fiscal year 2005 due to the agency's inability 
to disconnect legacy circuits in a safe and timely manner. The 
Inspector General also reported the FAA was at further risk of 
sacrificing over $100,000,000 in planned operating savings in 
the current fiscal year because of program delays. The failure 
of the agency to capture these planned savings is unacceptable. 
Among other problems, these failures have undermined the 
Administrator's ability to adequately hire and train critically 
needed safety personnel, including safety inspector positions 
which the Committee funded in 2006 with resources provided in 
excess of the agency's budget request.
    In April 2006, the Inspector General reported that FTI is a 
high risk effort and recommended that FAA take a number of 
actions. These include developing a realistic master schedule 
and effective transition plan by coordinating with all parties 
involved with the FTI transition, and validating cost estimates 
and benefits.
    FAA is taking overdue but positive steps by including its 
regions, the current service provider, and the FTI contractor 
to improve the overall transition to FTI. While FAA has made 
some progress in improving FTI service deliveries, a 
significant number of FTI services that were accepted by FAA 
have not been cutover, thus requiring considerable rework and 
causing an increased backlog.
    FAA also engaged MITRE to independently validate the FTI 
schedule. Based on MITRE's report, it appears that FTI will not 
be completed as planned in December 2007, but is more likely to 
be completed later in 2008. This will result in additional 
unplanned costs and a further reduction in projected cost 
savings from this program.
    The Committee is aware that FAA will be reviewing the FTI 
cost and schedule baselines in August. After that review, the 
Committee expects the FAA to provide it with a clear 
understanding of the work required to complete FTI, a realistic 
estimate of when FTI will be completed, how potential risks to 
ATC operations will be minimized, and when the Agency will 
begin to realize benefits from this multi-billion dollar 
investment. The Committee cautions FAA that future funding for 
this program is dependent on providing this information to this 
Committee in a timely manner.

                 RESEARCH, ENGINEERING, AND DEVELOPMENT

                    (AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)

Appropriations, 2006....................................    $136,620,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................     130,000,000
House allowance.........................................     134,000,000
Committee recommendation................................     135,500,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Research, Engineering and Development [RE&D] 
appropriation provides funding for long-term research, 
engineering and development programs to improve the air traffic 
control system by increasing its safety and capacity, as well 
as reducing the environmental impacts of air traffic, as 
authorized by the Airport and Airway Improvement Act and the 
Federal Aviation Act, as amended. The programs are designed to 
meet the expected air traffic demands of the future and to 
promote flight safety through improvements in facilities, 
equipment, techniques, and procedures in order to ensure that 
the system will safely and efficiently handle future volumes of 
aircraft traffic.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $135,500,000 for the FAA's 
research, engineering, and development activities. The 
recommended level of funding is $5,500,000 more than budget 
request and $1,120,000 less than the fiscal year 2006 enacted 
level.
    A table showing the fiscal year 2006 enacted level, the 
fiscal year 2007 budget estimate, and the Committee 
recommendation follows:

                                      RESEARCH, ENGINEERING AND DEVELOPMENT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                           Fiscal year--
                                                                 --------------------------------    Committee
                                                                   2006 enacted    2007 estimate  recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Improve Aviation Safety:
    Fire Research and Safety....................................      $6,182,000      $6,638,000      $6,638,000
    Propulsion and Fuel System..................................       5,741,000       5,048,000       6,048,000
    Advance Material/Structural Safety..........................       5,881,000       2,843,000       4,843,000
    Atmospheric Hazards/Digital System Safety...................       3,407,000       3,848,000       3,848,000
    Aging Aircraft..............................................      19,807,000      18,621,000      18,621,000
    Aircraft Catastrophic Failure Prevention Research...........       3,306,000       1,512,000       1,512,000
    Flightdeck/Maintanence/System Integration Human Factors.....       8,099,000       7,999,000       7,999,000
    Aviation Safety Risk Analysis...............................       4,883,000       5,292,000       5,292,000
    Air Traffic Control/Technical Operations Human Factors......       9,558,000       9,654,000       9,654,000
    Aeromedical Research........................................       8,800,000       6,962,000       8,462,000
    Weather Program--Safety.....................................      20,376,000      19,545,000      19,545,000
    Unmanned Aircraft System....................................  ..............       1,200,000       1,200,000
Improve Efficency:
    Joint Program and Development Office........................      17,919,000      18,100,000      18,100,000
    Wake Turbulence.............................................       2,273,000       3,066,000       3,066,000
Reduce Environmental Impacts: Environmental and Energy..........      15,840,000      16,008,000      16,008,000
Mission Support:
    System Planning and Resource Management.....................       1,189,000       1,234,000       1,234,000
    William J. Hughes Technical Center Laboratory Facility......       3,359,000       3,430,000       3,430,000
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      RE&D Total................................................     136,620,000     131,000,000     135,500,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        IMPROVE AVIATION SAFETY

    Propulsion and Fuel Systems.--The Committee recommends 
$5,048,000 for propulsion and fuel systems research to reduce 
commercial fatalities. The Committee provides $1,000,000 to 
complete the evaluation of the effects of molecular markers 
designed for the purpose of detecting adulteration or dilution 
of jet fuel for use in aviation engines.
    Advanced Materials/Structural Safety.--The Committee 
recommends $4,843,000 for advanced materials/structural safety 
research. The recommendation is an increase of $2,000,000 from 
the budget estimate and an decrease of $1,038,000 from the 
fiscal year 2006 enacted level. The Committee recommends 
$500,000 to support and improve ongoing metallic and composite 
structures research at the National Institute for Aviation 
Research.
    Aeromedical Research.--The Committee recommends $8,462,000 
for aeromedical research, an increase of $1,500,000 above the 
budget estimate. The Committee recommends $1,000,000 to 
continue studies related to cabin air quality to be conducted 
by the center of excellence for cabin environment research.
    Flight Attendant Fatigue.--The Committee continues to be 
concerned about the issue of flight attendant fatigue, and 
whether current regulations provide adequate rest time for 
flight attendants. Pursuant to the Committee's request in the 
Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2005, the FAA submitted a 
report in July 2006 on the impact of the minimum rest 
requirements of FAR 121.467 and FAR 135.273. The study was 
limited in nature; however, the report stated that flight 
attendants are ``experiencing fatigue and tiredness and as 
such, (fatigue) is a salient issue warranting further 
evaluation.'' In order to gain a fuller understanding of the 
impact of fatigue on flight attendants, the Committee directs 
FAA to utilize $500,000 of its appropriation for CAMI to carry 
out its recommendations for further study of this problem. The 
Committee directs CAMI to submit a report to the Congress not 
later than December 31, 2008, and expects the report to include 
analysis in the six areas that CAMI identified in its report of 
July 2006: a survey of field operations, a focused study of 
incident reports, field research on the effects of fatigue, a 
validation of models for assessing flight attendant fatigue, 
international policies and practices, and the potential 
benefits of training.

                       GRANTS-IN-AID FOR AIRPORTS

                      (LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

                    (AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)

Limitation, 2006........................................  $3,514,500,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................   2,750,000,000
House allowance.........................................   3,700,000,000
Committee recommendation................................   3,520,000,000

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends a limitation on obligations of 
$3,520,000,000 for grants-in-aid to airports for fiscal year 
2007, which is $770,000,000 more than the budget estimate and 
$5,500,000 more than the fiscal year 2006 enacted level. The 
Committee recommendation is sufficient to continue the 
important tasks of enhancing airport and airway safety, 
ensuring that airport standards continue to be met, maintaining 
existing airport capacity, and developing additional capacity.
    The Committee recommends several changes to the Grants-in-
Aid for Airports programs by including language that allows 
funds appropriated to the Small Community Air Service 
Development Program [SCASDP] to be used for expenses associated 
with administering the program. This language further exempts 
SCASDP from the obligation cap for administration and transfers 
the amount appropriated to the account available to administer 
the program. This language would also exempt the Small 
Community Air Service Development Program's obligation of funds 
for administrative purposes from the Trust Fund obligation cap 
for administrative expenses.
    In addition, these changes solve an inadvertent problem 
that was created in prior year appropriations. Because there is 
a prohibition on transfers, unless explicitly exempted, the 
funds for the SCASDP program cannot be transferred to the 
account where the program is currently administered. This 
language would allow the money to be transferred and align 
program funding with managed responsibility. In prior years, 
the SCASDP program has not been given the authority to use 
appropriated funds for administering the program. This language 
gives authority for funds appropriated to be used for 
administering the program.
    Airport Discretionary Grants.--Of the funds covered by the 
obligation limitation in this bill, the Committee directs FAA 
to provide not less than the following funding levels, out of 
available resources, for the following projects in the 
corresponding amounts. The Committee agrees that State 
apportionment funds may be construed as discretionary funds for 
the purposes of implementing this provision. To the maximum 
extent possible, the administrator should work to ensure that 
airport sponsors for these projects first use available 
entitlement funds to finance the projects. However, the FAA 
should not require sponsors to apply carryover entitlement to 
discretionary projects funded in the coming year, but only 
those entitlements applicable to the fiscal year 2007 
obligation limitation. The Committee further directs that the 
specific funding allocated above shall not diminish or 
prejudice the application of a specific airport or geographic 
region to receive other AIP discretionary grants or multi-year 
letters of intent.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
State       Airport Name         Project Description         Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
   AL Birmingham             Extension of runway 6/         $3,500,000
       International          24.
   AL Franklin Field         Environmental                   4,000,000
       Airport                assessment, land
                              acquisition, design
                              and construction,
                              relocation and
                              extension of the
                              existing runway and
                              renovation of airport
                              facility.
   DE Delaware Airpark       Construct a new                 3,300,000
       (33N)                  runway, taxiway and
                              apron system.
   IL Waukegan Regional      Environmental Study             1,000,000
                              and land acquisition
                              for runway extension.
   KY Louisville             Runway widening and             3,200,000
       International-         various improve-
       Standiford Field       ments.
   KY Barkley Regional       To construct a new              1,500,000
                              terminal facility.
   LA Louis Armstrong New    Various Improvements..          2,200,000
       Orleans
       International
   MA Nantucket Memorial     Move air traffic                2,000,000
                              control tower to
                              accommodate terminal
                              improvements.
   MI Bishop International   Cargo Apron expansion.          3,000,000
   MI Capital City           Extend primary runway.          4,000,000
   MO Mexico Memorial        New terminal and                  200,000
       Airport                various improvements.
   MO Max B. Swisher         Various improvements..          8,750,000
       Airport
   MO Rosecrans Memorial     Rotary Snow Broom.....            350,000
       Airport
   MO Farmington Regional    Partial parallel                  800,000
       Airport                taxiway construction.
   MS Golden Triangle        Runway extension and            2,000,000
       Regional Airport       environmental
                              assessment.
   MS Greenwood-Leflore      Control tower                   2,000,000
       Airport                construction and
                              various improvements.
   MS Jackson International  Essential airfield              4,000,000
       Airport                improvements.
   MS Trent Lott             Runway extension......          2,000,000
       International
       Airport
   MS Tunica Municipal       Runway and Parallel             2,000,000
       Airport                Taxiway Extension.
   MT Billings Logan         Taxiway A Pavement              2,200,000
       International          Rehabilitation and
       Airport                Drainage Upgrade.
   MT Bert Mooney Airport    Approach Lighting and           1,500,000
       Airport                environmental
                              assessment.
   MT Great Falls            Expand and improve              1,500,000
       International          taxiway apron system
       Airport                and other
                              improvements.
   NC Rowan County Airport   Existing runway                 1,000,000
                              protection zone land
                              acquisition and
                              airfield improvements.
   NC Statesville Regional   Runway extension,               1,000,000
       Airport                runway strengthening,
                              and other
                              improvements.
   ND Devils Lake Municipal- Reconstruct runway 13/          1,500,000
       Knoke Field            31.
   ND Grand Forks            Construct a new runway          1,000,000
       International
   NE Western Nebraska       Various improvements..          1,000,000
       Regional/William B.
       Heilig Field
   NM Alexander Municipal    Construct new cross             1,500,000
                              wind runway.
   NM Albuquerque            Aircraft parking ramp.          1,000,000
       International
       Sunport
   NM Las Cruces             Runway Improvements...          4,000,000
       International
   NY Niagara Falls          New Terminal Apron....          1,000,000
       International
   OR McNary Field           Construct new runway..          1,500,000
   OR Roberts Field-Redmond  Renovation of airport           2,000,000
       Municipal              terminal.
   PA Erie Intl              Runway expansion......          3,000,000
   TN Nashville              Runway 13/31                    5,000,000
       International          improvements.
   TX San Marcos Municipal   Various Improvements..          4,500,000
   WI La Crosse Municipal    Phase 3 construction            5,000,000
                              of parallel taxiway
                              to primary runway and
                              reconstruction of
                              Taxiways A and E and
                              the south General
                              Aviation apron.
   WI Sheboygan County       Extend primary runway.          2,000,000
       Memorial
   WI Southern Wisconsin     Construct parallel              1,000,000
       Regional               taxiway to Runway 36;
                              construct southwest T-
                              Hangar apron;
                              reconstruct T-Hangar
                              apron and acquire
                              land in the primary
                              runway approach.
   WV West Virginia          Various Improvements..          8,000,000
       statewide
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Panama City-Bay County International Airport, Florida.--The 
Committee encourages the FAA to give priority consideration to 
the application for a letter of intent that the Panama City-Bay 
County International Airport Authority and Industrial District 
submitted for construction of a new airport. The FAA has noted 
that the runways at the current airport do not meet Federal 
safety and design standards. The FAA's draft environmental 
impact statement further noted that the ``No Action'' 
alternative is ``not reasonable, feasible, practicable or 
prudent.'' The Committee has been informed that substantial 
safety and capacity benefits will accrue from the completion of 
this project. The Committee also understands this project has 
several unique characteristics, including having a private 
entity donate the new site and reducing conflict with military 
aircraft. In addition, the Committee understands that more than 
two-thirds of this project will be funded from non-Federal 
sources. The Committee supports the application as submitted 
and believes this is a unique opportunity to leverage Federal 
funds.
    Runway Incursion Prevention Systems and Devices.--The bill 
includes a provision that allows funds for grants-in-aid to 
airports to be used by airports to procure and install runway 
incursion prevention systems and devises.
    Airport Technology.--The budget estimate includes 
$18,870,000 for airport technology research. The Committee 
recommendation is $1,000,000 more than the budget request, and 
funds recommended in addition to the estimate are for the 
airfield pavements research program. The program is designed to 
develop safer, more cost-effective, and durable asphalt and 
concrete airfield pavements.

                       GRANTS-IN-AID FOR AIRPORTS

                    (AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)

                 (RESCISSION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

Rescission, 2006........................................ -$1,032,000,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................      -1,582,000
House allowance.........................................     -25,000,000
Committee recommendation................................    -765,490,000

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends a rescission of contract 
authorization of $765,490,000 of contract authority from the 
Airport and Airway Trust Fund. Section 48112 of title 49, 
United States Code, stipulates that additional contract 
authorization for the grants-in-aid program is automatically 
made available in an amount equal to the difference between the 
appropriated level for the facilities and equipment program and 
the authorized amount for the same fiscal year.

       ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS--FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

    Section 110 limits the number of technical staff years at 
the Center for Advanced Aviation Systems Development to no more 
than 395 in fiscal year 2007.
    Section 111 permits the Administrator to reimburse FAA 
appropriations for amounts made available for 49 U.S.C. 
41742(a)(1) as fees are collected and credited under 49 U.S.C. 
45303.
    Section 112 allows funds received to reimburse FAA for 
providing technical assistance to foreign aviation authorities 
to be credited to the Operations account.
    Section 113 extends the terms and conditions of the 
aviation insurance program, commonly known as ``war risk 
insurance,'' and the limitation on air carrier liability for 
third party claims arising out of acts of terrorism to August 
31, 2007 and includes an option for the Secretary to futher 
extend the program until December 31, 2007.
    Section 114 extends the retirement age for pilots to age 
65.
    Section 115 prohibits funds in this act to be used to adopt 
guidelines or regulations requiring airport sponsors to provide 
the Federal Aviation Administration ``without cost'' buildings, 
maintenance, or space for FAA services. The prohibition does 
not apply to negotiations between FAA and airport sponsors 
concerning ``below market'' rates for such services or to grant 
assurances that require airport sponsors to provide land 
without cost to the FAA for air traffic control facilities.

                     Federal Highway Administration


                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The principal mission of the Federal Highway Administration 
is, in partnership with State and local governments, to foster 
the development of a safe, efficient, and effective highway and 
intermodal system nationwide including access to and within 
national forests, national parks, indian lands and other public 
lands.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    Under the Committee recommendations, a total program level 
of $39,865,464,863 would be provided for the activities of the 
Federal Highway Administration in fiscal year 2007.

                 LIMITATION ON ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2006....................................    $360,991,620
Budget estimate, 2007...................................     372,504,000
House allowance.........................................     372,504,000
Committee recommendation................................     378,504,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    This limitation on obligations provides for the salaries 
and expenses of the Federal Highway Administration for program 
management, direction, and coordination; engineering guidance 
to Federal and State agencies; and advisory and support 
services in field offices.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends a limitation on obligations of 
$378,504,000 for administrative expenses of the agency.
    This limitation is $6,000,000 more than the budget request 
and $17,512,380 more than the fiscal year 2006 enacted level. 
The Committee recommends the additional funding be used to 
continue to improve oversight and stewardship of the Federal-
aid highway funds to ensure that every Federal dollar is well 
spent and that program operations and processes are efficient 
and streamlined. The funds should be applied to the Financial 
Integrity Review and Evaluation program, improvements to FHWA's 
Fiscal Information Management System, as well as permanent 
change of station moves.

                 LIMITATION ON TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH

Limitation, 2006........................................    $425,502,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................     429,800,000
House allowance.........................................     429,800,000
Committee recommendation................................     429,800,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The limitation controls spending for the transportation 
research and technology programs of the FHWA. This limitation 
includes the intelligent transportation systems, surface 
transportation research, technology deployment, training and 
education, and university transportation research. Funding for 
the Bureau of Transportation Statistics [BTS] is also included 
within this limitation even though BTS is organizationally 
placed within the Research and Innovative Technology 
Administration [RITA]. Additional information regarding BTS is 
included in the RITA section of this report.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends a limitation on obligations for 
transportation research of $429,800,000. This limitation is 
consistent with the Senate-passed authorization level and is 
$4,298,000 more than the fiscal year 2006 enacted level.

                          FEDERAL-AID HIGHWAYS

                      (LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

                          (HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

Limitation, 2006........................................ $35,672,020,464
Budget estimate, 2007...................................  39,086,464,683
House allowance.........................................  39,086,464,683
Committee recommendation................................  39,086,464,683

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Federal-aid highways program provides financial support 
to States and localities for development, construction, and 
repair of highways and bridges through grants. The program is 
financed from the Highway Trust Fund and most of the funds are 
distributed through apportionments and allocations to States. 
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.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends limiting fiscal year 2007 Federal-
aid highways obligations to $39,086,464,683, which is 
$3,414,444,220 more than the fiscal year 2006 enacted level.

               FERRY BOATS AND FERRY TERMINAL FACILITIES

    Within the funds available for ferry boats and ferry 
terminal facilities, funds are to be available for the 
following projects and activities:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Committee
                      Project name                        recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cleveland-Cuyahoga County Port Authority Intermodal           $1,000,000
 Relocation Opportunity Study, OH.......................
Detroit/Wayne County Port Authority Public Dock,
 Detroit, MI............................................
Public Dock & Terminal Project, MI......................       3,000,000
Dorena-Hickman Ferry Boat Service, Mississippi County,         1,000,000
 Missouri...............................................
Haverstraw Ferry Terminal , NY..........................         500,000
Homer-Halibut Cove-Jakolof Bay-Seldovia Ferry, AK.......       3,500,000
Kitsap Transit, Rich-Passage Wake Impact Study, WA......       2,200,000
Manns Harbor Shipyard, NC...............................       2,000,000
Mississippi River Ferry Boat Expansion, Davenport, Iowa.       1,000,000
Mukilteo Multimodal Terminal Redevelopment, WA..........         675,000
Oak Bluffs Terminal reconstruction, Martha's Vineyard,         1,500,000
 MA.....................................................
Oklahoma River Ferry Boat Transportation, Oklahoma......       1,000,000
Puget Sound Regional Council, Passenger-Only Ferry               125,000
 Study, WA..............................................
Swan's Island Ferry Facilities Improvement Project, ME..       1,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

      TRANSPORTATION AND COMMUNITY AND SYSTEM PRESERVATION PROGRAM

    Within the funds available for transportation and community 
and system preservation program, funds are to be distributed to 
the following projects and activities:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Committee
                      Project name                        recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
87th Street Parkway Improvement, Lenexa, KS.............      $1,500,000
Access Road to Beckley Veterans Affairs Medical Center,        1,400,000
 WV.....................................................
Antelope Valley Project Transportation Improvements, NE.         750,000
Aurora Bike Trail, IL...................................         300,000
Cal-Sag Greenway Bike Trail, IL.........................         250,000
City of Reading Streetscape Improvements, Pennsylvania..       1,000,000
City of Warwick, RI; for a feasibility study on Route 37         250,000
 extension, RI..........................................
Clayton Pedestrian Grade Seperation, Johnston County, NC         575,000
Des Moines Creek Trail Access Project, Des Moines, WA...         500,000
ast Aztec Arterial Route, NM............................       1,000,000
Euclid Lakefront Mixed Use Harbor Town Marina Project,           750,000
 OH.....................................................
Flats East Bank Project, OH.............................       1,050,000
General Dacey Trail--Phase 2, IL........................         200,000
Grand Illinois Trail, Village of Carbon Cliff, IL.......         200,000
Great River Trail near Savanna, IL......................         200,000
Harrisburg to Eldorado Bike Trail, IL...................         250,000
Highway 49 Roadway Lighting, Hattiesburg................         750,000
Hofstra University Safe and Sustainable Campus Plan, NY.       1,000,000
Intersection Rehabilitation and Improvements, US24 and         1,500,000
 Marlatt Avenue, Manhattan, KS..........................
Kaycee Main Street Project, Wyoming.....................         500,000
Longleaf Trace Trail, MS................................         250,000
Morgantown access road--Airport to I-68, WV.............       2,300,000
Natchez Historical Trail, MS............................         500,000
Olympic Discovery Trail/Elwha River Pedestrian Bridge,           500,000
 Clallam County, WA.....................................
Pookela Road Improvements, HI...........................       1,000,000
Separated Grade Crossing for Torrington, Wyoming........         800,000
Shiloh Road Corridor--West Billings, MT.................         500,000
SIU--Edwardsville Morris Bike Trail, IL.................         200,000
South Dakota School of Mines and Technology Connector          1,000,000
 Road, South Dakota.....................................
Springfield Park District's Interurban Bicycle and               200,000
 Pedestrian Trail, IL...................................
State Route 72 Widening, Grading, Paving, and General            500,000
 Safety Improvements, OH................................
Statesmen Boulevard and Trail, Delta State University,           500,000
 MS.....................................................
Town of North Kingstown, RI; for Post Road Corridor Plan         500,000
Town of Tiverton, RI; Stone Bridge Improvements.........         500,000
U.S. 113 (Worcester Highway), Maryland..................         750,000
University of Southern Maine, University Commons Bedford       1,000,000
 Street Safety Improvements, ME.........................
Urbana to Danville Trail, IL............................         200,000
Utah County Mobility Studies, UT........................         500,000
Uptown St. Joseph Revitalization Project, MO............       1,000,000
Vermont Downtown Streetscape & Sidewalk Improvements in        2,000,000
 Springfield, Derby Line, Bristol, Stamford, Franklin
 [VT]...................................................
Western Kentucky University--Community Bikeway in              1,000,000
 Bowling Green, Kentucky................................
William H. Darr Agricultural Center Renovation of              1,000,000
 Facilities and Equipment, MO...........................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                             FEDERAL LANDS

    Within the funds for the Federal lands program, funds are 
to be available for the following projects and activities:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Committee
                      Project name                        recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
116th Street NE Interchange Improvement Project, Tulalip      $1,000,000
 Tribes, WA.............................................
Alaska Trail Initiative, AK.............................       2,000,000
Arcadia Boat Ramp Project, Squaxin Island Tribe, WA.....       1,000,000
Beartooth Highway Reconstruction, WY....................       1,000,000
BIA Route 12 Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe, SD.............       2,000,000
BIA Route 6 Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe, South Dakota....       2,000,000
Big Timber-McLeod Street Renovation Project, MT.........       2,000,000
Bozeman-Durston Avenue/Peach Street and North 7th Avenue       2,000,000
 Intersection, MT.......................................
City of Red Lodge West Fork Road & Ski Run Road, MT.....       1,000,000
City of Rocks Back Country Byway, Idaho.................       1,000,000
City of Rocks Back Country Byway, Idaho.................       3,000,000
Colorado State Highway 13 from Craig to Wyoming state          1,000,000
 line, Colorado.........................................
Colorado State Highway 150--from US 160, north to Great        1,000,000
 Sand Dunes National Park, Colorado.....................
Consumer Road to Horizon Mine, Carbon County, Utah......       1,250,000
Croix Street Reconstruction: Completion of Phase I ,             350,000
 Negaunee, MI...........................................
Grand Teton Pathways Project, Wyoming...................       1,000,000
Grenada Access Road, MS.................................       1,000,000
Hawaii Statewide Federal Lands Improvements, HI.........         800,000
Homochitto National Forest Roads, Lincoln County, MS....       1,000,000
Hoover Dam Bypass Bridge, AZ............................       1,000,000
Kalispell Westside/Stillwater Bypass Project, MT........       4,200,000
Pikes Peak Highway [CO].................................       1,000,000
Pondera County Rural Roads, MT..........................       2,460,000
Reconstruct Nine Mile Canyon Road, Duchesne County, Utah         500,000
Road 27 Paving, NE......................................       1,000,000
Sardis Lake Drive, MS...................................         500,000
Shotgun Cove Road, AK...................................       1,000,000
Skokomish Tribe Access Road and US-101 Realignment             1,000,000
 Project, WA............................................
SR-160 Blue Diamond Highway--Las Vegas to Pahrump, NV...       5,000,000
Three Affiliated Tribes, Wells Road, North Dakota.......       1,000,000
US 491 in Montezuma County [CO].........................         500,000
Valentine National Wildlife Refuge Roads in Cherry             1,000,000
 County, Nebraska.......................................
Valles Caldera National Preserve, New Mexico............       1,400,000
Vermont Federal Lands Projects [VT].....................         640,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                  INTERSTATE MAINTANENCE DISCRETIONARY

    Within the funds for the interstate maintenance 
discretionary program, funds are to be available for the 
following projects and activities:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Committee
                      Project name                        recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
East Belgrade Interchange, MT...........................      $1,000,000
I-10 Reconstruction/Las Cruces to New Mexico-Texas State       1,500,000
 Line, NM...............................................
I-12 at LA 1088 New Interchange, Louisiana..............         750,000
I-15 Auxiliary Lanes, Kaysville to 31st Street in Ogden,       1,000,000
 Utah...................................................
I-15 Bluff Interchange, St. George, Utah................         750,000
I-225 at Colfax/US 40 & 17th Ave [CO]...................       1,000,000
I-25 and State Highway 16 Interchange at Fort Carson           2,000,000
 (Gate 20), CO..........................................
I-376 Redesignation Improvement Plan, Pennsylvania......       2,000,000
I-5/I-205 Salmon Creek Interchange Project, Clark              2,000,000
 County, WA.............................................
I-70 Viaduct Realignment, Topeka, KS....................         500,000
I-73, Construction of I-73 from Myrtle Beach, SC to I-           500,000
 95, ending at the North Carolina state line, SC........
I-75 at South Dixie Drive/Central Avenue Interchange, OH       2,000,000
I-81 Widening, PA.......................................         625,000
I-84, US-93 Interchange, Stage 2--Idaho.................         500,000
I-85 New Interchange in Troup County, GA................       1,000,000
I-95 in Cumberland, Harnett, and Johnston Counties, NC..         750,000
I-95/U.S. Hwy 301 Interchange, SC.......................         500,000
Improvements to Rte 266 and Interchange with I-44, MO...       2,500,000
Interstate 20/59 Industrial Park Interchange, MS........       3,150,000
Interstate 29 Utility Relocation, Sioux City, Iowa......         500,000
Interstate 69/Great River Bridge: Highway 65-MS Highway        2,000,000
 1, AR..................................................
Interstate 80 Concrete Rehabilitation, Wyoming..........         750,000
Interstate 84 Burnt River Freight Improvement, OR.......       1,000,000
Interstate 94 from Highway 336 to Barnesville, MN.......         750,000
Interstate 94/43/794, Marquette Interchange, WI.........       2,375,000
Lighting at Exit 400 Off Interstate 55, Lincoln County,          350,000
 MS.....................................................
Pacific Street Bridge over I-680, NE....................         750,000
Port Road Expansion and Improvements, Houston, Texas....         500,000
Queen's Medical center H-1 Access Ramp, HI..............       4,000,000
Reconstruction of Two Interchanges on I-235, Wichita, KS         500,000
Rhode Island Department of Transportation; I-95 and I-         1,000,000
 195 Lighting Project, RI...............................
Southern Nevada Beltway Interchanges, NV................       3,000,000
SR-704/I-5 Cross Base Highway, Pierce County, WA........       1,000,000
Turnpike Improvements Project, DE.......................       2,000,000
US 278 Corridor Construction, South Carolina............         500,000
Widening of I-55 from Church Rd. to TN State Line,             5,000,000
 Mississippi............................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                     FEDERAL-AID HIGHWAYS PROGRAMS

    The roads and bridges that make up our Nation's highway 
infrastructure are built, operated, and maintained through the 
joint efforts of Federal, State, and local governments. States 
have much flexibility to use Federal-aid highway funds to best 
meet their individual needs and priorities, with FHWA's 
assistance and oversight.
    The Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation 
Equity Act: A Legacy for Users [SAFETEA-LU], the highway, 
highway safety, and transit authorization through fiscal year 
2009, makes Federal-aid highways funds available in the 
following major categories:
    National Highway System [NHS].--The Intermodal Surface 
Transportation Efficiency Act [ISTEA] of 1991 authorized the 
NHS, which was subsequently established as a 161,000 mile road 
system by the National Highway System Designation Act of 1995. 
This system serves major population centers, intermodal 
transportation facilities, international border crossings, and 
major destinations. The NHS program provides funding for this 
system consisting of roads that are of primary Federal 
interest. The NHS consists of the current Interstate, other 
rural principal arterials, urban freeways and connecting urban 
principal arterials, and facilities on the Defense Department's 
designated Strategic Highway Network, and roads connecting the 
NHS to intermodal facilities. The Federal share for the NHS 
program is generally 80 percent, subject to the sliding scale 
adjustment, with an availability period of 4-years.
    Interstate Maintenance [IM].--The 46,876 mile Dwight D. 
Eisenhower National System of Interstate and Defense Highways 
retains a separate identity within the NHS. The IM program 
finances projects to rehabilitate, restore, resurface and 
reconstruct the Interstate system. Reconstruction that 
increases capacity, other than HOV lanes, is not eligible for 
IM funds. The Federal share for the IM program is 90 percent, 
subject to the sliding scale adjustment, and funds are 
available for 4 years.
    Surface Transportation Program [STP].--STP is a flexible 
program that may be used by States and localities for projects 
on any Federal-aid highway, bridge projects on any public road, 
transit capital projects, and intracity and intercity bus 
terminals and facilities. A portion of STP funds are set aside 
for transportation enhancements and State sub-allocations are 
provided. The Federal share for STP is generally 80 percent, 
subject to the sliding scale adjustment, with a 4-year 
availability period.
    Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation.--The bridge program 
enables States to improve the condition of their bridges 
through replacement, rehabilitation, and systematic preventive 
maintenance. The funds are available for use on all bridges, 
including those on roads functionally classified as rural minor 
collectors and as local. Bridge program funds have a 4-year 
period of availability with a Federal share for all projects, 
except those on the Interstate System, of 80 percent, subject 
to the sliding scale adjustment. For those bridges on the 
Interstate System, the Federal share is 90 percent, subject to 
the sliding scale adjustment. There is a set-aside of 
$100,000,000 from the fiscal year 2006-2009 funding for 
specific projects listed in SAFETEA-LU.
    Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program 
[CMAQ].--The CMAQ program directs funds toward transportation 
projects and programs to help meet and maintain national 
ambient air quality standards for ozone, carbon monoxide, and 
particulate matter. A minimum one-half percent of the 
apportionment is guaranteed to each State.
    Highway Safety Improvement Program [HSIP].--The new highway 
infrastructure safety program (previously funded by a set-aside 
from STP), was established as a core program beginning in 2006. 
The program, which features strategic safety planning and 
performance, devotes additional resources and supports 
innovative approaches to reducing highway fatalities and 
injuries on all public roads.
    Federal Lands Highways.--This category funds improvements 
for forest highways; park roads and parkways; Indian 
reservation roads; and refuge roads. The Federal lands highway 
program provides for transportation planning, research, 
engineering, and construction of highways, roads, parkways, and 
transit facilities that provide access to or within public 
lands, national parks, and Indian reservations.
    The Committee directs that the funds allocated for this 
program in this bill and in permanent law are to be derived 
from the FHWA's public lands discretionary program, and not 
from funds allocated to the National Park Service's regions.
    Equity Bonus.--The equity bonus (replaces TEA21's minimum 
guarantee) provides additional funds to States to ensure that 
each State's total funding from apportioned programs and for 
High Priority Projects meets certain equity considerations. 
Each State is guaranteed a minimum rate of return on its share 
of contributions to the highway account of the Highway Trust 
Fund, and a minimum increase relative to the average dollar 
amount of apportionments under TEA21. Certain States will 
maintain the share of total apportionments they each received 
during TEA21. An open-ended authorization is provided, ensuring 
that there will be sufficient funds to meet the objectives of 
the equity bonus.
    Emergency Relief [ER].-- Section 125 of title 23, United 
States Code, authorizes $100,000,000 annually for the ER 
program. This program provides funds for the repair or 
reconstruction of Federal-aid highways and bridges and 
federally owned roads and bridges that have suffered serious 
damage as the result of natural disasters or catastrophic 
failures. The ER program supplements the commitment of 
resources by States, their political subdivisions, or Federal 
agencies to help pay for unusually heavy expenses resulting 
from extraordinary conditions.
    Ferry Boats and Ferry Terminal Facilities.--SAFETEA-LU 
reauthorized funding for the construction of ferry boats and 
ferry terminal facilities and requires that $20,000,000 from 
each of fiscal years 2005 through 2009 be set aside for marine 
highway systems that are part of the National Highway System 
for use by the States of Alaska, New Jersey, and Washington.
    National Scenic Byways.--This program provides funding for 
roads that are designated by the Secretary of Transportation as 
All American Roads [AAR] or National Scenic Byways [NSB]. These 
roads have outstanding scenic, historic, cultural, natural, 
recreational, and archaeological qualities.
    Transportation and Community and System Preservation 
[TCSP].--SAFETEA-LU continues the TCSP program to provide 
grants to States and local governments for planning, 
developing, and implementing strategies to integrate 
transportation and community and system preservation plans and 
practices. These grants may be used to improve the efficiency 
of the transportation system; reduce the impacts of 
transportation on the environment; reduce the need for costly 
future investments in public infrastructure; and provide 
efficient access to jobs, services, and centers of trade.
    Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation 
[TIFIA].--The TIFIA credit program provides funds to assist in 
the development of major infrastructure facilities through 
greater non-Federal and private sector participation, building 
on public willingness to dedicate future revenues or user fees 
in order to receive transportation benefits earlier than would 
be possible under traditional funding techniques. The TIFIA 
program provides secured loans, loan guarantees, and standby 
lines of credit that may be drawn upon to supplement project 
revenues, if needed, during the first 10 years of project 
operations.
    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 SAFETEA-LU, funding is authorized for each of 
fiscal years 2005 through 2009, is available until expended, 
and is distributed among the 13 eligible States based on the 
latest available cost-to-complete estimate prepared by the 
Appalachian Regional Commission.
    High Priority Projects.--Funds are provided for specific 
projects identified in SAFETEA-LU. Over 5,000 projects are 
identified, each with a specified amount of funding over the 5 
years of SAFETEA-LU.
    Projects of National and Regional Significance.--This 
program provides funding for specific projects of national or 
regional importance. All the funds authorized for this program 
from the Highway Trust Fund are designated for projects listed 
in SAFETEA-LU.

                          FEDERAL-AID HIGHWAYS

                (LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

                          (HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

Appropriations, 2006.................................... $36,032,343,903
Budget estimate, 2007...................................  39,086,464,683
House allowance.........................................  39,086,464,683
Committee recommendation................................  39,086,464,683

    The Committee recommends a liquidating cash appropriation 
of $39,086,464,683. The recommended level is equal to the 
budget request and is necessary to pay outstanding obligations 
from various highway accounts pursuant to prior appropriations 
acts.

                          FEDERAL-AID HIGHWAYS

                          (HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

                              (RESCISSION)

    The bill rescinds $1,500,983,000 of the unobligated 
balances of funds apportioned to the States under chapter 1 of 
title 23, United States Code, excluding safety programs and 
funds set aside within the State for population areas. The 
Committee directs the FHWA to administer the rescission by 
allowing each State the maximum flexibility in making 
adjustments among the apportioned highway programs.

                 APPALACHIAN DEVELOPMENT HIGHWAY SYSTEM

Appropriations, 2006....................................     $19,800,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................................
House allowance.........................................................
Committee recommendation................................      20,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    Funding for the Appalachian Development Highway System 
[ADHS] is authorized under section 1069(y) of the Intermodal 
Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (Public Law 102-240). The 
ADHS program provides funds for the construction of the 
Appalachian corridor highways in the 13 States that comprise 
the Appalachian region. These highways, in many instances, are 
intended to replace some of the most deficient and dangerous 
segments of rural roadway in America.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $20,000,000 for corridor H in West 
Virginia of the Appalachian Development Highway System [ADHS]. 
The recommended amount is $200,000 more than the fiscal year 
2006 enacted level.

           DELTA REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

Appropriations, 2006....................................................
Budget estimate, 2007...................................................
House Allowance.........................................................
Committee recommendation................................     $20,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    Funding for the Delta Regional Transportation Development 
Program is authorized under section 1308 of the Safe, 
Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A 
Legacy for Users (Public Law 109-59). The Delta Regional 
Transportation Development Program provides funds to support 
and encourage multi-state transportation planning and corridor 
development, provide for transportation project development, 
facilitate transportation decisionmaking and support 
transportation construction in the eight States comprising the 
Delta Region (Alabama, Arkansas, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, 
Mississippi, Missouri, and Tennessee).

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $20,000,000 for the Delta Regional 
Transportation Development Program. The Committee directs 
funding be allocated to the following projects that are listed 
below:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Committee
                      Project name                        recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pemiscot County Port Authority Intermodal                     $3,900,000
 Infrastructure, Missouri...............................
Highway 6 from Batesville to Clarksdale, Mississippi....       5,000,000
Park Hills and Mineral Area College Outer Road, Missouri       1,100,000
Industrial Park By-Pass, MO.............................       2,787,000
Route Y Reconstruction Project, MO......................       1,200,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

       ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS--FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

    Section 120 distributes obligation authority among Federal-
aid highway programs.
    Section 121 continues a provision that credits funds 
received by the Bureau of Transportation Statistics to the 
Federal-aid highways account.
    Section 122 includes language that makes certain projects 
and activities eligible to receive fiscal year 2007 grants.
    Section 123. The statement of managers accompanying the 
fiscal year 2005 appropriations act includes $2,500,000 from 
Bridge Discretionary Program funds for the Joachim Avenue 
Bridge replacement, Missouri (page 1394 of House Report 108-
792). This provision would make the funds available for the New 
South Herculaneum Bridge, Herculaneum, Missouri.
    Section 124 recommends that funds made available under this 
section be designated for the following projects:

                     SURFACE TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Committee
                      Project name                        recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I-225 at Colfax Avenue (US 40) and 17th Avenue in             $2,000,000
 Aurora, Colorado.......................................
I-70 Stapleton Interchange [CO].........................       1,000,000
13th Street/Interstate 22 Ramp Repair and Safety,              1,000,000
 Pennsylvania...........................................
21st Century Parks Inc. in Louisville, KY...............       5,400,000
A-B Street Corridor Connector, Auburn, WA...............       1,800,000
Akutan Road construction, AK............................       1,000,000
Allen County SR-309 Safety Improvements and Related            1,000,000
 Construction, OH.......................................
American Parkway Project, PA............................         500,000
American St./Girard Ave. Gateway, PA....................         500,000
Aroostook County North-South Highways, ME...............       1,500,000
Ashburton Avenue Reconstruction in Yonkers, NY..........       2,000,000
Battleship New Jersey Access Road (Clinton Street)               750,000
 Repaving, New Jersey...................................
Beltline Road Corridor Study, OR........................         500,000
Bland Street Improvements, MO...........................         300,000
Bluffton Parkway Extensions, SC.........................       1,000,000
Bob Anthony Parkway, Barnett Reservoir, MS..............         750,000
Booneville Bypass, MS...................................       1,000,000
Bossier Parish Congestion Relief Program, Louisiana.....       2,000,000
Bridge Over Brandywine Creek, Pennsylvania..............       1,250,000
Bristol Street Widening, Santa Ana, CA..................         600,000
Burlington Avenue Grade Separated Interchange at US 24,        2,000,000
 Logansport, Cass County, IN............................
Caraway Bridge Overpass, Arkansas.......................       2,000,000
Carson City Freeway-Phase 2, NV.........................       3,000,000
CEMAR Urban Trail Project, Iowa.........................         500,000
Center City Streetscape Improvement, Missouri...........       1,000,000
Chambers County Bridge Replacement, Alabama.............         200,000
Chittenden County, VT Downtown Revitalization                  2,400,000
 Improvements in Essex Junction and Milton [VT].........
City of Ashland Main Street Redevelopment Project, MO...         315,800
City of Herculaneum-Joachim Avenue Bridge Replacement-         2,557,800
 the new ``South Bridge'', Missouri.....................
City of Pittsburgh Lower Hill Plaza, Pennsylvania.......       1,000,000
City of Scranton East Elm Street Project, Pennsylvania..         500,000
Clifton Corridor Transit Management Association [CCTMA].       1,000,000
Coalfields Expressway, WV...............................       5,000,000
Cold Storage Spur Line, Iowa............................       1,500,000
Coldwater River Bridge and Approaches, DeSoto County, MS       1,250,000
Colfax Narrows Project, NV..............................       1,000,000
College of Southern Idaho Student Safety Initiative, ID.         800,000
Connecticut Center for Science and Exploration and             2,000,000
 Capital City Economic Development Authority
 Construction of Integrated Parking Facilities, CT......
Construction and Improvements to County Road One (RS-          1,000,000
 209) south of I-70 to K-32, Leavenworth County, Kansas.
Construction of I-45 over SH96, Galveston County, Texas.       1,500,000
Construction of Improvements to 144th Street from ``Q''        1,000,000
 Street to Madison Street, NE...........................
Coon Rapids Iowa Area Great Places Trail, IA............         500,000
County Highway 74/Laraway Road Corridor Improvements,            650,000
 Illinois...............................................
Cumberland Avenue Improvements, Tennessee...............       1,000,000
Deer Valley Road Bridge Crossing, Surprise, AZ..........       1,880,000
Delaware State Transportation & Public Safety Traffic          1,000,000
 Information Exchange Pilot Project, DE.................
Denali Commission, AK...................................       4,000,000
Downtown Redevelopment Plan, MO.........................         500,000
Durant Main Street/SH 78 Improvements, Oklahoma.........         500,000
East Street Extension Junction City, Kansas.............       1,000,000
East Washington Avenue Reconstruction, WI...............         400,000
El Paso Inner Loop Highway, TX..........................       4,000,000
Ellsworth Air Force Base Road Improvement, South Dakota.       4,750,000
Engineering, design and construction of a Port Access          1,000,000
 Road connecting to I-26 in North Charleston, SC........
Extension of arterial roadway, Prineville, Oregon.......       1,000,000
Extension of Highway 57, Jackson County, MS.............         750,000
Falcon Raod Improvements--Phase II, Oklahoma............       1,000,000
Forest Park South Neighborhood Streetscape Improvements,         500,000
 Missouri...............................................
Fredericksburg Road/Medical Drive, San Antonio, TX......       1,000,000
Friant Road Widening, Fresno County, CA.................       1,000,000
Gateway Plan 2030: Inner Loop Highway, El Paso, Texas...         750,000
Glencoe Railroad Congestion Mitigation Project in MN....       1,000,000
Grand Avenue Underpass, Illinois........................       2,000,000
Grand Lagoon Bridge Replacement, Bay County, Florida....       1,500,000
Grand Rapids Passenger Rail and Station Relocation, MI..       2,000,000
Granite Falls Alternate Freight Route, Snohomish County,       2,000,000
 WA.....................................................
Granite Street Reconstruction Project, NH...............       1,500,000
Grant City Downtown Revitalization, MO..................         500,000
Grant County Economic Development Corridor, Indiana.....       1,000,000
Green Spring Interchange Area Management Plan, OR.......         300,000
Greenville Trail, MO....................................         500,000
Haines Road Improvements, AK............................       1,000,000
Hanford Reach National Monument Transportation                 1,000,000
 Infrastructure Improvements, WA........................
Harrisburg Southern Gateway Project, Pennsylvania.......       1,000,000
Heart of America Bicycle/Pedestrian Bridge, MO..........       1,000,000
High Speed Maglev Deployment Program, PA................       1,500,000
Highway 11, Picayune, MS................................       1,250,000
Highway 19, Neshoba County, MS..........................       2,500,000
Highway 412: Springdale Bypass, Arkansas................       4,000,000
Highway 431 Expansion, Alabama..........................       1,000,000
Highway 49/Highway 7 Connector Road, Greenwood, MS......       1,250,000
Highway 65 North in Dallas County, Missouri.............       1,500,000
Highway 71: Louisiana State Line--DeQueen, Arkansas.....       2,000,000
Highway 79 Four Lane, Blount County, Alabama............       2,000,000
Highway 965/Fairview Lane/Golfview Drive Intersection            870,000
 Alignment Project, North Liberty, Iowa.................
Highway Improvement to Highway 54 Near Mexico, MO.......         539,400
Hudiburg Drive Beautification and Improvement, Oklahoma.         780,000
I-10 Widening in Western Maricopa County, Arizona.......       2,000,000
I-25 & SH 16 Interchange [CO]...........................       1,000,000
I-29/52nd Avenue South Interchange Reconstruction in           2,000,000
 Fargo, North Dakota....................................
I-35/Tecumseh Road Transportation Traffic Study, Norman,         800,000
 Oklahoma...............................................
I-5/Highway 99W Connector, OR...........................       1,000,000
I-5/North Macadam Freeway Ramp & Street Capacity               2,000,000
 Improvements, OR.......................................
I-580 Meadow Mall Interchange, NV.......................       1,000,000
I-74/Northern Beltway, Eastern Expansion, Forsyth              1,000,000
 County, NC.............................................
I-84, Exit 29 (Franklin Road) Local Systems Improvement,       1,000,000
 ID.....................................................
Idaho Byways Corridor Planning Implementation, ID.......       1,000,000
Interchange Construction at US73 and 20th Street,              1,000,000
 Leavenworth, KS........................................
Interchange Improvements at I-44 & Kansas Expressway,          1,000,000
 Missouri...............................................
Interchange Improvements at U.S. 60 and National Avenue,       1,500,000
 Greene County, MO......................................
Intermodal Infrastructure Enhancement Project, Port of           800,000
 Pasco, WA..............................................
Interstate 20 South Frontage Road, Warren County, MS....       1,500,000
Interstate 235 Reconstruction in Des Moines, Iowa--            3,750,000
 utility work...........................................
Iowa Highway 32, Southwest Areterial, Dubuque, Iowa.....       1,000,000
Jefferson Park Avenue Pedestrian Crossing, Virginia.....       3,500,000
K-7 Corridor Study from 183rd St to 119th Street in              500,000
 Olathe, KS.............................................
Kalispell Bypass, MT....................................       4,000,000
King Coal Highway, WV...................................       5,000,000
KY 70 Rehabilitation Project in Barren County, KY.......         400,000
Lake Harbour Road, Ridgeland, MS........................       1,250,000
Las Vegas Beltway/Airport Connector Interchange, NV.....       1,000,000
Lawton Downtown Revitalization Project, Oklahoma........       1,000,000
Lincoln Avenue Grade Separation Project, Port of Tacoma,       1,500,000
 WA.....................................................
Lincoln South and West Beltway, NE......................       1,000,000
Little Bay Bridges/Spaulding Turnpike, New Hampshire....       5,000,000
Mahoning County US-224 and Related Connector Road Safety       1,500,000
 Improvements, OH.......................................
Manchester East/West Connector Bridge [NH]..............         500,000
Marks Airport Improvements, MS..........................       1,000,000
Marshall County Commission Double Bridges, Alabama......       2,000,000
Marshall County Salt Dome, KY...........................         400,000
Martin Bluff Road, Mississippi..........................       5,000,000
McIngvale Road Interchange/State Hwy 304, Mississippi...       5,000,000
MD 404 Upgrades, Maryland...............................       4,000,000
Merrimack River Footbridge, Manchester, NH..............         250,000
Mingo Wildlife Refuge Recreational Trail & Habitat               800,000
 Improvement, MO........................................
Minnesota Valley Regional Rail Authority Rehabilitation        2,000,000
 Improvements, Minnesota................................
Mississippi Highway 27, MS..............................         500,000
Mississippi Highway 44 Extension/Pearl River Bridge, MS.       2,000,000
Missouri 58 Highway and Route D Improvements, Cass             1,000,000
 County, MO.............................................
MO 740 Stadium Extension to I-70, Missouri..............       3,000,000
Morgan County, WV--Extension of Western Maryland Trail         1,000,000
 through Paw Paw Bends..................................
Natchez Roads, MS.......................................       1,500,000
Nehemiah Gateway ``Ways to Work'' Loan Program, DE......         259,080
New Orleans Regional Redevelopment Planning, LA.........       2,000,000
North Royal Street Improvements, TN.....................       1,000,000
North Second Street Corridor, Memphis, Tennessee........       4,000,000
Northside Drive, Clinton, MS............................       3,750,000
Oelwein Community Revitalization Initiative, Oelwein,          1,000,000
 Iowa...................................................
Old Whitfield Road, Pearl, MS...........................       2,000,000
Outer Loop, Montgomery, Alabama.........................       3,000,000
Paducah Waterfront Development Project in Paducah,             4,600,000
 Kentucky...............................................
Patriot Parkway (Southern Bypass), Madison County,             4,700,000
 Alabama................................................
Pecue Lane Interchange and Realignment, Louisiana.......         250,000
Pedestrian Access and Safety Improvements, Oklahoma.....         500,000
Pinnacle Aeropark Access Project, Wayne County, MI......       2,000,000
Planning Study for Limited Access Highway at Fort                400,000
 Campbell, KY...........................................
Port Huron NAFTA Corridor Congestion Mitigation Project,       1,000,000
 MI.....................................................
Port of Anacortes Infrastructure Improvements,                 1,150,000
 Anacortes, WA..........................................
Port of Anchorage Intermodal Marine Facility                   1,000,000
 Development, AK........................................
Port of Anchorage road improvements, AK.................       1,000,000
Ports-to-Plains Corridor [CO]...........................         500,000
Ports-to-Plains Trade Corridor, TX......................       1,000,000
Post Street Centennial Trail and Utility Bridge,               2,000,000
 Spokane, WA............................................
Pyramid Highway Corridor Early Action Items, NV.........       1,000,000
Rails Corridor Alliance, MS.............................         750,000
Reconstruction of US-50 in Reno County, KS..............       1,000,000
Reconstruction of US-50, Gray County, KS................       2,000,000
Relief Route, City of Aztec, New Mexico.................       1,000,000
Resurfacing of Ocean, Post, and Shore Roads, RI.........       1,000,000
Rhode Island Department of Transportation; Post Road           2,000,000
 Improvements [RI]......................................
Rhode Island Department of Transportation; Route 3             1,000,000
 Improvements, RI.......................................
Rhode Island Department of Transportation; Warwick             1,000,000
 Intermodal Station Sky Bridge and Moving Skywalk
 Project, RI............................................
Rickenbacker Global Logistics Transportation                   1,000,000
 Improvements, OH.......................................
River Tech Boulevard Road Construction, Illinois........       1,000,000
Road Improvements and Upgrades to Boyd Boulevard,                750,000
 LaPorte, IN............................................
Route 17 Essex Street Bridge (Bergen County, NJ)........       2,000,000
Route 29 Boulevard Conversion Project in Trenton, NJ....       2,000,000
Route 30 Cooper River Drainage Improvements (Camden            3,000,000
 County, NJ)............................................
Sam Chastain Waterfront Trail, Renton, WA...............       1,200,000
SD 11 and SD 42 in Sioux Falls, South Dakota............       5,000,000
Second Bridge to Oak Island, Brunswick County NC........       1,000,000
SH 44/104th Ave Improvements [CO].......................         800,000
South Corridor (North Lake Road) of the North Valley             750,000
 Connector Study, Utah..................................
South Lake Union Circulation System, Seattle, WA........       1,150,000
SR 40 from west of CR 61 to I-95, Camden Co., GA........       1,000,000
SR 85 Improvements, Crestview, Florida..................       1,000,000
SR1 Beach Area Improvements--Rehoboth Entrance                 2,000,000
 Improvements, DE.......................................
SR-1 Grade Separated Intersection, DE...................       2,000,000
SR-57 Safety Improvements, Lorain County, OH............       1,000,000
Stafford County Courthouse Improvement Project, Virginia         711,000
State Road 133 from Valdosta to Moultrie to Albany,            1,000,000
 Georgia................................................
Staten Island North/West Shore Rail Plan Study, NY......       1,400,000
Ste. Genevieve Main Street/Riverfront Improvement              1,000,000
 Project, MO............................................
Stillwater Avenue Reconstruction Project, Bangor, ME....         100,000
Street Repair, Greenville, MS...........................       1,250,000
Tantalus Drive Stabilization, HI........................       4,000,000
Temple Park and Temple Square, MO.......................       1,000,000
Tenth Street Connector, Greeneville, NC.................       1,000,000
TH 14 from Waseca to Owatonna, MN.......................       2,000,000
TH 610 Corridor from TH 169 in Brooklyn Park to I-94 in        1,000,000
 Maple Grove, MN........................................
The Chinatown Plaza and Vicinity Revitalization,                 120,000
 Pennsylvania...........................................
Thomaston--Route 1 Highway Reconstruction Project, ME...       2,000,000
Toby Tubby Parkway, MS..................................         500,000
Town of Branford Relocation of State Route 794 and             3,000,000
 Alterations of Approaches of State Route 794 and State
 Route 146 to Route 1, Connecticut......................
Town of Mansfield Construction of Parking Garage in            2,000,000
 Storrs Town Center, Connecticut........................
Town of West Haven Development of a Feasibility Study of         250,000
 the Extension of Fresh Meadow Road to Route 34,
 Connecticut............................................
Transportation Infrastructure Improvements and Expansion         400,000
 for Green River, Wyoming...............................
U.S. 69 and Chuckwa Drive Ramps, Oklahoma...............         475,118
U.S. 82--Downtown Connector Road, Greenwood, MS.........       1,500,000
University of Memphis Southern Railroad Pedestrian             1,000,000
 Underpass, Tennessee...................................
US 12 Improvements from Burbank to Walla Walla, WA,            1,000,000
 Phase VII..............................................
US 14 Pierre-Fort Pierre Bridge Rehabilitation, South          1,000,000
 Dakota.................................................
US 17 in Beaufort County, NC............................       2,000,000
US 2, Dover Bridge, Bonner County--Idaho................       1,000,000
US 30 and SR 230/Harrisburg Pike Improvements, PA.......         630,000
US 35 Improvements, West Virginia.......................       5,000,000
US 51 Widening, Hernando, MS............................       1,250,000
US 51/SR 43 Connector Road, MS..........................       3,250,000
US 63 and Gans Road Interchange, Missouri...............       4,500,000
US 93 Hamilton to Missoula..............................       1,000,000
US Highway 11, St. Tammany, Louisiana...................       4,000,000
US Highway 21 from Roaring Gap to Sparta, NC............         997,000
US Route 1 and SR 452 Improvements, PA..................         500,000
US-2, Dover Bridge, Bonner County, Idaho................       1,000,000
US-6 Passing Lanes, Emery County, Utah..................       3,000,000
Utah County I-15 Reconstruction Mitigation Strategic           2,000,000
 Plan: Redwood Road and Lehi 1000 South, Utah...........
Walden Point Road, AK...................................       2,250,000
Warrensburg Hwy 13 Bypass, Missouri.....................       5,000,000
Warsaw Bridge Replacement, Warsaw, MO...................         200,000
Washington Boulevard Transportation Project, Camanche,           200,000
 Iowa...................................................
Wasilla Road improvements, AK...........................         750,000
West High Development, MO...............................         500,000
West Veterans Boulevard Extension, Auburn, Alabama......       1,500,000
West Virginia Drive, City of Port St. Lucie, Florida....       1,000,000
West Virginia Route 2 Improvements, WV..................       9,500,000
Wheeler Peak Drive Road Upgrade, NV.....................       1,000,000
WV Route 9..............................................       5,000,000
Zora and Main Street Interchange, MO....................       1,200,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    New Orleans Regional Redevelopment Planning, Louisiana.--
The Committee instructs the grantee for the New Orleans 
Regional Redevelopment Planning to be coordinated with the New 
Orleans area foundation.
    Section 125 transfers funding from a New Haven, Missouri, 
project to route 100 and highway 19 improvements.
    Section 126 provides requirements for any waiver of Buy 
American requirements.

              Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration


                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration [FMCSA] was 
established within the Department of Transportation by the 
Motor Carrier Safety Improvement Act [MCSIA] (Public Law 106-
159) in December 1999. Prior to this legislation, motor carrier 
safety responsibilities were under the jurisdiction of the 
Federal Highway Administration.
    FMCSA's primary mission is to improve the safety of 
commercial vehicle operations on our Nation's highways. To 
accomplish this mission, FMCSA is focused on reducing the 
number and severity of large truck crashes. FMCSA is 
responsible for ensuring that Mexican commercial vehicles 
entering the United States operate in accordance with the North 
American Free Trade Agreement [NAFTA] and comply with all U.S. 
hazardous material and safety regulations. In addition, FMCSA 
oversees compliance with the Federal Motor Carrier Commercial 
Regulations through increased household goods carrier 
enforcement, education and outreach.
    Agency resources and activities contribute to 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, recordkeeping, and 
sanctions. To accomplish these activities, FMCSA works closely 
with Federal, State, and local enforcement agencies, the motor 
carrier industry, highway safety organizations, and individual 
citizens.
    MCSIA and the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient 
Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users [SAFETEA-LU] 
provides funding authorizations for FMCSA's Motor Carrier 
Safety Operations and Programs and Motor Carrier Safety Grants. 
Under these authorizations, funding supports FMCSA's expanded 
scope as authorized by the USA PATRIOT Act, which created new 
and enhanced security measures. Additionally, funding supports 
border enforcement and safety-related activities associated 
with implementation of the NAFTA requirement that Mexican long-
haul shippers be allowed to operate within the United States 
subject to the same safety requirements placed on U.S. 
carriers.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends a total of $517,000,000 for FMCSA 
in fiscal year 2007, which is equal to the requested amount and 
$26,950,000 more than the fiscal year 2006 level.

              MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY OPERATIONS AND PROGRAMS

                (LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

                      (LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

                          (HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

Limitation, 2006........................................    $210,870,000
Budget estimate, 2007 (limitation)......................     223,000,000
House allowance.........................................     223,000,000
Committee recommendation................................     223,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    This account provides the necessary resources to support 
motor carrier safety program activities and maintain the 
agency's administrative infrastructure. Funding supports 
nationwide motor carrier safety and consumer enforcement 
efforts, including Federal safety enforcement activities at the 
U.S./Mexico border to ensure that Mexican carriers entering the 
United States are in compliance with Federal Motor Carrier 
Safety Regulations. Resources are also provided to fund motor 
carrier regulatory development and implementation, information 
management, research and technology, safety education and 
outreach, and the 24-hour safety and consumer telephone 
hotline.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends a limitation on obligations of 
$223,000,000 for FMCSA's Operations and Programs. The 
recommendation is consistent with SAFETEA-LU authorization 
levels and is $12,130,000 more than fiscal year 2006 enacted 
level.
    The bill specifies that $10,296,000 for the research and 
technology program is available for obligation until September 
30, 2010.

                           OPERATING EXPENSES

    The Committee recommends $151,107,000 for operating 
expenses.
    State Enforcement of Farm Operations.--The Committee is 
concerned about the confusion and the unnecessary burdens 
imposed on farm operators and State enforcement officials 
associated with Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration 
title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, parts 381-397. Clearly, 
farmers operating their own equipment to transport their own 
farm commodities to local markets are intended in many if not 
most cases to be exempt from the Federal regulatory 
requirements imposed on commercial operators. In regard to the 
regulations referenced, the Committee directs the FMCSA to 
review and provide a report to the Committee within 90 days 
after the date of enactment of this act outlining: the explicit 
legal requirements for farm operators and State enforcement 
officials; the flexibility, waivers and exemptions available to 
States in enforcing Federal requirements; the conditions 
related to farm operator compliance that compel the DOT to 
withhold Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program assistance to 
States; and, recommendations on how these Federal requirements 
may be simplified and made more uniform to avoid unnecessary 
and unintended confusion and regulatory burdens.
    Household Goods Enforcement.--The Committee recommends 
$1,500,000 for household goods enforcement. The Committee 
encourages FMCSA to assert its role to enforce Federal laws and 
regulations with respect to transportation of household goods 
and to do everything possible to increase the number of 
investigations against unscrupulous household goods movers.
    Working Capital Fund.--The Committee recommends $4,087,000 
for the working capital fund. The Committee recommendation is 
consisent with the budget request and more than a 6 percent 
increase above the fiscal year 2006 enacted level.
    U.S.-Mexico Cross Border Trucking.--Section 350 of the 
fiscal year 2002 Transportation Appropriations Act (Public Law 
107-87) mandated that certain safety requirements must be met 
for Mexican motor carriers to enter the United States. Prior to 
the enactment of that legislation, on June 27, 2002, the 
Committee held a joint hearing with the Committee on Commerce, 
Science and Transportation on cross-border truck and bus 
operations at the United States-Mexico border. At that hearing, 
the Department of Transportation's Inspector General pointed 
out that, despite the fact that FMCSA had issued a rule 
requiring States to authorize their enforcement personnel to 
take action when they encounter a vehicle without valid 
operating authority, only two States had taken the necessary 
action by the time of that hearing. Today, more than 3 years 
later, some States have still not provided authorization for 
their enforcement personnel to take trucks without the proper 
operating authority out-of-service despite the fact that the 
FMCSA established a deadline for compliance with this 
requirement of September 30, 2003.
    The Committee is frustrated and dismayed to learn of the 
slow responsiveness by several States in complying with this 
Federal requirement. The Committee has tasked the Federal Motor 
Carrier Safety Administration with carrying out congressional 
intent on all of the safety requirements established in section 
350 of Public Law 107-87 and the implementation of all Federal 
motor carrier safety regulations. This includes the provision 
in section 350 requiring that inspectors of Mexican trucks 
affix a Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance [CVSA] decal showing 
that the vehicle meets all necessary requirements. Given the 
Agency's disappointing results in compelling compliance by the 
States to the above-cited requirements, the Committee directs 
the Administrator to redouble her efforts and take whatever 
steps are necessary to ensure that States come into full 
compliance with all the safety requirements and intent set 
forth in section 350.
    Federally Conducted Compliance Reviews.--The Committee is 
concerned that the number of federally conducted compliance 
reviews and enforcement actions have decreased significantly 
since the new entrant program commenced and directs FMCSA to 
ensure that it reverses this trend consistent with the 
objectives and goals of MCSIA. The Committee also directs FMCSA 
to work closely with the States to promote their continued 
participation in a vigorous compliance review program. In order 
to monitor its progress, FMCSA shall provide a report to the 
House and Senate Committees on Appropriations on the number of 
completed compliance reviews and new extrant safety audits in 
conjunction with the Agency's fiscal year 2008 budget request.

                            PROGRAM EXPENSES

    The Committee recommends $70,893,000 for FMCSA's program 
expenses.
    Research and Technology.--The Committee recommends 
$10,296,000 for research and technology. The recommendation is 
consistent with the requested amount and $313,000 more than the 
fiscal year 2006 enacted level.
    Outreach and Education.--The Committee recommends 
$4,000,000 for the outreach and education program, consistent 
with the budget request and the fiscal year 2006 enacted level. 
The Committee reminds FMCSA that data collection and analysis 
are two of the most important aspects of any program that 
focuses on ways to inform and influence behavior. The Committee 
expects FMCSA to manage the Outreach and Education program with 
the same performance, data, and analysis-driven focus which the 
Agency is implementing for the enforcement programs. The 
Committee directs FMCSA to use funds provided above the budget 
estimate to continue the outreach program with the goal of 
enhancing the coordination and effective enforcement of Federal 
laws and regulations with respect to household goods 
transportation. The Committee directs FMCSA to develop a 
process as part of the household goods outreach program for 
State safety authorities and law enforcement agencies to refer 
investigations to the appropriate Federal authorities.
    Information Management Program.--The Committee recommends 
$43,175,000 for FMCSA's information management program [IMP], 
which is consistent with the budget request and $1,504,000 more 
than the fiscal year 2006 enacted level.

                      MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY GRANTS

                (LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

                      (LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

                          (HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      Liquidation of
                                         contract        Limitation on
                                      authorization       obligations
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2006..............       $279,180,000       $279,180,000
Budget estimate, 2007.............        297,502,000        297,502,000
House allowance...................        294,000,000        294,000,000
Committee recommendation..........        294,000,000        294,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    This account provides the necessary resources for the Motor 
Carrier Safety Assistance Program [MCSAP] State grants. Grants 
will be used to support State compliance reviews; identify and 
apprehend traffic violators; conduct roadside inspections; and 
support safety audits on new entrant carriers. Grants are also 
provided to States for enforcement efforts at both the southern 
and northern borders to ensure that all points of entry into 
the United States are fortified with comprehensive safety 
measures; improvement of State commercial driver's license 
[CDL] oversight activities to prevent unqualified drivers from 
being issued CDL's; and the Performance Registration 
Information Systems and Management [PRISM] program, which links 
State motor vehicle registration systems with carrier safety 
data in order to identify unsafe commercial motor carriers.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

                (LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

    The Committee recommends a liquidation of contract 
authorization of $294,000,000 for the payment of obligations 
incurred in carrying out motor carrier safety grant programs. 
The Committee recommendation is consistent with the budget 
estimate and is consistent with the amount of contract 
authorization for this program under SAFETEA-LU.

                      (LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

    The Committee recommends a limitation on obligations of 
$294,000,000 for motor carrier safety grants. The recommended 
limitation is consistent with the budget estimate and is 
consistent with the amount of contract authorization for this 
program under SAFETEA-LU. The Committee recommendation is 
$14,820,000 more than the fiscal year 2006 enacted level. In 
addition, the Committee recommends the allocation of $3,502,000 
of revenue aligned budget authority [RABA] from the Federal-aid 
highway program to this account as authorized by SAFETEA-LU. 
The Committee recommends a separate limitation for each grant 
program funded under this account with the following funding 
allocations:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Motor carrier safety assistance program [MCSAP].........    $197,000,000
Border enforcement grants...............................      32,000,000
Performance and registration information system                5,000,000
 management [PRISM] grants..............................
MCSAP RABA..............................................       3,502,000
Safety Data Improvement.................................       3,000,000
CDLIS...................................................       7,000,000
Commercial driver's license and driver improvement            25,000,000
 program................................................
Commercial vehicle information systems and networks           25,000,000
 [CVISN] grants.........................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY

                          (HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

                              (RESCISSION)

    The bill rescinds $27,122,669 in unobligated balances from 
amounts made available under this heading in prior 
appropriations acts.

                 NATIONAL MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY PROGRAM

                          (HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

                              (RESCISSION)

    The bill rescinds $3,419,816 in unobligated balances from 
amounts made available under this heading in prior 
appropriations acts.

 ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS--FEDERAL MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY ADMINISTRATION

    Section 130 subjects the funds in this act to section 350 
of Public Law 107-87 in order to ensure the safety of all 
cross-border long haul operations conducted by Mexican-
domiciled commercial carriers.
    Section 131. SAFETEA-LU includes a provision for the repeal 
of the Single State Registration System [SSRS] on January 1, 
2007, and its replacement with a new Unified Carrier 
Registration System [UCR]. The Committee, however, believes 
that a repeal of SSRS is premature given that progress on 
instituting the UCR has been insignificant. The current SSRS 
brings in approximately $100,000,000 in registration fees to 
the States that participate in the program, funds that are 
often used to cover the cost of transportation safety and 
enforcement programs. For this reason, the Committee includes 
language that would delay the repeal of SSRS by 12 months, and 
require the Government Accountability Office to report to the 
Congress on the progress being made in establishing the UCR.
    Section 132. This section makes a correction to Public Law 
109-59 regarding the definition of a commercial motor vehicle 
and regulation of freight forwarders and brokers.

             National Highway Traffic Safety Administration


                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration [NHTSA] 
is responsible for motor vehicle safety, highway safety 
behavioral programs, and the motor vehicle information and 
automobile fuel economy programs. The Federal Government's 
regulatory role in motor vehicle and highway safety began in 
September 1966 with the enactment of the National Traffic and 
Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966 (codified as chapter 301 of 
title 49, United States Code) and the Highway Safety Act of 
1966 (codified as chapter 4 of title 23, United States Code). 
The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966 
instructs the Secretary to reduce traffic crashes and deaths 
and injuries resulting from traffic crashes; establish motor 
vehicle safety standards for motor vehicles and motor vehicle 
equipment in interstate commerce; carry out needed safety 
research and development; and expand the National Driver 
Register. The Highway Safety Act of 1966 instructs the 
Secretary to increase highway safety by providing for a 
coordinated national highway safety program through financial 
assistance to the States.
    In October 1966, these activities, originally under the 
jurisdiction of the Department of Commerce, were transferred to 
the Department of Transportation, to be carried out through the 
National Traffic Safety Bureau. In March 1970, the National 
Highway Traffic Safety Administration [NHTSA] was established 
as a separate organizational entity in the Department. 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.
    NHTSA's mission was expanded in October 1972 with the 
enactment of the Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act 
(now codified as chapters 321, 323, 325, 327, 329, and 331 of 
title 49, United States Code). This act as originally enacted, 
instructs the Secretary to establish low-speed collision bumper 
standards, consumer information activities, and odometer 
regulations. Three major amendments to this act have been 
enacted: (1) a December 1975 amendment directs the Secretary to 
set and administer mandatory automotive fuel economy standards; 
(2) an October 1984 amendment directs the Secretary to require 
certain passenger motor vehicles and their major replacement 
parts to be marked with identifying numbers or symbols; and (3) 
an October 1992 amendment directs the Secretary to set and 
administer automobile content labeling requirements.
    NHTSA's current programs are authorized in five major laws: 
(1) the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (chapter 
301 of title 49, United States Code ); (2) the Highway Safety 
Act (chapter 4 of title 23, U.S.C.); (3) the Motor Vehicle 
Information and Cost Savings Act [MVICSA] (part C of subtitle 
VI of title 49, United States Code); (4) the National Driver 
Register Act of 1982; and (5) the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, 
Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users 
[SAFETEA-LU].
    The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act provides 
for the establishment and enforcement of safety standards for 
vehicles and associated equipment and the conduct of supporting 
research, including the acquisition of required testing 
facilities and the operation of the National Driver Register, 
which was reauthorized by the National Driver Register Act of 
1982.
    The Highway Safety Act provides for coordinated national 
highway safety programs (section 402 of title 23, United States 
Code) to be carried out by the States and for highway safety 
research, development, and demonstration programs (section 403 
of title 23, United States Code). The Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 
1988 (Public Law 100-690) authorized a new drunk driving 
prevention program (section 410 of title 23, United States 
Code) to make grants to States to implement and enforce drunk 
driving prevention programs.
    SAFETEA-LU, which was enacted on August 10, 2005, either 
reauthorized or added new authorizations for the full range of 
NHTSA programs for fiscal years 2005 through 2009.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommendation of $819,250,000 provides 
sufficient funding for the National Highway Traffic Safety 
Administration to maintain current programs and continue the 
mobilization and paid media initiatives that have proven so 
effective in increasing safety belt use and impaired driving 
awareness.
    The following table summarizes the Committee 
recommendations:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                         Fiscal year--
                                                              ----------------------------------    Committee
                           Program                               2006 enacted                     recommendation
                                                                     \1\         2007 estimate
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Operations and research......................................     $230,132,000     $227,250,000     $231,500,000
National Driver Register.....................................        3,960,000        4,000,000        4,000,000
Highway traffic safety grants................................      572,394,000      583,750,000      583,750,000
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Total..................................................      806,486,670      815,000,000      819,250,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        OPERATIONS AND RESEARCH

Appropriations, 2006....................................    $234,092,430
Budget estimate, 2007...................................     227,250,000
House allowance.........................................     236,450,000
Committee recommendation................................     231,500,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    These programs support traffic safety programs and related 
research, demonstrations, technical assistance, and national 
leadership for highway safety programs conducted by State and 
local government, the private sector, universities, research 
units, and various safety associations and organizations. These 
highway safety programs emphasize alcohol and drug 
countermeasures, vehicle occupant protection, traffic law 
enforcement, emergency medical and trauma care systems, traffic 
records and licensing, State and community traffic safety 
evaluations, motorcycle riders, pedestrian and bicycle safety, 
pupil transportation, distracted and drowsy driving, young and 
older driver safety programs, and development of improved 
accident investigation procedures.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends a total of $231,500,000 in new 
budgetary resources, which is $4,250,000 above the budget 
request and $2,592,430 less than the fiscal year 2006 enacted 
level.
    The Committee recommends funds to be distributed to the 
following program activities in the following amounts:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Committee
                        Program                          recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contract programs:
    Safety performance................................      $14,905,000
    Safety assurance..................................       18,277,000
    Highway safety....................................       50,965,000
    Research and analysis.............................       65,711,000
    General administration............................          673,000
Salaries and benefits.................................       75,000,000
Travel................................................        1,364,000
Operating expenses....................................       22,355,000
Grant administration reimbursement....................      (17,750,000)
                                                       -----------------
      Total...........................................      231,500,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                           OPERATING EXPENSES

    Budget Documentation.--The Committee reminds NHTSA that 
budget request materials submitted to the Congress should not 
only include explanatory documentation for any proposed budget 
increases; the budget materials should also describe any 
proposed decreases to programs from the prior year's funding 
levels.
    The Committee recommends $5,403,000 for the working capital 
fund, equal to the budget request.
    Administrative Expenses.--Section 2001(11) of SAFETEA-LU 
provides for administrative and related operating expenses for 
NHTSA carrying out chapter 4 of title 23, United States Code, 
and for the highway safety title of Public Law 109-59. The 
Committee recommends $17,750,000, to NHTSA for administrative 
expenses associated with administering the highway safety grant 
programs and related operating expenses.

                           SAFETY PERFORMANCE

    Vehicle Safety Harmonization.--The Committee recommends 
$206,000 for international harmonization activities, an amount 
equal to the budget request.
    New Car Assessment Program.--The Committee recommends 
$10,500,000 for the New Car Assessment Program [NCAP].
    Tire Pressure Monitoring Systems.--The TREAD Act included a 
requirement that the Secretary of Transportation issue a rule 
mandating new motor vehicles have a warning system to alert 
operators when a tire is significantly under-inflated. In 
compliance with this directive, in April of 2005 NHTSA 
published a final rule that requires Tire Pressure Monitoring 
Systems [TPMS] to be installed in every new vehicle by model 
year 2006. NHTSA notes the potential of TPMS in preventing 
injury, saving lives and improving fuel economy. However, the 
Committee is concerned that these impacts may be undermined if 
consumers do not fully understand the technology. Therefore, 
the Committee provides NHTSA with $750,000 and directs NHTSA to 
carry out a consumer education campaign that would assist 
drivers in understanding new TPMS technologies, their purpose, 
and the valuable safety information that they provide.

                        highway safety programs

    The Committee recommends funds to be distributed to the 
following program activities in the following amount:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Committee
                                                         recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impaired Driving......................................      $11,300,000
Drug Impaired Driving.................................        1,500,000
Pedestrians/Bicycles..................................        1,665,000
Older Drivers.........................................          500,000
Motorcycles...........................................          800,000
National Occupant Protection..........................       11,224,000
Enforcement and Justice Services......................        2,717,000
Law Enforcement Training..............................         (500,000)
Emergency Medical Services............................        4,320,000
Records and Licensing.................................        2,660,000
Highway Safety Research...............................       11,430,000
Emerging Traffic Safety Issues........................          593,000
NOPUS.................................................        1,656,000
Enhance 9-1-1 Act Implementation......................          500,000
International Activities..............................          100,000
                                                       -----------------
      Total...........................................       50,965,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Impaired Driving.--The Committee recommends $11,300,000 to 
support the impaired driving program. This amount is equal to 
the budget request. These additional funds will allow NHTSA to 
continue to: (1) promote high visibility law enforcement; (2) 
educate prosecutors, judges and law enforcement regarding 
impaired driving and promote specialized or enhanced court 
systems; (3) develop effective messages and countermeasures to 
reach high risk groups; and (4) encourage widespread adoption 
of medical screening and brief intervention for individuals 
with alcohol abuse problems.
    Judicial and Prosecutorial Awareness.--The Committee 
recommends $1,100,000 for judicial and prosecutorial awareness 
to expedite the detection, identification and tracking of hard 
core drunk drivers. The Committee is aware that one of the 
major factors in alcohol-related crashes is the number of 
habitual drunk drivers involved in alcohol-related traffic 
crashes.
    The Committee directs NHTSA to work with State and local 
law enforcement officials, judges, prosecutors and parole 
officers to assist them in developing strategies that 
specifically target the removal of habitual drunk drivers from 
the road.
    Motorcycles.--NHTSA's budget documents state that 
motorcycle fatalities have increased for 7 straight years, for 
a total 89 percent increase since 1997. Helmet use continues to 
play a role in 40 percent of motorcycle accidents. The 
Committee recommends $800,000 for motorcycle program 
activities, the same as the fiscal year 2006 level.
    National Occupant Protection Program.--Recent years have 
seen encouraging increases in safety belt use across the 
country, reaching 82 percent for 2005.
    The Committee continues to urge NHTSA to be vigilant and 
resourceful in its efforts to not only increase the seat belt 
rate, but ensure that this vigilance is not overshadowing the 
overall goal of reducing fatalities in this and every aspect of 
highway safety. The Committee recommends $11,224,000 for 
NHTSA's occupant protection efforts, which is the requested 
amount.
    To supplement NHTSA's overall safety belt effort, the 
Committee recommends funding to continue the ``Click It or 
Ticket'' national public service message program.
    Emergency Medical Services.--The Committee continues to 
support the development of a national database to collect EMS 
data similar to those that exist for fire and police services. 
The Committee recommends an increase of $2,000,000 for fiscal 
year 2007, of which $1,000,000 is to continue the 
implementation of the National Emergency Medical Services 
Information System [NEMISIS] data collection initiative at the 
National Center for Statistics and Analysis. The Committee 
views the implementation of NEMISIS, to be extremely important 
in light of NHTSA's role as Federal coordinator of all EMS 
systems.
    International Activities.--The Committee recommends 
$100,000 for NHTSA's international activities initiative.
    The Committee recommends $500,000 for necessary expenses of 
the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to support 
the E-911 Implementation Coordination Office, established 
pursuant to section 104 of Public Law 108-494.

                         RESEARCH AND ANALYSIS

    Biomechanical Research.--The Committee recommends 
$12,500,000 for biomechanics research. The Committee's 
recommendation includes necessary resources for the continued 
research of the Crash Injury Research and Engineering Network 
program.
    Maternal and Fetal Injuries in Vehicle Crashes.--The 
Committee has become aware of possible increases in vehicle 
crashes involving pregnant women. These vehicle crashes put 
both the expectant mother and fetus at risk, yet little is 
known of the incident, risks and characteristics of pregnant 
women in crashes. The Committee directs NHTSA to explore the 
feasibility of adding a gravid anthropomorphic dummy to its 
vehicle testing procedures. A Federal standard on a gravid 
anthropomorphic dummy may help spur the research to improve the 
crashworthiness of vehicles for pregnant women. NHTSA shall 
report to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations 
within 9 months of enactment of this act on the number of 
crashes involving pregnant women and the injuries and 
fatalities associated with those crashes. Also, the report 
shall include an assessment of creating a crash test dummy that 
would measure the injuries to the women and the fetus.
    CIREN Research on Older Drivers.--The Committee is aware of 
the growing population of older Americans, which is expected to 
nearly double by 2030. In recognition of this growth and the 
different health issues facing older Americans, the Committee 
directs NHTSA as part of its CIREN program, to collect data 
that will measure the impact of crashes on older populations 
and that would assist in the possible development of a crash 
test dummy representing older occupants. NHTSA is directed to 
update the Committee on the CIREN program including its efforts 
related to older drivers.
    Plastic and Composite Vehicles.--The Committee recognizes 
the development of plastics and polymer-based composites in the 
automotive industry and the important role these technologies 
play in improving and enabling automobile performance. The 
Committee recommends $500,000 to continue development of 
Lightweight Plastic and Composite Intensive Vehicles [PCIV] 
research to examine possible safety benefits. The program will 
help facilitate a foundation of cooperation between DOT, the 
Department of Energy and industry stakeholders for the 
development of safety-centered approaches for future light-
weight automotive design.
    Crash Avoidance and Human Vehicle Performance.--The 
Committee includes $6,750,000 for the crash avoidance and human 
vehicle performance program as requested in the budget 
estimate. Within the funds provided, the Committee directs that 
no less than $3,000,000 be utilized for the National Advance 
Driving Simulator.
    Fatality Analysis Reporting System.--The Committee 
recommends $7,063,000 for the Fatality Analysis Reporting 
System [FARS], equal to the proposed budget request and the 
fiscal year 2006 enacted base funding.
    FAST FARS.--The Committee recommends $1,000,000 for the 
FAST FARS data collection program. An effective FAST FARS 
system will permit the agency to analyze the effectiveness of 
its programs more quickly, thereby improving decision making to 
better utilize limited safety funding resources.
    Vehicle Crash Causation Study.--The Committee continues to 
support the ongoing vehicle crash causation study and provides 
$7,000,000, the requested level, for this purpose.
    Hydrogen Fuel Cell and Alternative Fuel Vehicle Safety.--
The Committee strongly supports NHTSA's initiative to address 
possible safety concerns as hydrogen fuel cell and other 
alternative fuel cell vehicles are introduced into the Nation's 
fleet. The fiscal year 2007 budget request, $925,000, is 
provided for this purpose.

                        national driver register


                (LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

                      (LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

                          (HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               Liquidation    Limitation
                                               of contract        on
                                              authorization  obligations
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2006........................    $4,000,000    $3,960,000
Budget estimate, 2007.......................     4,000,000     4,000,000
House allowance.............................     4,000,000     4,000,000
Committee recommendation....................     4,000,000     4,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    This account provides funding to implement and operate the 
Problem Driver Pointer System [PDPS] and improve traffic safety 
by assisting State motor vehicle administrators in 
communicating effectively and efficiently with other States to 
identify drivers whose licenses have been suspended or revoked 
for serious traffic offenses such as driving under the 
influence of alcohol or other drugs.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

                (LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

    The Committee recommends a liquidation of contract 
authorization of $4,000,000 for payment on obligations incurred 
in carryout provisions of the National Driver Register Act. The 
recommended liquidating cash appropriation is equal to the 
budget estimate and is equal to the fiscal year 2006 enacted 
level.

                       LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS

    The Committee recommends a limitation on obligations of 
$4,000,000 for the National Driver Register. The recommended 
limitation is the same as the budget request and is $40,000 
more than the fiscal year 2006 enacted level.

                     HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY GRANTS

                (LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

                          (HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                         Limitation of
                                            contract      Limitation on
                                         authorization     obligations
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2006..................     $578,176,000     $572,394,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................      583,750,000      583,750,000
House allowance.......................      587,750,000      587,750,000
Committee recommendation..............      583,750,000      583,750,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    SAFETEA-LU reauthorizes three State grant programs: highway 
safety programs, occupant protection incentive grants, and 
alcohol-impaired driving countermeasures incentive grants; and 
authorizes for the first time an additional five State 
programs: safety belt performance grants, State traffic safety 
information systems improvement grants, high visibility 
enforcement program, child safety and child booster seat safety 
incentive grants, and motorcyclist safety grants.
    The highway safety grant program under section 402 of title 
23, United States Code SAFETEA-LU established a new safety belt 
performance incentive grant program under section 406 of title 
23, United States Code; SAFETEA-LU also established a new 
program of incentive grants under section 408 of title 23, 
United States Code; SAFETEA-LU amended the alcohol-impaired 
driving countermeasures incentive grant program authorized by 
section 410 of title 23, United States Code; SAFETEA-LU 
establishes a new program to administer at least two high-
visibility traffic safety law enforcement campaigns each year 
to achieve one or both of the following objectives: (1) reduce 
alcohol-impaired or drug-impaired operation of motor vehicles; 
and/or (2) increase the use of safety belts by occupants of 
motor vehicles.
    Motorcyclist Safety.--Section 2010 of SAFETEA-LU 
established a new program of incentive grants for motorcycle 
safety training and motorcyclist awareness programs. Section 
2011 of SAFETEA-LU established a new incentive grant program 
these grants may be used only for child safety seat and child 
restraint programs.
    Grant Administrative Expenses.--Section 2001(a)(11) of 
SAFETEA-LU provides funding for salaries and operating expenses 
related to the administration of the grants programs and 
supports the national occupant protection user survey and 
highway safety research programs.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

                (LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

    The Committee recommends an appropriation for liquidation 
of contract authorization of $583,750,000 for payment on 
obligations incurred in carryout provision of the highway 
traffic safety grant programs. The Committee recommendation is 
consistent with the amount of contract authorization for 
highway traffic safety grant programs under SAFETEA-LU. The 
recommended liquidating cash appropriation is equal to the 
budget estimate and $5,574,000 more than fiscal year 2006 
enacted level.

                      (LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

    The Committee recommends a limitation on obligations of 
$583,750,000 for the highway traffic safety grant programs 
funded under this heading. The recommended limitation is equal 
to the budget estimate and $11,356,000 more than fiscal year 
2006 enacted level.
    The Committee continues to recommend prohibiting the use of 
section 402 funds for construction, rehabilitation or 
remodeling costs, or for office furnishings and fixtures for 
State, local, or private buildings or structures.
    The Committee recommends a separate limitation on 
obligations for administrative expenses and for each grant 
program as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Administrative expenses.................................     $17,750,000
Highway safety programs (section 402)...................     220,000,000
Occupant protection programs (section 405)..............      25,000,000
Alcohol impaired driving countermeasures incentive           125,000,000
 grants (section 410)...................................
High visibility enforcement program (section 2009)......      25,000,000
Motorcyle safety (section 2010).........................       6,000,000
State traffic safety information systems improvements         34,500,000
 (section 412)..........................................
Child safety and child booster seat safety incentive           6,000,000
 grants.................................................
Safety belt performance grants (section 406)............     124,500,000
                                                         ---------------
      Total.............................................     445,500,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        OPERATIONS AND RESEARCH

                  (LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORITY)

                      (LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

                          (HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

                              (RESCISSION)

    The bill rescinds $6,772,751 in unobligated balances from 
amounts made available under this heading in prior 
appropriations acts.

                        NATIONAL DRIVER REGISTER

                  (LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORITY)

                      (LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

                          (HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

                              (RESCISSION)

    The bill rescinds $8,553 in unobligated balances from 
amounts made available under this heading in prior 
appropriations acts.

                     HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY GRANTS

                  (LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORITY)

                      (LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

                          (HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

                              (RESCISSION)

    The bill rescinds $5,646,863 in unobligated balances from 
amounts made available under this heading in prior 
appropriations acts.

      ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS--NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY 
                             ADMINISTRATION

    Section 140 includes a provision to allows the Secretary to 
transfer funds in any fiscal year provided for administrative 
expenses for the National Highway Traffic Safety 
Administration's National Driver Register, under section 
2001(a)(7) of Public Law 109-59, and for the agency's 
administrative and related operating expenses, under section 
2001(a)(11) of Public Law 109-59, to the ``Operations and 
Research'' account and the ``Operations and Research, 
Limitations on Obligations, Highway Trust Fund'' account.''
    Section 141 requires the Secretary of Transportation to 
submit a report to Congress describing the feasibility and 
marginal production costs of making all new passenger 
automobiles and light trucks sold in the United States capable 
of using a flexible fuel mixture.

                    Federal Railroad Administration

    The Federal Railroad Administration [FRA] became an 
operating administration within the Department of 
Transportation on April 1, 1967. It incorporated the Bureau of 
Railroad Safety from the Interstate Commerce Commission, the 
Office of High Speed Ground Transportation from the Department 
of Commerce, and the Alaska Railroad from the Department of the 
Interior. The Federal Railroad Administration is responsible 
for planning, developing, and administering programs to achieve 
safe operating and mechanical practices in the railroad 
industry. Grants to the National Railroad Passenger Corporation 
(Amtrak) and other financial assistance programs to 
rehabilitate and improve the railroad industry's physical 
infrastructure are also administered by the Federal Railroad 
Administration.

                         SAFETY AND OPERATIONS

Appropriations, 2006....................................    $144,490,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................     150,578,000
House allowance.........................................     150,153,000
Committee recommendation................................     150,578,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Safety and Operations account provides support for FRA 
rail safety activities and all other administrative and 
operating activities related to staff and programs.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $150,578,000 for Safety and 
Operations for fiscal year 2007, which is consistent with the 
budget request and $6,088,000 more than the fiscal year 2006 
enacted level. Of this amount the bill specifies that, 
$13,870,890 remains available until expended.

                   RAILROAD RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

Appropriations, 2006....................................     $54,524,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................      34,650,000
House allowance.........................................................
Committee recommendation................................      34,650,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    Railroad Research and Development provides for research in 
the development of safety and performance standards for 
railroads and the evaluation of their role in the Nation's 
transportation infrastructure.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $34,650,000 
for railroad research and development, which is the same as the 
budget request and $19,874,000 less than the fiscal year 2006 
enacted level.
    Within the amount provided, the Committee recommends:
    $250,000 for the Constructed Facilities Center at West 
Virginia University to develop manufactured modules using 
innovative manufacturing techniques, advanced blast resistant 
materials and structural systems, and embedded modern sensors;
    $750,000 for Marshall University, in cooperation with the 
University of Nebraska, to develop a new track stability 
technology using the actual rail lines in the states as the 
calibration test beds; and
    $500,000 for the Las Vegas-Los Angeles High Speed Rail 
Study to conduct the conceptual engineering and capacity 
modeling for multi-frequency passenger rail service between Las 
Vegas and Los Angeles.

     GRANTS TO THE NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION (AMTRAK)

Appropriations, 2006....................................  $1,293,633,000
Budget estimate, 2007 \1\...............................     900,000,000
House allowance.........................................     900,000,000
Committee recommendation................................   1,400,000,000

\1\ Funds to be available for transfer to the Surface Transportation 
Board for directed service of commuter rail obligations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) is a 
for-profit corporation that operates intercity passenger rail 
services in 46 States and the District of Columbia, in addition 
to serving as a contractor in various capacities for several 
commuter rail agencies. Congress created Amtrak in the Rail 
Passenger Service Act of 1970 (Public Law 91-518) in response 
to private carriers' inability to profitably operate intercity 
passenger rail service due a steady decline in ridership that 
began in the 1920's. Thereafter, Amtrak assumed the common 
carrier obligations of the private railroads in exchange for 
the right to priority access of their tracks for incremental 
cost.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

     CAPITAL GRANTS FOR THE NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION

    The Committee recommends $750,000,000 for capital grants to 
Amtrak. Of this amount, no more than $295,000,000 is available 
for debt service payments. The Committee is concerned about the 
safety and efficiency of the Nation's passenger rail system and 
has provided the funds needed to ensure Amtrak's major capital 
needs are met. The Committee continues to believe that 
providing funds in the forms of grants for Amtrak's capital 
needs ensures greater oversight and more optimal use of 
taxpayers' resources.
    Because the Committee is concerned about the uncertainty of 
what benchmarks must be reached to achieve a systemwide state-
of-good repair, the Committee has included a new provision 
allowing the Federal Railroad Administration to retain up to 
one-quarter of 1 percent of Amtrak's capital subsidy to provide 
meaningful oversight to Amtrak's major capital investments. 
Amtrak has begun to undertake projects that are significant in 
size and cost, such as the replacement of the bridges across 
the Thames and Niantic Rivers in Connecticut and the 
ventilation towers for the Hudson and East River tunnels in New 
York and New Jersey. Moreover, as the failure of Amtrak's 
electrification system between New York City and Washington, 
DC, on May 25 of this year demonstrated, the lack of action on 
Amtrak's major capital assets has the potential for adversely 
affecting transportation over a wide region.
    While the FRA has assumed the responsibility of providing 
annual capital grants to Amtrak, the FRA has yet to possess the 
resources necessary to provide meaningful oversight of major 
capital investments. As an example, FRA does not have the 
resources to review independently the design and cost estimates 
for the new bridges, to assess whether the bridges have been 
built according to design, or to review and, if necessary, 
recommend corrective measures if the bridge fabrication and 
construction begins to exceed estimates and schedules. Indeed, 
FRA's oversight is limited to reviewing reports on project 
progress from Amtrak's engineering and mechanical departments 
except where FRA's limited staff might have expertise in a 
specific area that coincides with a capital project. The 
Federal Transit Administration performs its oversight of major 
projects through Project Management Oversight consultants. The 
Committee believes that FRA should use a similar approach. 
While the amount provided for this purpose is modest in 
absolute terms, it should be adequate to initiate the oversight 
program and for FRA to review those large projects important 
for maintaining or improving safety and operational reliability 
where there may be significant risk in achieving the expected 
cost, schedule or scope of the project. It is expected that 
with this enhanced ability that FRA will report to the House 
and Senate Committees on Appropriations on a regular basis on 
the state of Amtrak's capital program.
    The Committee remains concerned about the significant costs 
associated with Amtrak's food and beverage and first-class 
services. While Amtrak has shown commendable progress in its 
efforts to reform these services, the Committee believes that 
further oversight and accountability is needed. The Committee 
has included a provision that prohibits the Secretary of 
Transportation from approving any capital grant request that 
proposes spending funds on the retrofitting, refurbishing or 
maintenance of equipment or facilities used for food and 
beverage or sleeper class services unless the proposed plans 
comply with the stated goal of eliminating Federal subsidies 
for these services by 2011. While Amtrak's services meet basic 
mobility needs, the Committee does not believe that Federal 
subsidies should be directed toward the enhancement of services 
and amenities that only add to Amtrak's operational losses.
    As Amtrak itself has noted, Amtrak's equipment and 
infrastructure require significant investment to achieve a 
state-of-good repair. Amtrak has, on repeated occasions, 
diverted funds needed for capital investments to cover 
operational losses. This has had the effect of leaving Amtrak's 
system in a less than optimal state. While the Committee has 
pressed both Amtrak and the Department of Transportation to 
provide a detailed and prioritized list of needs to return 
Amtrak's infrastructure to a state-of-good repair, both 
entities have either been unable or unwilling to do so. The 
administration's capital grant request for Amtrak for fiscal 
year 2007 is $500,000,000, but it remains unclear what this 
number will achieve in restoring Amtrak's system to the 
necessary state-of-good repair. If the Committee were better 
able to discern what projects could be funded with more 
resources, it would be better positioned to justify the 
provision of such resources. The Committee has, therefore, 
included provisions mandating that the administration's budget 
submission for fiscal year 2008 include a detailed capital 
investment plan that prioritizes and provides cost estimates 
for capital projects necessary to achieve safe, efficient, and 
timely intercity passenger rail service. This plan should 
incorporate input from the States and railroads where Amtrak 
provides services or its infrastructure is used detailing what 
investments are necessary to ensure timely and safe 
transportation services. The Committee believes that such a 
plan will better enable Congress, Amtrak, and the 
administration to chart a future path for Amtrak and to more 
strategically provide for Amtrak's many capital needs.

    EFFICIENCY INCENTIVE GRANTS TO THE NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER 
                              CORPORATION

    Despite the lack of action on a comprehensive 
reauthorization of Amtrak, the Committee notes that there are 
signs that Amtrak is making some progress in addressing the 
significant imbalance between its operating expenses and 
revenues. The Committee is pleased with reports of savings and 
other efficiencies achieved through the reforms contained in 
the fiscal year 2006 Transportation appropriations act 
directing savings through operating efficiencies, including, 
but not limited to, modifications to food and beverage service 
and first-class service. Amtrak also has improved its 
accounting and its capital project management and reporting. It 
has renewed focus on improving on-time performance on the 
Northeast Corridor that is resulting in measurable 
improvements. Amtrak is implementing a consistent approach to 
seeking compensation from States for service largely within one 
State modeled after what States on the Pacific Coast have been 
doing for years and Amtrak has initiated a review of the future 
of its long distance service. All of these initiatives are 
positive signs. While most of these reforms can be found in 
directives from this Committee or conditions in Amtrak's grant 
agreement with FRA, the Amtrak Board, and Amtrak's current 
management deserve credit for serving as instruments and 
advocates of needed change.
    Despite the concerns stated previously, the Committee is 
pleased that Amtrak has implemented strategic initiatives in 15 
areas including: a plan for restructurings its food and 
beverage service and dining and lounge car operations over 
several years; adopting a reliability-centered maintenance 
approach to increase fleet maintenance efficiencies; 
consolidating maintenance facilities and reducing maintenance 
overtime; outsourcing and reducing staff at stations; improving 
fuel efficiency; renegotiating labor agreements to eliminate 
outsourcing and work rule restrictions; and reducing outside 
legal fees. While Amtrak is making positive steps toward 
reforms, the Committee remains concerned that other initiatives 
such as restructuring long-distance train services, improving 
financial management systems, and improving service reliability 
on the Northeast Corridor are only in the beginning of the 
planning stage, and that many of the initiatives have not yet 
translated into any meaningful way of improving Amtrak's bottom 
line.
    The Committee remains interested in making sure that Amtrak 
is fully addressing reform opportunities and meeting 
benchmarked goals that are sustainable over the long term on 
food and beverage reforms, sleeper car and long distance 
service in particular. Amtrak continues to require a 
significant claim on the discretionary Federal financial 
resources available for transportation and places significant 
stress on this Committee in finding sufficient resources to 
keep Amtrak running. For this reason, the Committee will 
continue to insist on reform initiatives with timelines and set 
benchmarked goals so that the Committee will know with some 
degree of confidence that the Federal taxpayer's funds, 
regardless of the amount, provides a high quality product in a 
cost-effective manner.
    The most glaring examples of the failure of Amtrak to serve 
as an effective steward of the taxpayer's investments are in 
the areas of food and beverage service and first-class service. 
Both the Amtrak Inspector General and the Department of 
Transportation Inspector General have singled out these 
functions as primary examples of misplaced priorities in the 
use of the financial resources available to the Corporation. In 
fiscal year 2006, Amtrak's losses on food and beverage service 
will equal over 10 percent of Amtrak's total subsidy and over 
20 percent of its operating subsidy. Amtrak loses even more on 
its first-class service.
    While the Committee believes there is a role for Federal 
subsidies on intercity passenger rail service, in particular 
for capital investment, it cannot accept the concept that the 
Federal taxpayers should pay for the cost of dinner and drinks 
on the train or of first-class accommodations. Indeed, 49 
U.S.C. 305(c)(4) authorizes Amtrak to ``provide food and 
beverage service on its trains only if the revenues from the 
services each year at least equal the cost of providing the 
service.'' This statutory requirement seems to have been 
ignored by Amtrak. The Committee recognizes that passengers on 
trains, particularly those trains that operate on extended 
schedules, need food. This does not mean that the food and 
beverage or the first-class accommodations should receive a 
Federal subsidy. The Committee notes that Amtrak has begun 
initiatives for improving the financial performance of food and 
beverage and first-class services--initiatives that the 
Committee wants to nurture. Indeed, the history of Amtrak is 
replete with initiatives that have been forgotten or ignored 
because the attention of management, Amtrak's Board of 
Directors, the Department of Transportation, and the Congress 
have been diverted to other issues. Thus, this year, the 
Committee wishes to build upon Amtrak's early work by requiring 
that Amtrak develop realistic plans with meaningful milestones 
to eliminate the Federal subsidies of these services over the 
next 5 years. Amtrak is directed to reduce the net Federal 
subsidy of food and beverage service and sleeper/first-class 
service in fiscal year 2007 by 20 percent over the level of 
subsidy, including that attributable to the operation and 
maintenance of equipment and facilities solely used for these 
services, in fiscal year 2005. The Committee requests that 
Amtrak's Inspector General provide the Senate and House 
Appropriations Committees with regular reports on Amtrak's 
performance.
    To better understand the cost effectiveness of Amtrak 
today, the Committee directs FRA, in consultation with Amtrak, 
Amtrak's Inspector General, the Government Accountability 
Office, and such other entities that the Administrator deems 
appropriate, to develop a set of metrics for important 
functions performed by Amtrak, be they important from a safety 
or operational perspective or important because these functions 
consume a large amount of Amtrak's financial resources. FRA and 
Amtrak will then identify how Amtrak and corporations and/or 
public agencies with functions similar to Amtrak, performed 
against these metrics in fiscal year 2006 or the most recent 
year in which data are available. Amtrak will include in its 
quarterly reports updates of its performance against these 
metrics.
    Another approach to determining the extent to which the 
quality and cost of providing intercity passenger rail service 
can be improved is to determine whether an entity other than 
Amtrak can provide such services more efficiently and 
effectively. While there has been an ongoing debate over 
whether others could do better than Amtrak, there has yet to be 
an effective test. This issue certainly resonates with the 
States that provide financial support for intercity passenger 
rail service. Amtrak's de facto monopoly limits any incentive 
on Amtrak's part to control costs or enhance the quality of its 
operation, and States must pay whatever Amtrak demands. The 
Committee believes that, in the absence of reauthorization 
legislation, an appropriate interim measure to determine the 
feasibility of a State assuming greater responsibility over 
intercity passenger rail would be a pilot program to determine 
whether a State can reduce its costs and, thus, reduce the 
Federal operating subsidy while maintaining or improving 
service quality. This will be achieved by enabling a State to 
assume responsibility for part or all of the functions that the 
State presently pays Amtrak to do.
    The Secretary of Transportation is directed to require 
Amtrak to conduct a pilot program under which a State would 
assume the financial responsibility for a train, route or 
corridor that the State either presently subsidizes or has 
committed to subsidize. The State would receive 75 percent of 
the current fully allocated operating loss, which effectively 
is the Federal subsidy of the service in the first year and 50 
percent in the second and third years. Thus, this pilot would 
not only yield information on the potential long-term benefits 
of States assuming responsibility for trains they deem 
important, it offers some reduction in the Federal operating 
subsidy needs in the short term. This pilot would be 
implemented as a contract between a State and Amtrak. The State 
would use established State procedures to arrange for another 
entity or entities to provide those functions the State wishes 
to assume. Amtrak would make whatever other services, 
equipment, facilities, including crew where incorporated into a 
State's plan, available to the State at a cost that covers 
Amtrak's expenses. The Secretary would effectively oversee 
Amtrak's implementation of this provision. Amtrak and the State 
should reach an agreement through amicable negotiations. The 
Secretary would also be charged with keeping the process moving 
and, where the State and Amtrak could not reach agreement, 
serve to resolved such issues as the appropriate terms and 
conditions for the use of Amtrak-controlled equipment.
    On-Time Performance of Amtrak Long Distance Trains.---The 
Committee is greatly dismayed with Amtrak's deteriorating on-
time performance outside of the Northeast Corridor. Such 
delays, frequently longer than 3 or 4 hours, undermine Amtrak's 
ability to attract repeat customers. Outside of the Northeast 
corridor, Amtrak trains are dispatched by the freight railroads 
over whose territory they operate. Under section 24308(c) of 
title 49 of the United States Code, Amtrak trains have 
``preference over freight transportation in using a rail line, 
junction, or crossing'' unless the Secretary of Transportation 
provides a specific exemption to this law. For this reason, the 
Committee directs the DOT Inspector General to investigate the 
root causes of Amtrak delays and compliance with the above 
cited subsection of title 49. The report shall investigate all 
pertinent issues regarding practices in dispatching trains and 
delays in maintaining track used by Amtrak.
    The Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing 
[RRIF].--The RRIF program was established by Public Law 109-178 
to provide direct loans and loan guarantees to State and local 
governments, government-sponsored entities, or railroads. 
Credit assistance under the program may be used for 
rehabilitating or developing rail equipment and facilities. 
SAFETEA-LU expanded the authority under the RRIF program; 
currently, the unpaid principal amounts of the obligations may 
not exceed $35,000,000,000 at any one time. Of this total, not 
less than $7,000,000,000 is reserved for projects benefiting 
freight railroads other than class I carriers. No Federal 
appropriation is required to implement the program because a 
non-Federal partner may contribute the subsidy amount required 
by the Credit Reform Act of 1990 in the form of a credit risk 
premium. 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 2007.

                       ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS

    Section 150 allows DOT to purchase promotional items of 
nominal value for use in certain outreach activities.
    Section 151 prohibits funds for the National Railroad 
Passenger Corporation from being available if the Corporation 
contracts for services at or from any location outside of the 
United States which were, as of July 1, 2006, performed by a 
full-time or part-time Amtrak employee within the United 
States.

                     Federal Transit Administration

    The Federal Transit Administration was established as a 
component of the Department of Transportation by Reorganization 
Plan No. 2 of 1968, effective July 1, 1968, which transferred 
most of the functions and programs under the Federal Transit 
Act of 1964, as amended (78 Stat. 302; 49 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.), 
from the Department of Housing and Urban Development. The 
missions of the Federal Transit Administration are: to assist 
in the development of improved mass transportation facilities, 
equipment, techniques, and methods; to encourage the planning 
and establishment of urban and rural transportation services 
needed for economical and desirable development; to provide 
mobility for transit dependents in both metropolitan and rural 
areas; to maximize the productivity and efficiency of 
transportation systems; and to provide assistance to State and 
local governments and their instrumentalities in financing such 
services and systems.
    The programs funded by the FTA are contained in the Safe, 
Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A 
Legacy for Users [SAFETEA-LU], Public Law 109-59. The budget 
request follows a new account structure, established under 
SAFETEA-LU, which consists of four major accounts, three of 
which are general funded--Administrative Expenses, Research, 
and University Research Centers, and Capital Investment Grants. 
The fourth, Formula and Bus Grants, is funded solely from the 
Mass Transit Account of the Highway Trust Fund.
    The following table summarizes the Committee's 
recommendations compared to fiscal year 2006 and the 
administration's request:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                   2007 House       Committee
                   Program                      2006 enacted    2007 estimate      allowance      recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Administrative expenses.....................      $79,200,000      $85,000,000      $85,000,000      $85,000,000
Formula and bus grants......................    6,910,132,000    7,262,775,000    7,262,775,000    7,262,775,000
Research and University Research Centers....       75,200,000       61,000,000       61,000,000       61,000,000
Capital investment grants...................    1,440,681,660    1,466,000,000    1,566,000,000    1,466,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2006....................................     $79,200,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................      85,000,000
House allowance.........................................      85,000,000
Committee recommendation................................      85,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    Administrative expenses funds personnel, contract 
resources, information technology, space management, travel, 
training, and other administrative expenses necessary to carry 
out its mission to promote public transportation systems.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends a total of $85,000,000 for the 
agency's salaries and administrative expenses. The recommended 
level of funding is $5,800,000 more than the fiscal year 2006 
enacted level.
    The specific levels of funding recommended by the Committee 
are as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Committee
                                                          recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office of the Administrator............................       $1,063,353
Office of Administration...............................        7,653,698
Office of Chief Counsel................................        4,272,759
Office of Communications and Congressional Affairs.....        1,394,111
Office of Program Management (including the Office of          8,403,493
 Safety and Security)..................................
Office of Budget and Policy............................        9,258,714
Office of Research, Demonstration, and Innovation......        4,876,078
Office of Civil Rights.................................        3,272,077
Office of Planning.....................................        4,717,764
Regional offices.......................................       22,419,998
Central Account........................................       17,667,955
                                                        ----------------
      Total............................................       85,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Committee recommendation includes language authorizing 
the Administrator to transfer funding between offices. Any 
transfers totaling more than 5 percent of the initial 
appropriation from this account must be approved by the House 
and Senate Committees on Appropriations through the same 
process used for reprogramming funds.
    Budget Justifications.--The FTA is directed to submit its 
fiscal year 2008 congressional justification for administrative 
expenses by office, with material detailing salaries and 
expenses, staffing increases, and programmatic initiatives of 
each office.
    Project Management Oversight Activities.--The Committee 
directs FTA to continue to submit to the House and Senate 
Committees on Appropriations the quarterly FMO and PMO reports 
for each project with a full funding grant agreement.
    To further support oversight activities, the bill continues 
a provision requiring FTA to reimburse the DOT Office of 
Inspector General [OIG] $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 OIG has provided critical oversight 
of a number transit projects and FTA activities, which the 
Committee has found invaluable. The Committee anticipates that 
the Inspector General will continue such activities in fiscal 
year 2007.
    Full Funding Grant Agreements [FFGAs].--TEA21, as amended, 
requires that 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, 60 days before executing a full funding grant 
agreement. In its notification to the House and Senate 
Committees on Appropriations, the Committee directs FTA to 
submit the following information: (1) a copy of the proposed 
full funding grant agreement; (2) the total and annual Federal 
appropriations required for the project; (3) the yearly and 
total Federal appropriations that can be planned or anticipated 
for future FFGAs for each fiscal year through 2008; (4) a 
detailed analysis of annual commitments for current and 
anticipated FFGAs against the program authorization, by 
individual project; (5) an evaluation of whether the 
alternatives analysis made by the applicant fully assessed all 
the 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 
finance plan; (7) the source and security of all public and 
private sector financing; (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 30 days before 
approving schedule, scope, or budget changes to any full 
funding grant agreement. Correspondence relating to all changes 
shall include any budget revisions or program changes that 
materially alter the project as originally stipulated in the 
FFGA, including any proposed change in rail car procurement.
    The Committee directs FTA to continue to provide a monthly 
new start project update to the House and Senate Committees on 
Appropriations, detailing the status of each project. This 
update should include FTA's plans and specific milestone 
schedules for advancing projects, especially those within 2 
years of a proposed full funding grant agreement. In addition, 
FTA should notify the Committees 10 days before any project in 
the new starts process is given approval by FTA to advance to 
preliminary engineering or final design.

                         FORMULA AND BUS GRANTS

                  (LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORITY)

                      (LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

                         (INCLUDING RESCISSION)

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           Trust fund
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2006..................................    $6,910,131,690
Budget estimate, 2007.................................     7,262,775,000
House allowance.......................................     7,262,775,000
Committee recommendation..............................     7,262,775,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    As proposed in the budget, Formula and Bus Grants includes 
the following programs: urbanized area formula grants; clean 
fuels formula grants; formula grants for special needs of 
elderly individuals and individuals with disabilities; formula 
grants for non-urbanized areas; job access and reverse commute 
grants; new freedom grants; growing States and high density 
States grants; bus and bus facility grants; rail modernization 
grants; alternatives analysis; alternative transportation in 
parks and public lands; and the national transit database. In 
addition, set-asides from formula funds are directed to a grant 
program for intercity bus operators to finance Americans with 
Disabilities Act accessibility costs.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $7,262,775,000 for transit formula 
and bus grants from a limitation on obligations from the mass 
transit account of the highway trust fund. The recommendation 
is $352,643,310 more than the fiscal year 2006 enacted level. 
This account includes a rescission of $28,660,920.
    The Committee recommendation maintains the set-aside for 
project oversight in current law instead of providing an 
increase for program management of formula funds, as requested. 
The Committee distributes, the total level of funding among the 
formula categories as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Urbanized Area Formula...............................     $3,947,144,400
Over-the-road Bus Program............................          7,600,000
Elderly & Persons with Disabilities..................        117,000,000
Nonurbanized Area Formula....................        467,030,600
Bus and Bus Facility.................................        900,500,000
Fixed Guideway Modernization.........................      1,448,000,000
Job Access and Reverse Commute.......................        144,000,000
New Freedom..........................................         81,000,000
National Transit Database............................          3,500,000
Planning Programs....................................         99,000,000
Alternatives Analysis................................         25,000,000
Alternative Transportation in Parks and Public Lands.         23,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 3009 of SAFETEA-LU amends U.S.C. 5307, urbanized 
formula grants, by providing for a phase-out of operating 
eligibility for urbanized areas which crossed over 200,000 in 
population for the first time in the 2000 census, but continues 
to allow the Secretary to make operating grants to urbanized 
areas with a population of less than 200,000. Generally, 
urbanized formula grants may be used to fund capital projects 
and to finance the planning and improvement costs of equipment, 
facilities, and associated capital maintenance used in mass 
transportation. All urbanized areas greater than 200,000 in 
population are statutorily required to use 1 percent of their 
annual formula grants on enhancements, which include 
landscaping, public art, bicycle storage, and connections to 
parks.
    Formula and Bus funds can be used for all transit purposes, 
including planning, bus and railcar purchases, facility repair 
and construction, maintenance and, where eligible, operating 
expenses. These funds help transit systems alleviate 
congestion, ensure basic mobility, promote economically vibrant 
communities, and meet the requirements of the Americans with 
Disabilities Act [ADA] and the Clean Air Act [CAA].
    The following table displays the State-by-State 
distribution of the formula program funds within each of the 
program categories:

                     FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION ESTIMATED FISCAL YEAR 2007 APPORTIONMENTS FOR FORMULA GRANTS PROGRAMS (BY STATE)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                 Section 5310
                                         Section 5307 and   Section 5311 and  Special Needs for
                 State                    5340 Urbanized       5340 Non-         Elderly and       Job Access and      New Freedom        State Total
                                               Area          urbanized Area    Individuals with   Reverse Commute
                                                                                 Disabilities
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama...............................        $17,757,310        $11,531,981         $2,031,112         $2,520,454         $1,341,689        $35,182,547
Alaska................................         22,435,680          5,287,400            275,749            218,712            109,127         28,326,668
American Samoa........................  .................            198,128             63,190             86,638             18,116            366,072
Arizona...............................         53,233,301          8,224,361          2,122,529          2,789,071          1,428,548         67,797,810
Arkansas..............................          8,732,695          8,801,078          1,308,042          1,482,182            761,051         21,085,048
California............................        637,409,387         20,178,894         12,367,520         20,630,436         10,147,556        700,733,794
Colorado..............................         53,882,757          7,265,712          1,478,187          1,760,887          1,110,096         65,497,638
Connecticut...........................         65,239,473          2,372,431          1,437,179          1,186,944          1,097,915         71,333,943
Delaware..............................         10,144,567          1,101,096            423,082            278,186            216,349         12,163,280
District of Columbia..................         72,816,544  .................            365,619            399,650            242,935         73,824,748
Florida...............................        188,812,559         11,938,051          7,890,887          8,740,426          5,440,473        222,822,396
Georgia...............................         73,598,292         14,854,892          2,962,922          3,927,582          2,458,689         97,802,378
Guam..................................  .................            535,533            167,134             86,754             53,757            843,178
Hawaii................................         25,300,938          1,718,384            584,095            481,097            303,970         28,388,484
Idaho.................................          6,315,238          5,072,764            557,451            663,139            322,397         12,930,988
Illinois..............................        232,616,115         12,367,244          4,571,851          5,314,858          3,607,918        258,477,986
Indiana...............................         39,176,416         11,845,248          2,408,422          2,428,364          1,634,380         57,492,831
Iowa..................................         14,900,302          8,813,714          1,243,967          1,090,305            693,372         26,741,660
Kansas................................         10,984,546          8,174,258          1,115,566            977,774            601,609         21,853,754
Kentucky..............................         19,618,629         11,172,945          1,872,803          1,943,690            931,398         35,539,465
Louisiana.............................         31,708,912          8,971,607          1,864,585          3,044,744          1,339,953         46,929,801
Maine.................................          3,838,677          4,761,201            658,535            532,282            309,363         10,100,059
Maryland..............................        101,139,169          4,367,070          1,982,154          1,869,988          1,566,055        110,924,436
Massachusetts.........................        166,641,644          3,038,777          2,630,547          2,450,968          1,948,572        176,710,508
Michigan..............................         72,595,701         15,131,932          3,803,866          4,194,169          2,894,852         98,620,521
Minnesota.............................         47,111,756         11,117,462          1,747,510          1,490,649            997,847         62,465,224
Mississippi...........................          5,508,784         10,069,922          1,311,767          1,536,366            715,108         19,141,947
Missouri..............................         40,647,314         12,058,993          2,300,287          2,354,038          1,385,899         58,746,531
Montana...............................          2,820,380          6,552,507            464,254            480,936            225,706         10,543,783
N. Mariana Islands....................            696,764             30,507             64,379            132,766             58,007            982,423
Nebraska..............................          8,946,243          5,713,026            741,458            591,960            327,216         16,319,903
Nevada................................         25,879,336          4,292,814            905,448            903,751            553,501         32,534,850
New Hampshire.........................          5,448,721          3,070,213            560,176            371,486            363,503          9,814,099
New Jersey............................        280,684,486          2,846,191          3,344,865          2,992,052          2,549,253        292,416,847
New Mexico............................          9,685,768          7,138,423            818,200          1,153,820            433,668         19,229,879
New York..............................        625,104,763         15,289,317          7,925,192         10,287,412          5,801,102        664,407,786
North Carolina........................         43,181,676         19,149,339          3,313,420          3,536,873          2,229,626         71,410,933
North Dakota..........................          3,424,958          3,456,075            367,819            307,145            154,087          7,710,084
Ohio..................................         93,965,897         17,413,497          4,447,567          4,664,132          2,867,435        123,358,528
Oklahoma..............................         14,403,558          9,827,707          1,541,451          1,713,818            817,436         28,303,970
Oregon................................         39,829,471          8,509,361          1,429,162          1,547,190            793,434         52,108,619
Pennsylvania..........................        160,661,233         17,629,639          5,249,324          5,294,308          3,543,480        192,377,984
Puerto Rico...........................         52,950,512          1,226,050          1,791,572          6,990,591          1,390,749         64,349,474
Rhode Island..........................         17,922,122            512,123            566,911            492,067            303,302         19,796,525
South Carolina........................         16,117,501          9,625,026          1,770,069          1,973,447          1,130,635         30,616,678
South Dakota..........................          2,688,866          4,277,960            405,186            329,640            173,676          7,875,328
Tennessee.............................         31,607,849         12,278,186          2,465,049          2,814,741          1,547,929         50,713,754
Texas.................................        212,828,027         29,417,889          7,341,337         13,095,027          5,884,975        268,567,254
Utah..................................         31,123,282          4,176,204            735,982            938,490            447,018         37,420,977
Vermont...............................          1,423,405          2,299,609            346,510            196,980            124,633          4,391,137
Virgin Islands........................            842,661            406,863            158,694             87,101             35,854          1,531,173
Virginia..............................         59,491,923         10,839,984          2,599,542          2,691,215          1,871,053         77,493,718
Washington............................        105,979,847          8,318,576          2,211,542          2,613,574          1,638,596        120,762,135
West Virginia.........................          5,701,734          5,870,001            987,018          1,116,308            556,512         14,231,573
Wisconsin.............................         43,010,894         11,741,348          2,019,973          1,989,522          1,393,903         60,155,640
Wyoming...............................          1,509,504          4,051,087            296,342            213,292            104,717          6,174,941
                                       -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal........................      3,920,098,087        446,930,600        116,415,000        144,000,000         81,000,000      4,708,443,687
                                       -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oversight.............................         27,046,313          2,020,000            585,000  .................  .................         29,651,313
                                       -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total...........................      3,947,144,400        448,950,600        117,000,000        144,000,000         81,000,000      4,738,095,000
                                       =================================================================================================================
Tribal Transit Program................  .................         10,000,000  .................  .................  .................         10,000,000
RTAP..................................  .................          8,080,000  .................  .................  .................          8,080,000
                                       -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Grand Total.....................      3,947,144,400        467,030,600        117,000,000        144,000,000         81,000,000      4,756,175,000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Limited Extensions of Discretionary Funds.--There have been 
occasions when the Committee has extended the availability of 
capital investment funds for longer than the original 3-year 
availability. The Committee, however, has extended funding for 
many of these projects for more than 1 fiscal year, in an 
effort to give transit agencies and FTA the opportunity to 
spend these funds. The Committee strongly urges FTA to obligate 
the grants before the commencement of the fiscal year 2007 
calendar, as the Committee will not look favorably upon any 
further requests for an extension of funds past 1 fiscal year. 
Three, even four, fiscal years is more than an adequate amount 
of time for project sponsors to obligate the discretionary 
grants, except in the most unusual of circumstances. Transit 
agencies are urged not to seek discretionary funding when the 
work cannot be completed in a 3-year time frame. In addition, 
by October 30, 2006, FTA should submit a report to the House 
and Senate Committees on Appropriations detailing which of 
these projects have not obligated the funds, including an 
explanation of why this could not be achieved.
    The availability of these particular funds is extended for 
1 additional year, absent further congressional direction. The 
Committee directs the FTA not to reallocate funds provided in 
fiscal year 2004 for the following bus and bus facilities 
projects:
    Alaska--Sawmill Creek Intermodal Facility
    Georgia--Macon Multimodal Station
    Idaho--Transit Coalition for Buses and Bus Facilities
    Iowa--UNI Multimodal Project
    Indiana--Indianapolis Downtown Transit Facility
    Massachusetts--Springfield Union Station Intermodal 
facility redevelopment
    Mississippi--Intermodal Facility, JIA
    New York--Nassau County, Hub Enhancements
    Ohio--Central Ohio Transit Authority Facility
    Pennyslvania-- Pittsburgh Water Taxi and
    South Dakota--Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe Public Buses and 
Bus Facilities
    Washington--Grant Transit Authority, Bus Facility.
    The Committee directs FTA not to reallocate funds provided 
in fiscal year 2003 or previous acts for the following bus and 
bus facilities projects:
    Georgia--Macon Intermodal Center
    Indiana--Indianapolis Downtown Transit facility
    Massachusetts--Springfield Union Station Intermodal 
facility
    Massachusetts--Springfield Union Station Intermodal 
Redevelopment Project; and
    Washington--Aurora Avenue Bus Rapid Transit.
    Bus Rapid Transit Project Las Vegas Boulvard, Nevada.--
Amounts made available in fiscal year 2003 for Bus Rapid 
Transit Project Las Vegas Boulvard., Nevada shall not be 
reallocated by FTA and shall be available to the Regional 
Transportation Commission of Southern Nevada for Buses and Bus 
Facilities, including Bus Rapid Transit projects, and shall 
remain available until expended.
    Orange County Transportation Authority.--Funds made 
available in fiscal year 2002 for Costa Mesa CNG facility shall 
be available to Orange County Transportation Authority.
    Utah Intermodal Transportation Facilities.--Funds made 
available in the fiscal year 2006 for the Westminster College 
Intermodal Transportation Expansion for small buses in Utah 
shall be made available for Utah Intermodal Transportation 
Facilities.
    Pablo Bus Facility.--Funds made available in fiscal year 
2006 for Pablo Bus Facility and Pablo Buses shall be made 
available for Pablo Bus Facility.
    Illinois Statewide Buses.--The Committee provides 
$6,000,000 to the Illinois Department of Transportation [IDOT] 
for section 5309 Bus and Bus Facilities grants. The Committee 
expects IDOT to provide at least $3,000,000 for Downstate 
Illinois replacement buses in Bloomington, Champaign-Urbana, 
Danville, Decatur, Peoria, Pekin, Quincy, River Valley, 
Rockford, Rock Island, Springfield, Madison County, Rides MTD, 
South Central MTD, and Macomb. Further, the Committee expects 
IDOT to provide appropriate funds for bus facilities in 
Bloomington, Galesburg, River Valley Metro in Kankakee, Macomb, 
Peoria, and Rock Island, including $500,000 for the Macomb 
maintenance facility and $500,000 for the Kankakee's River 
Valley Metro operations facility.
    Springfield Union Station Intermodal Facility, 
Massachusetts.--The Committee continues to be supportive of the 
construction of a new, affordable, intermodal facility in the 
city of Springfield, Massachusetts. However, the Committee 
notes that more than $12,700,000 of funds already appropriated 
for this project from as far back as 2002 remain unobligated. 
Still other funds provided for the project in authorization 
acts also remain unobligated. The Committee directs the 
government and transportation leaders in the region to 
immediately focus on the task of developing a feasible project 
plan that limits the Federal contribution for the project to 
the sums already provided so that these appropriated funds can 
be expended promptly. The Committee further directs the 
Administrator to work with the appropriate city and regional 
leadership toward this goal. The Administrator is requested to 
report back to the Committee regarding progress on this project 
not later than July 1, 2007.
    West Virginia Statewide Bus and Bus Facilities.--Consistent 
with the provisions of section 3044 of SAFETEA-LU, the bill 
includes a total of $5,000,000 for bus and bus facilities 
within the State of West Virginia for fiscal year 2007.
    Hybrid Bus Cost Share.--The Committee has not included a 
provision to allow FTA to provide grants for 100 percent of the 
net capital cost of a factory-installed or retrofitted hybrid 
electric system in a bus as proposed in the budget. The 
Committee has stressed the importance of hybrid technology 
buses in the past and remains committed to seeing hybrid 
technology proliferate throughout the Nation's transit systems. 
However, the Committee believes that waiving the required match 
would result in less hybrid buses being purchased by transit 
properties, not more. The Committee strongly believes that 
local share requirements are the best deal for taxpayers when 
it comes to stretching increasingly scarce Federal resources.
    The Committee directs FTA to distribute funds made 
available to carry out the Bus and Bus Facilities program in 
this fiscal year as directed by SAFETEA-LU. Of the remaining 
funds provided for that program in this fiscal year as well as 
the $24,893,251 remaining in fiscal year 2006, the committee 
directs the funds as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Committee
                      Project name                        recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Akron METRO RTA Radio Replacement, OH...................        $750,000
Alabama Senior Transportation Program, AL...............       1,000,000
Altoona Intermodal/Parking Facility Renovation Project,        1,000,000
 Pennsylvania...........................................
AnchorRides Disabled Vehicle Maintenance Project, AK....         100,000
Atlanta--MARTA Bus Acquisition Program, GA..............       1,750,000
Bay Area Transportation Authority Replacement Bus                550,000
 Purchase, Traverse City, MI............................
Ben Franklin Transit, Maintenance and Operations                 750,000
 Facility, WA...........................................
Bi-County Transit Center in Langley Park, Maryland......       1,000,000
Boston College Green Line MBTA, MA......................       1,000,000
Bridgeport Intermodal Transportation Center (CT)........       5,000,000
Brockton Area Transit Authority Bus Replacement, MA.....       1,000,000
Broward County Alternative Fuel Buses, Florida..........       1,000,000
Bucks County Intermodal Facility........................       2,000,000
Bus and Bus Facilities, City of Roswell, New Mexico.....         400,000
Bus and Bus Facilities, Grant County, New Mexico........       1,500,000
Calaveras County--Calaveras Regional Intermodal                  500,000
 Transportation Center, CA..............................
Camden County Intermodal Facility, New Jersey...........       1,000,000
Capital Metro--Bus and Bus Facilities, TX...............       4,800,000
CCTA Buses, Facilities and Equipment [VT]...............       4,000,000
Cedar Avenue Bus Rapid Transit, Phase 1, Dakota County,        3,700,000
 Minnesota..............................................
Central Corridor Transitway, MN.........................       1,350,000
Central Florida Regional Transportation Authority (LYNX)       3,250,000
 Bus Procurement, Florida...............................
Church Street Transportation Center.....................       1,600,000
City of Billings--City of Billings' MET Transit                  500,000
 Authority Improvements.................................
City of Mobile Waterfront Project, AL...................       1,000,000
City of St. Joseph, Missouri, Bus and Bus facilities....          84,000
City Utilities of Springfield Intermodel Transfer              2,000,000
 Facility, MO...........................................
City of San Luis Obisbo--Replacement Buses, CA..........         500,000
City of Lynwood--Lynwood Intermodal Transit Facility, CA         500,000
City of Hercules--Hercules Intermodal Terminal, CA......         500,000
City of Pasadena--Bus Priority System, CA...............         500,000
City of Visalia--Visalia Buses and Bus Facilities, CA...         500,000
City of Oakland--Transit Improvements at BART Stations,          500,000
 CA.....................................................
City of Fresno--FAX Buses, CA...........................         500,000
Clallam Transit Vehicle Replacement, WA.................         500,000
Clallam Transit, International Gateway Project, WA......       1,000,000
Coast Transit Authority, MS.............................       5,000,000
Colorado Transit Coalition--Colorado....................       5,000,000
Columbia County Public Transportation Vehicle                    120,000
 Replacement, WA........................................
Community Transit, Bus Rapid Transit Vehicle                   1,000,000
 Acquisition, WA........................................
Diesel Paratransit Vans, Las Cruces, NM.................         140,000
Downtown Transit Center, Indianapolis, IN...............       1,000,000
Dubuque Downtown Transportation Center Intermodal                100,000
 Transit Facility Study, Iowa...........................
Ed Roberts Campus, CA...................................         500,000
Erie Metropolitan Transit Authority Operations Facility,       1,750,000
 Pennsylvania...........................................
Everett Transit Vehicle Replacement, WA.................         600,000
FAST Traffic Management, Southern Nevada, NV............       1,017,000
Four County Elder Advocates Senior Transportation                150,000
 Initiative, Joplin, Missouri...........................
Garfield County Public Transportation Vehicle                     70,000
 Replacement, WA........................................
Georgia Regional Transportation Authority Express Buses.       2,000,000
Grant Transit Vehicle Replacement, WA...................         480,000
Grays Harbor Transit Vehicle Replacement, WA............       1,000,000
Great Falls Transit District--Bus and Bus Facilities....       3,480,000
Greater Ouachita Port Intermodal Facility, Louisiana....       3,500,000
Greater Richmond Transit Company Bus Facility, Virginia.       1,500,000
Hampton Roads Transit--Southside Bus Facility                  1,500,000
 Replacement, Virginia..................................
Hawaii Rural Bus Program................................       3,000,000
Idaho Transit Coalition Capital Investment..............       3,750,000
Indiana University Campus Bus Service Park and Ride,           1,500,000
 Bloomington, IN........................................
Intermodal Facilities, Utah.............................       2,500,000
Island Transit Vehicle Replacement, WA..................         435,000
JATRAN Fleet Replacement, MS............................       1,000,000
Jefferson State Hoover Intermodal Facility, AL..........       1,250,000
Jefferson Transit Vehicle Replacement, WA...............         480,000
Kansas City Area Transportation Authority Bus                  5,420,000
 Replacement, MO........................................
Kansas Statewide Bus and Bus Facilities, Kansas.........       1,000,000
King County Metro, Bus Radio Replacement Program, WA....         750,000
LACMTA Bus Facility Upgrade, CA.........................       1,000,000
Lakewood Township Multi Modal Facility Phase I, New            1,500,000
 Jersey.................................................
Livermore Amador Valley Transit Authority--Satellite             500,000
 Maintenance and Operations Facility, CA................
Long Beach Transit--Clean Fuel Buses, CA................         500,000
Louisiana Statewide Bus and Bus Facilities..............       3,000,000
Lubbock Citibus Low Floor Buses, Paratransit Vans,             1,800,000
 Facilities, and Equipment..............................
Mason Transit Vehicle Replacement, WA...................         300,000
Memphis Airport Intermodal Facility, Tennessee..........       2,750,000
Mesa, AZ Main Street Bus Rapid Transit..................       2,500,000
Metro Atlanta--MARTA Automated Smart Card Fare                   750,975
 Collection System, GA..................................
MetroLINK Facility, Illinois............................       1,000,000
Michigan's 1st congressional District Bus and Facility         2,000,000
 Capital Needs, MI......................................
Montpelier, VT Transit Facilities [VT]..................       1,000,000
Nevada Statewide Bus and Bus Facilities.................       3,000,000
Newark Penn Station Intermodal Improvements, New Jersey.       2,000,000
North Dakota Statewide Transit, North Dakota............       2,000,000
Norwalk Pulse Point Facility Safety Improvements (CT)...         199,650
Norwich Intermodal Transportation Center, CT............       2,000,000
Operations and Maintenance Facility, Memphis, Tennessee.       3,500,000
Oxford Public Transit, MS...............................         450,000
Pacific Transit Vehicle Replacement, WA.................         210,000
Paducah Area Transit System in Paducah, Kentucky........       2,000,000
Pierce Transit, Peninsula Park and Ride, WA.............       1,000,000
Potomac & Rappahannock Transportation Commission (PRTC)        2,250,000
 Bus and Bus Facilities.................................
Prospect & E. 21st Street intermodal Transportation            2,750,000
 Center, OH.............................................
Pullman Transit Vehicle Replacement, WA.................       1,000,000
Replacement Buses and Bus and Facility Related                 2,000,000
 Equipment--Nebraska....................................
Replacement of buses for the Transit Authority of              1,000,000
 Northern Kentucky......................................
Richmond Highway Public Transportation Initiative,             3,000,000
 Virginia...............................................
Rio Arriba County Vehicles, Shelters, Building and               300,000
 Compound for Fleet, New Mexico.........................
Sacramento Regional Transit District Bus and Bus               1,000,000
 Facility/Sacramento Region Paratransit Vehicles, CA....
San Antonio Bus Facility Improvements and Bus Fleet            2,250,000
 Modernization, TX......................................
San Joaquin County Bus Facility, CA.....................       1,000,000
San Diego Association of Governments--Regional Bus               500,000
 Replacement Vehicles, CA...............................
Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority--Paratransit         500,000
 Vehicles, CA...........................................
Santa Fe Transit Center, Replacement Buses and Park and        1,500,000
 Ride Lots, NM..........................................
Section 5309 fiscal year 2007 Bus Discretionary                6,000,000
 Proposal, OH...........................................
Senior Transportation Connection of Cuyahoga County, OH.         750,000
SEPTA R-5 Intermodal Center, Pennsylvania...............       1,000,000
Shenango Valley Shuttle Service, Pennsylvania...........         600,000
Silver Spring Metrorail Station, South Gate Entrance             500,000
 Opening, Maryland......................................
Skagway Intermodal facility, AK.........................         900,000
SMTS-Bus, Facilities and Capital Maintenance, MO........       1,660,800
Southeastern Connecticut Bus Rapid Transit System (CT)..       1,000,000
Southern University Bus Enhancements....................         250,000
St. Bernard Port Intermodal Facility, Louisiana.........       1,000,000
State of Arkansas--Bus and Bus Facilities for Urban,           4,000,000
 Rural, and Elderly and Disabled Agencies, Arkan-  sas..
Statewide Bus & Bus Facilities Improvements, Utah.......       3,750,000
Statewide bus and bus facilities, Illinois..............       6,000,000
Statewide Bus and Bus Facilities, Missouri..............       2,000,000
Statewide Bus and Bus Facilities, New Mexico............       1,500,000
Statewide Bus and Bus Facilities, Tennessee.............       5,250,000
Statewide Bus and Bus Facilities, WI....................       5,000,000
Statewide Bus Replacement, Iowa.........................       5,000,000
Statewide Electric Hybrid Bus Initiative by the Indiana        4,192,273
 Transit Association, IN................................
Statewide O.A.T.S. bus and bus facilities, MO...........       1,000,000
Telegraph Avenue-International Boulevard-East 14th             2,000,000
 Street Bus Rapid Transit Corridor Improvements, CA.....
Transit Maintenance and Operations Facility, City of Las       1,500,000
 Cruces, NM.............................................
Treasure Valley, Idaho Transit Facilities...............         480,000
Tucson SunTran bus replacement, AZ......................       2,000,000
Twin Transit Vehicle Acquisition, WA....................         175,000
UNI Multimodal Project, Cedar Falls, Iowa...............       2,425,000
University of Delaware's Automotive Based Fuel Cell            1,000,000
 Hybrid Bus Program.....................................
University Place Intermodal Transit Facility, Pierce             750,000
 County, WA.............................................
Uptown Crossings Joint Development Transit Project,            2,000,000
 Cincinnati, OH.........................................
Valley Transit Vehicle Replacment, WA...................         230,000
Wahiawa Transit Center..................................       1,000,000
Wyandotte County Unified Government Transit Bus                1,000,000
 replacement and facilities enhancements, Kansas........
Yolo County--Yolobus facility expansion, CA.............         500,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Committee directs FTA to distribute funds made 
available to carry out the Alternatives Analysis Program in 
this fiscal year as directed by SAFETEA-LU. Of the remaining 
funds provided for that program in this fiscal year as well as 
the $6,100,000 remaining in fiscal year 2006, the Committee 
directs the funds as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Committee
                      Project name                        recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pawtucket/Central Falls Commuter Rail Project, RI.......      $1,220,000
Middletown to Newark Commuter Rail Connection Project,         1,220,000
 DE.....................................................
Commuter Rail, Albuquerque to Santa Fe, New Mexico......       1,000,000
Commuter Rail--Eastern Jackson County, Missouri.........       1,000,000
Jacksonville Transportation Authority, Rapid Transit             530,000
 System Development, Florida............................
Northwest New Jersey--Northeast Pennsylvania Passenger           830,000
 Rail Project...........................................
SR-304/I-269 HOV Bus Rapid Transit, MS..................         300,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                RESEARCH AND UNIVERSITY RESEARCH CENTERS

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            General fund
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2006......................................   $75,200,000
Budget estimate, 2007.....................................    61,000,000
House allowance...........................................    65,000,000
Committee recommendation..................................    61,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    This appropriation provides financial assistance to support 
activities that are designed to develop solutions that improve 
public transportation. As the Federal agency responsible for 
transit, FTA assumes a leadership role in supporting research 
intended to identify different strategies to increase 
ridership, improve personal mobility, minimize automobile fuel 
consumption and air pollution, and enhance the quality of life 
in all communities.
    FTA may make grants, contracts, cooperative agreements, or 
other agreements for research, development, demonstration, and 
deployment projects, and evaluation of technology of national 
significance to public transportation. FTA provides transit 
agencies with research results to help make them better 
equipped to improve public transportation services and to help 
public transportation services meet national transportation 
needs at a minimum cost. FTA assists transit agencies to employ 
new service methods and technologies that improve their 
operations and capital efficiencies or improve transit safety 
and emergency preparedness.
    The purpose of the university transportation centers [UTC] 
program is to foster a national resource and focal point for 
the support and conduct of research and training concerning the 
transportation of passengers and property. Funds provided under 
the FTA's UTC program are transferred to and managed by the 
Research and Innovation Technology Administration and combined 
with a transfer of funds from the Federal Highway 
Administration. The transit university transportation research 
program funds are statutorily available to designated 
universities in SAFETEA-LU.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $61,000,000 to continue the 
university transportation research program. The Committee 
recommendation is $14,200,000 less than the fiscal year 2006 
enacted level.
    The Committee recommends funds for the following:
  --East Tennessee Hydrogen Initiative, Tennessee, $2,400,000;
  --Staten Island North/West Shore Rail Plan Study, New York, 
        $600,000; and
  --WVU Exhaust Emission Testing Initiative, West Virginia, 
        $1,000,000.

                       CAPITAL INVESTMENT GRANTS

Appropriations, 2006....................................  $1,440,682,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................   1,466,000,000
House allowance.........................................   1,566,000,000
Committee recommendation................................   1,466,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    Section 5309 of 49 U.S.C. authorizes discretionary grants 
or loans to States and local public bodies and agencies thereof 
to be used in financing mass transportation investments. 
Investments may include construction of new fixed guideway 
systems and extensions to existing guideway systems; major bus 
fleet expansions and bus facility construction; and fixed 
guideway expenditures for existing systems. Under SAFETEA-LU, 
funding for major bus fleet expansion and bus facility 
construction and fixed guideway expenditures for existing 
systems has been incorporated under Formula and Bus Grants and 
is provided as contract authority supported by funds derived 
from the Mass Transit Account of the Highway Trust Fund.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee action recommends a level of $1,466,000,000. 
The recommended level is $25,318,000 above the fiscal year 2006 
enacted level and the same as the budget request. A total of 
$14,660,000 is set aside for oversight activities.
    The Committee recommends the following allocations of new 
starts funds in fiscal year 2007:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Committee
                      Project name                        recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alaska and Hawaii ferry projects, Alaska................     $15,000,000
Central Link Initial Segment, Washington................      80,000,000
Central LRT Double-Track, Maryland......................         482,822
Central Phoenix/East Valley Light Rail, Arizona.........      90,000,000
Charlotte (NC) Charlotte Rapid Transit Expansion               6,000,000
 Project, North Carolina................................
Charlotte (NC) South Corridor Light Rail Project, North       70,744,065
 Carolina...............................................
Commuter Rail, Salt Lake County to Weber County, Utah...      80,000,000
CORRIDORone Regional Commuter Rail......................       2,500,000
CTA Douglas Blue Line, Chicago, Illinois................       1,573,675
CTA Ravenswood Brown Line, Chicago, Illinois............      40,000,000
Dallas Area Rapid Transit Northwest/Southeast Light Rail      80,000,000
 MOS, Texas.............................................
Denali Commission, Alaska...............................       5,000,000
Dulles Corridor Rail Project, Virginia..................      25,000,000
Euclid Corridor Transportation Project, Ohio............         693,013
Galveston Rail Trolley Extension to Boulevard, Texas....       2,000,000
Honolulu High-Capacity Transit Corridor Project, Hawaii.       4,000,000
Houston METRO--Advanced Transit Program/METRO Solutions       15,000,000
 Phase 2, Texas.........................................
Hudson-Bergen Light Rail MOS2, New Jersey...............     100,000,000
Interstate MAX LRT Extension, Oregon....................         542,940
Long Island Rail Road East Side Access, New York........     300,000,000
Los Angeles Metro Gold Line Eastside Extension,              100,000,000
 California.............................................
MARC Commuter Rail Improvements, Maryland...............       4,000,000
Miami-Dade County Metrorail Orange Line Expansion,             2,000,000
 Florida................................................
Mid-Jordan Light Rail Transit Line, Utah................       4,500,000
Mission Valley East LRT Extension, California...........         806,654
NJ Trans-Hudson Midtown Corridor, New Jersey............       4,400,000
Norfolk Light Rail Project Final Design and                    1,500,000
 Construction, Virginia.................................
North Shore LRT Connector, Pennsylvania.................      55,000,000
Northeast Corridor Commuter Rail Project between               1,000,000
 Wilmington and Newark, Delaware........................
Northstar Corridor Rail Project, Minnesota..............       1,000,000
Oceanside-Escondido Rail Corridor, California...........         684,040
Perris Valley Line Metrolink Extension, California......       3,000,000
Post Road Commuter Rail Facility, Connecticut...........       2,000,000
San Francisco BART Extension to San Francisco                  2,424,694
 International Airport, California......................
Schuylkill Valley MetroRail, Pennsylvania...............       1,000,000
South Corridor I-205/Portland Mall Light Rail, Oregon...      80,000,000
South County Commuter Rail Project--Wickford Junction          7,000,000
 Station, Rhode Island..................................
Southeast Corridor Multi-Modal Project (T-REX) Colorado.      80,000,000
Tren Urbano, Puerto Rico................................       2,670,518
Union-Pacific West Line Extension, Illinois.............       1,255,978
University Link LRT Extension, Seattle, Washington......      15,000,000
West Corridor LRT, Colorado.............................      35,000,000
Wilsonville to Beaverton Commuter Rail Project, Oregon..      27,600,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    New Jersey Trans-Hudson Midtown Corridor Project.--The 
Committee has fully funded the project allocations articulated 
in section 3037 of SAFETEA-LU including the funding authorized 
for the New Jersey Trans-Hudson Midtown Corridor project. Over 
and above these amounts, the Committee has provided 
discretionary funding from the Capital Investment Grants 
program for this project. The combination of these two 
appropriations will yield a total of $8,400,000 for this 
project for fiscal year 2007.
    Seattle Light Rail Initial Segment and Extensions.--
Consistent with the existing full funding grant agreement, the 
bill includes $80,000,000 for the initial segment of the 
Seattle Link light rail system. The bill also includes 
$15,000,000 for the University Link extension that will shortly 
be entering the final design phase. It has always been the goal 
of regional transportation planners and the locally elected 
leadership that the initial segment of this light rail system 
should directly connect Seattle city center with SeaTac 
International Airport. However, due to rapid changes in 
security and infrastructure planning at the airport after the 
September 11 terrorist attacks, the Full Funding Grant 
Agreement [FFGA] for the initial segment could not include a 
direct connection into the airport. In order to rectify this 
situation and help provide for a seamless transit link directly 
to the airport, the bill includes a general provision (section 
145) intended to allow any Federal funds that may not be 
necessary due to budget ``under runs'' in the performance of 
the initial segment project to be used to assist in the 
construction of the airport link. This provision will, in 
effect, allow Sound Transit to benefit from its careful 
management of the initial segment project, allowing the agency 
to capture the Federal portion of any cost savings and use 
those savings to close a critically important gap in transit 
service in the region.
    Limited Extensions of Discretionary Funds.--There have been 
occasions when the Committee has extended the availability of 
capital investment funds. These extensions are granted on a 
case by case basis and, in nearly all instances, are due to 
circumstances that were unforeseen by the project's sponsor. 
The availability of these particular funds is intended for one 
additional year, absent further congressional direction. The 
Committee directs the FTA not to reallocate funds provided in 
fiscal year 2004 for the following new starts projects:
    Connecticut--Stamford, Connecticut, Urban Transitway and 
Intermodal Transportation Center Improvements.
    Delaware--Wilmington, Delaware, Train Station Improvements
    District of Columbia/Virginia--Dulles Corridor Rapid 
Transit Project
    Pennsylvania--Schuylkill Valley Metro; and
    Wisconsin--Kenosha-Racine-Milwaukee Rail Extension Project.
    The Committee directs FTA not to reallocate funds provided 
in fiscal year 2003 or previous acts for the following new 
starts projects:
    Connecticut--Bridgeport Connecticut, Intermodal 
Transportation Center Project
    District of Columbia/Virginia--Dulles Corridor Rapid 
Transit Project
    Delaware--Wilmington, Delaware, Train Station Improvements
    Delaware--Wilmington, Delaware, Downtown Transit Corridor 
Project; and
    Wisconsin--Kenosha-Racine-Milwaukee Rail Extension Project.
    Appropriations for Full Funding Grant Agreements.--The 
Committee reiterates direction initially agreed to in the 
fiscal year 2002 conference report that FTA should not sign any 
FFGAs that have a maximum Federal share of higher than 60 
percent.

       ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS--FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION

    Section 160 exempts limitations previously made available 
on obligations for programs of the FTA under 49 U.S.C. 5338.
    Section 161 allows funds under this act, Federal Transit 
Administration, Capital investment grants not obligated by 
September 30, 2008 to be made available for other projects 
under 40 U.S.C. 5309.
    Section 162 allows funds appropriated before October 1, 
2005, that remain available for expenditure to be transferred.
    Section 163 allows unobligated funds for new projects under 
Federal Transit Authority to be used during this fiscal year to 
satisfy expenses incurred for such projects.
    Section 164 allows funds appropriated in prior years to the 
City of Albuquerque, New Mexico, to be available for bus and 
bus facilities.
    Section 165 amends the Central Link Initial Segment 
Project, as previously stated in the report.
    Section 166 extends the availability of funds provided for 
the Las Vegas Resort Corridor Fixed Guideway Project and makes 
those funds available to the Regional Transportation Commission 
of Southern Nevada for any bus or bus facilities project 
eligible under section 5307 or 5309 of title 49, United States 
Code.
    Section 167 modifies the eligibility of funds provided in 
fiscal year 2006 for the Miami Streetcar project.
    Section 168 allows funds for the Alaska Hawaii Ferry set-
aside grant program to be used for the Hawaii Port 
Infrastructure Expansion Program.
    Section 169 allows funds under Capital Investments Grants 
to be used for activities under 49 U.S.C. 5339.

             Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation


                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation [SLSDC] 
is a wholly owned Government corporation established by the 
Saint Lawrence Seaway Act of May 13, 1954 (33 U.S.C. 981). The 
SLSDC is a vital transportation corridor for the international 
movement of bulk commodities such as steel, iron, grain, and 
coal, serving the North American region that makes up one-
quarter of the United States population and nearly one-half of 
the Canadian population. The SLSDC is responsible for the 
operation, maintenance, and development of the United States 
portion of the Saint Lawrence Seaway between Montreal and Lake 
Erie.

                       OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE

                    (HARBOR MAINTENANCE TRUST FUND)

Appropriations, 2006....................................     $16,121,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................       8,000,000
House allowance.........................................      17,425,000
Committee recommendation................................      17,425,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund [HMTF] was established by 
the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (Public Law 99-
662). Since 1987, the HMTF has supported the operations and 
maintenance of commercial harbor projects maintained by the 
Federal Government. Appropriations from the Harbor Maintenance 
Trust Fund and revenues from non-Federal sources finance the 
operation and maintenance of the Seaway for which the SLSDC is 
responsible.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommendation includes $17,425,000 to fund 
the operations and maintenance of the SLSDC. This amount is 
$9,425,000 above the President's request and is $1,304,000 
above the fiscal year 2006 enacted level. The Committee rejects 
the request to establish commercial tolls. The recommended 
level is sufficient to fund all base requirements, including 
concrete replacement at the two United States Seaway locks.

                        Maritime Administration


                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Maritime Administration [MARAD] is responsible for 
programs authorized by the Merchant Marine Act, 1936, as 
amended (46 App. U.S.C. 1101 et seq.). MARAD is also 
responsible for programs that strengthen the U.S. maritime 
industry in support of the Nation's security and economic 
needs. MARAD prioritizes DOD's use of ports and intermodal 
facilities during DOD mobilizations to guarantee the smooth 
flow of military cargo through commercial ports. MARAD 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 capacity. MARAD also continues to address the 
disposal of obsolete ships in the National Defense Reserve 
Fleet which are deemed a potential environmental risk. Further, 
MARAD administers education and training programs through the 
U.S. Merchant Marine Academy and six State maritime schools 
that assist in providing skilled merchant marine officers who 
are capable of serving defense and commercial transportation 
needs. The Committee continues to fund MARAD in its support of 
the United States as a maritime Nation.

                       MARITIME SECURITY PROGRAM

Appropriations, 2006....................................    $154,440,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................     154,440,000
House allowance.........................................     154,440,000
Committee recommendation................................     154,440,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Maritime Security Program provides resources to 
maintain a U.S. flag merchant fleet crewed by U.S. citizens to 
serve both the commercial and national security needs of the 
United States. The program 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.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $154,440,000 for the Maritime 
Security Program, consistent with the budget request.

                        OPERATIONS AND TRAINING

Appropriations, 2006....................................    $128,527,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................     115,830,000
House allowance.........................................     116,442,000
Committee recommendation................................     115,830,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Operations and Training appropriation primarily funds 
the salaries and expenses for MARAD headquarters and regional 
staff in the administration and direction for all MARAD 
programs. The account includes funding for the U.S. Merchant 
Marine Academy, six State maritime schools, port and intermodal 
development, cargo preference, international trade relations, 
deep-water port licensing, and administrative support costs.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $115,830,000 for Operations and 
Training for fiscal year 2007. The recommendation is consistent 
with the President's budget request and $12,697,000 below the 
fiscal year 2006 enacted level. The Committee has included 
$14,850,000 for the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy to continue 
with the major design and construction projects as identified 
in the 10-year capital improvement plan.
    Funds appropriated for Operations and Training are 
sufficient to maintain the operating costs incurred by 
headquarters and regional staffs in administering and directing 
the Maritime Administration programs. The Committee 
recommendation includes the necessary resources to cover the 
costs of officer training at the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy; 
provide Federal financial support to the six State maritime 
academies; support coordination efforts for U.S. maritime 
industry activities under emergency conditions; and to promote 
port and intermodal development activities.
    Funds provided for this account are to be distributed as 
follows: $61,747,000 for the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy, 
$9,900,000 for the State Maritime schools, and $44,185,000 for 
MARAD operations, for a total of $115,830,000.

                             SHIP DISPOSAL

Appropriations, 2006....................................     $20,790,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................      25,740,000
House allowance.........................................      25,740,000
Committee recommendation................................      25,740,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Ship Disposal account provides resources to dispose of 
obsolete merchant-type vessels of 150,000 gross tons or more in 
the National Defense Reserve Fleet [NDRF] which the Maritime 
Administration is required by law to dispose of by the end of 
2006. Currently there is a backlog of more than 115 ships 
awaiting disposal. Many of these vessels are some 50 years old 
or more and pose a significant environmental threat due to the 
presence of hazardous substances such as asbestos and solid and 
liquid polychlorinated biphenyls [PCBs].

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $25,740,000 
for ship disposal. This amount is the same as the budget 
request and $4,950,000 above the fiscal year 2006 enacted 
level.
    The Committee is pleased that the Maritime Administration 
expects to have completed the removal of all high priority 
ships and many moderate priority ships from its fleet sites by 
the end of fiscal year 2006. The Committee directs the Maritime 
Administration to notify the House and Senate Committee on 
Appropriations of any changes to this projection and the 
reasons for such changes. The Committee is concerned about the 
unexpected rising costs associated with the decommissioning of 
the nuclear ship Savannah and the uncertainty of costs needed 
to fund this project in future years. The Committee expects the 
Maritime Administration to update these cost projections in its 
fiscal year 2008 budget submission.

                    MARITIME GUARANTEED LOAN PROGRAM

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2006....................................      $4,085,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................       3,317,000
House allowance.........................................       3,317,000
Committee recommendation................................       3,317,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Maritime Guaranteed Loan Program, commonly referred to 
as, ``Title XI,'' provides for a Federal Government guarantee 
of private-sector debt for ship construction and shipyard 
modernization. This program fosters and sustains a U.S. 
shipbuilding and repair industry which helps ensure that the 
United States remains a maritime Nation.
    As required by the Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 
(Public Law 101-508), 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 the administrative expenses of this program. 
The subsidy amounts are estimated on a present value basis and 
administrative expenses are estimated on a cash basis.
    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.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,317,000 for 
the Title XI, Maritime Guaranteed Loan Program. This amount is 
consistent with the administration's 2007 budget request.

           NATIONAL DEFENSE TANK VESSEL CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM

                              (RESCISSION)

Appropriations, 2006....................................................
Budget estimate, 2007...................................    -$74,000,000
House allowance.........................................     -74,400,000
Committee recommendation................................     -74,400,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    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.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends rescinding funding for the 
National Defense Tank Vessel Construction Program but does not 
repeal sections 3541-46 of the Maritime Security Act of 2003.

                     ASSISTANCE TO SMALL SHIPYARDS

Appropriations, 2006....................................................
Budget estimate, 2007...................................................
House allowance.........................................................
Committee recommendation................................     $15,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    As authorized by section 3506 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006, the Assistance to Small 
Shipyards program provides assistance in the form of grants, 
loans and loan guarantees to small shipyards for capital 
improvements.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommendation includes $15,000,000 for 
capital and related infrastructure improvements at qualified 
shipyards to enhance U.S. shipyards' ability to jointly compete 
for commercial and international ship construction. The 
Committee believes that this program will improve the overall 
international competitiveness of the domestic shipbuilding 
industry.

              MARITIME GUARANTEED LOAN (TITLE XI) PROGRAM

Appropriations, 2006....................................................
Budget estimate, 2007...................................................
House allowance.........................................................
Committee recommendation................................     $30,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Program, established pursuant to title XI of the 
Merchant Marine Act, 1936, as amended, provides for a full 
faith and credit guarantee by the U.S. Government of debt 
obligations issued by (1) U.S. or foreign shipowners for the 
purpose of financing or refinancing either U.S. flag vessels or 
eligible export vessels constructed, reconstructed or 
reconditioned in U.S. shipyards and (2) U.S. shipyards for the 
purpose of financing advanced shipbuilding technology and 
modern shipbuilding technology (Technology) of a privately 
owned general shipyard facility located in the United States. 
The Program is administered by the Secretary of Transportation 
acting by and through the Maritime Administrator. Under the 
Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990, appropriations to cover the 
estimated costs of a project must be obtained prior to the 
issuance of any approvals for title XI financing.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee has provided $30,000,000 for the Maritime 
Guaranteed Loan Title XI program. Of the amount provided, 
$20,000,000 is available for obligation upon enactment of this 
act. To ensure appropriate oversight and financial controls, 
the Committee has mandated that of the funds provided, 
$10,000,000 cannot be expended until the Department of 
Transportation's Inspector General has certified to the House 
and Senate Committee on Appropriations that the Maritime 
Administration is in compliance with the recommendations 
contained in the Inspector General's audit reports on the title 
XI progam.

           ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS--MARITIME ADMINISTRATION

    Section 170 authorizes 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. Rental payments received pursuant to this 
provision shall be credited to the Treasury as miscellaneous 
receipts.
    Section 171 prohibits obligations incurred during the 
current year from construction funds in excess of the 
appropriations and limitations contained in this act or in any 
prior appropriation act.

         Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

    The Pipeline and Hazardous Material Safety Administration 
[PHMSA] was established in the Department of Transportation on 
November 30, 2004, pursuant to the Norman Y. Mineta Research 
and Special Programs Improvement Act (Public Law 108-246). The 
PHMSA is responsible for the Department's pipeline safety 
program as well as oversight of hazardous materials 
transportation safety operations. The administration also is 
dedicated to safety, including the elimination of 
transportation-related deaths and injuries associated with 
hazardous materials and pipeline transportation, and by 
promoting transportation solutions that enhance communities and 
protect the environment.

                        ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2006....................................     $16,708,230
Budget estimate, 2007...................................      17,721,000
House allowance.........................................      17,721,000
Committee recommendation................................      17,721,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    This account funds program support costs for the PHMSA, 
including policy development, civil rights, management, 
administration and agency-wide expenses.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $17,721,000 for this account, of 
which $639,000 is transferred from the Pipeline Safety Fund. 
This funding is the same as the budget request and $1,012,770 
more than the fiscal year 2006 level. The Committee expects 
PHMSA to use these funds as reflected in its budget 
justification.

                       HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFTEY

Appropriations, 2006....................................     $25,876,620
Budget estimate, 2007...................................      27,225,000
House allowance.........................................      27,225,000
Committee recommendation................................      27,225,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The PHMSA oversees the safety of more than 800,000 daily 
shipments of hazardous materials in the United States. PHMSA 
uses risk management principles and security threat assessments 
to fully assess and reduce the risks inherent in hazardous 
materials transportation.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $27,225,000 for hazardous 
materials safety, of which $2,111,000 shall remain available 
until September 30, 2009. These funds are the same as the 
budget request and $1,348,380 more than the fiscal year 2006 
funding level.

                            PIPELINE SAFETY

                         (PIPELINE SAFETY FUND)

                    (OIL SPILL LIABILITY TRUST FUND)

Appropriations, 2006....................................     $72,279,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................      75,735,000
House allowance.........................................      75,735,000
Committee recommendation................................      75,735,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Office of Pipeline Safety [OPS] is designed to promote 
the safe, reliable, and reliable sound transportation of 
natural gas and hazardous liquids by pipelines.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommendation provides $75,735,000, of which 
$18,810,000 will be derived from the Oil Spill Liability Trust 
Fund and of which $56,925,000 shall be derived from the 
Pipeline Safety Fund.
    The Committee remains concerned with the significant 
increase included in the budget estimate for funds from the 
oilspill liability trust fund. The Oil Pollution Act of 1990 
requires that these trust funds be used exclusively for 
oilspill 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 oilspill 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.

                     EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS GRANTS

                     (EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FUND)

Appropriations, 2006....................................     $14,355,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................      28,526,000
House allowance.........................................      28,526,000
Committee recommendation................................      28,526,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Hazardness Materials Transportation Uniform Safety Act 
of 1990 [HMTUSA] requires 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 $28,526,000 for this activity, of 
which $198,000 shall be for activities related to emergency 
response training curriculum development and updates, as 
authorized by section 117(A)(i)(3)(B) of HMTUSA. The Committee 
includes an obligation limitation of $28,328,000 for the 
emergency preparedness grant program.

           Research and Innovative Technology Administration


                        RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

Appropriations, 2006....................................      $5,716,260
Budget estimate, 2007...................................       8,217,000
House allowance.........................................       6,367,000
Committee recommendation................................       8,217,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Research and Innovative Technology Administration 
[RITA] was established in the Department of Transportation, 
effective November 24, 2004, pursuant to the Norman Y. Mineta 
Research and Special Programs Improvement Act (Public Law 108-
246). The mission of RITA is to focus the Department's multi-
modal and intermodal research efforts, while coordinating the 
multifaceted research agenda of the Department.
    RITA includes the University Transportation Centers, the 
Volpe National Transportation Center and the Bureau of 
Transportation Statistics [BTS], which is funded by an 
allocation from the Federal Highway Administration's Federal-
aid highway account.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $8,217,000 to continue research 
and development activities in fiscal year 2007, of which 
$3,000,000 shall remain available until September 30, 2009. 
This funding level is sufficient to fund 33 full-time 
equivalent [FTE] staff, an increase of 5 FTEs over the fiscal 
year 2006 level.
    Transportation Futures Program.--The Committee recommends 
the budget request of $2,228,000 for the transportation futures 
and applied technology program.
    Research programs.--Within the fiscal year 2007 recommended 
funding level, the Committee provides $1,120,000 for RITA's 
research, development and technology [RD&T] programs as 
follows:

Hazardous materials research and development [R&D]......         $80,000
Hydrogen fuels safety [R&D].............................         500,000
RD&T coordination.......................................         540,000

    The Committee recommends that the $1,120,000 provided for 
these RD&T programs is available until September 30, 2009.
    The bill also includes language that allows funds received 
from States, counties, municipalities, other public 
authorities, and private sources for expenses incurred for 
training to be credited to this appropriation.

                  Bureau of Transportation Statistics


                      (LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

Limitation on obligations, 2006.........................   ($26,730,000)
Budget estimate, 2007...................................    (27,000,000)
House allowance.........................................    (27,000,000)
Committee recommendation................................    (27,000,000)

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Bureau of Transportation Statistics [BTS] is funded by 
an allocation from the limitation on obligations for Federal-
aid highways. The bureau 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.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    Under the appropriation of the Federal Highway 
Administration, the bill provides $27,000,000 for BTS. In 
addition, BTS will receive a portion of the revenue aligned 
budget authority [RABA] increase to the Federal-aid highway 
program in fiscal year 2007.
    The Committee limits BTS staff to 122 FTEs in fiscal year 
2007 in order to curtail the significant growth in staffing 
that occurred previously within this agency.

                      Office of Inspector General


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2006....................................     $61,874,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................      64,143,000
House allowance.........................................      64,143,000
Committee recommendation................................      64,143,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Inspector General Act of 1978 established the Office of 
Inspector General [OIG] as an independent and objective 
organization, with a mission to: (1) conduct and supervise 
audits and investigations relating to the programs and 
operations of the Department; (2) provide leadership and 
recommend policies designed to promote economy, efficiency, and 
effectiveness in the administration of programs and operations; 
(3) prevent and detect fraud, waste, and abuse; and (4) keep 
the Secretary and Congress currently informed regarding 
problems and deficiencies.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommendation provides $64,143,000 for 
activities of the Office of Inspector General, which is 
$2,269,000 more than the fiscal year 2006 enacted level and the 
same as the budget request.
    In addition, the OIG will receive $7,324,000 from other 
agencies in this bill for audit and investigation activities 
within that agency, as noted below:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Highway Administration..........................      $3,524,000
Federal Transit Administration..........................       2,000,000
Federal Aviation Administration.........................       1,050,000
National Transportation Safety Board....................         500,000
Office of the Secretary of Transportation...............         125,000
Research and Innovative Technology Administration.......         125,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Funding is sufficient to finance 420 full-time equivalent 
[FTE] staff in fiscal year 2007, for a decrease of 10 FTEs from 
the fiscal year 2006 level.
    Audit Reports.--The Committee requests the Inspector 
General to continue to forward 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.
    The Committee has included a provision in title VII (sec. 
718) that requires all departments and agencies in this act to 
report quarterly to the House and Senate Committees on 
Appropriations on all sole source contracts, including the 
contractor, the amount of the contract, the purpose of the 
contract and the rationale for a sole-source procurement as 
opposed to a market-based procurement. The departments and 
agencies also are required to publish this information 
quarterly in the Federal Register. The Committee directs the IG 
to assess any conflicts of interest with regard to these 
contracts and DOT.
    Unfair Business Practices.--The bill maintains language 
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.

                      Surface Transportation Board


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Crediting
                                         Appropriation      offsetting
                                                           collections
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2006..................      $26,198,000       $1,250,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................       22,925,000        1,250,000
House allowance.......................       25,618,000        1,250,000
Committee recommendation..............       26,500,000        1,250,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Surface Transportation Board [STB] was created on 
January 1, 1996, by the Interstate Commerce Commission 
Termination Act of 1995 [ICCTA] (Public Law 104-88). The Board 
is a three-member, bipartisan, decisionally independent 
adjudicatory body organizationally housed within DOT and is 
responsible for the regulation of the rail and pipeline 
industries and certain non-licensing regulation of motor 
carriers and water carriers.
    STB's rail oversight activities encompass rate 
reasonableness, car service and interchange, mergers, line 
acquisitions, line constructions, and abandonments. STB's 
jurisdiction also includes certain oversight of the intercity 
bus industry and pipeline carriers, rate regulation involving 
noncontiguous domestic water transportation, household goods 
carriers, and collectively determined motor carrier rates.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends a total appropriation of 
$26,500,000, an increase of $3,575,000 above the budget 
request. Included in the recommendation is $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.
    The Committee's recommendation funds the following 
increases above the fiscal year 2006 enacted level:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annualize fiscal year 2006 pay raise....................       +$113,000
Fiscal year 2007 pay raise..............................        +340,000
GSA rent and security increases.........................      +1,849,000
Inflation...............................................         +51,000
Annualize salary increase for fiscal year 2006 hires and        +882,000
 employee benefits increases............................
Working capital fund and telephone/utilities increases..         +21,000
Fiscal year 2007 relocation expenses (one-time).........        +375,000
Post move costs.........................................        +274,000
Environmental travel increases..........................         +15,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The increases are offset by a reduction of $4,500,000 for 
the one-time relocation expenses funded in fiscal year 2006.
    User Fees.--Current statutory authority, under 31 U.S.C. 
9701, grants theBboard the authority to collect user fees. 
Language is included in the bill allowing fees to be credited 
to the appropriation on a dollar-for-dollar basis as the fees 
are received and credited. The Committee continues this 
language to simplify the tracking of the collections and 
provide the Board with more flexibility in spending its 
appropriated funds.

        Administrative Provisions--Department of Transportation

    Section 180 allows funds for maintenance and operation of 
aircraft; motor vehicles; liability insurance; uniforms; or 
allowances, as authorized by law.
    Section 181 limits appropriations for services authorized 
by 5 U.S.C. 3109 not to exceed the rate for an Executive Level 
IV.
    Section 182 prohibits funds in this act for salaries and 
expenses of more than 113 political and presidential appointees 
in the Department of Transportation.
    Section 183 prohibits funds for the implementation of 
section 404 of title 23, United States Code.
    Section 184 prohibits recipients of funds made available in 
this act to release personal information, including a 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 Secretary of Transportation from 
withholding funds provided in this act for any grantee if a 
State is in noncompliance with this provision.
    Section 185 allows 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 186 authorizes the Secretary of Transportation to 
allow issuers of any preferred stock to redeem or repurchase 
preferred stock sold to the Department of Transportation.
    Section 187 prohibits funds in this act to make a grant 
unless the Secretary of Transportation notifies the House and 
Senate Committees on Appropriation at least 3 full business 
days before any discretionary grant award, letter of intent, or 
full funding grant agreement totaling $2,000,000 or more is 
announced by the Department or its modal administration.
    Section 188 allows rebates, refunds, incentive payments, 
minor fees and other funds received by the Department of 
Transportation from travel management center, charge card 
programs, subleasing of building space and miscellaneous 
sources are to be credit to appropriations of the Department of 
Transportation.
    Section 189 allows that amounts from improper payments to a 
third party contractor that are lawfully recovered by the 
Department of Transportation shall be available to cover 
expenses incurred in recovery of such payments.
    Section 190 authorizes the transfer of unexpended sums from 
``Minority Business Outreach'' to ``Office of the Secretary, 
Salaries and expenses''.
    Section 191 does not allow OST to use any funds made 
available under this act to approve assessments or 
reimbursement agreements for funds appropriated to modal 
administrations in this act, except those already underway 
prior to the date of enactment of this act.
    Section 192 prohibits the use of funds for a new EAS pilot 
program.
    Section 193 establishes certain requirements for civil 
suits against moving companies.
    Section 194 establishes certain requirements for the 
submission of budget justifications to the Congress.
    Section 195 establishes requirements for reprogramming 
actions by the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations.
    Section 196 authorizes and directs the Secretary of 
Transportation, notwithstanding any provision of law, to make 
project grants for the cost of acquisition of land, or 
reimbursement of the cost of land if purchased prior to 
enactment of this provision and prior to a grant agreement, for 
non-exclusive use aeronautical purposes on an airport layout 
plan that has been approved by the Secretary on January 23, 
2004, pursuant to section 49 U.S.C. 47107(a)(16), for any small 
hub airport as defined in 49 U.S.C. 47102, and had scheduled or 
chartered direct international flights totaling at least 200 
millions pounds gross aircraft landed weight for calendar year 
2002.
    Section 197 permits the FAA Administrator to reimburse FAA 
appropriations for amounts made available for 49 U.S.C. 
41742(a)(1) as fees are collected and credited under U.S.C. 
45303.
    Section 198 prohibits assessments to be levied against any 
program, budget activity, subactivity or project funded by this 
act for the Working Capital Fund except under certain 
circumstances.
    Section 199. This section directs the STB to conduct a 
hearing on ``bottle neck'' decisions. This provision further 
directs the STB to issue a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 
regarding small rate cases not later than 90 days after the 
date of enactment of this act.

                                TITLE II

                       DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

                          Departmental Offices

                         salaries and expenses

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2006....................................    $194,626,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................     223,874,000
House allowance.........................................     223,786,000
Committee recommendation................................     223,874,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Departmental Offices consists of the Office of the 
Secretary and Deputy Secretary, the Office of International 
Affairs, the Office of Domestic Finance, the Office of 
Terrorism and Financial Intelligence, the Office of Tax Policy, 
the Office of Economic Policy, the Office of the General 
Counsel, the Office of Legislative Affairs, the Office of 
Public Affairs, Office of the Treasurer, and the Office of 
Management. The Secretary of the Treasury has the 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; executing the Nation's financial sanction policies; 
disrupting and dismantling terrorist financial infrastructure; 
protecting the United States and international financial system 
from terrorist financing, money laundering, and other financial 
crimes; managing the public debt; managing international 
development policy; representing the United States on 
international monetary, trade and investment issues; overseeing 
Department of the Treasury overseas operations; and directing 
the administrative operations of the Department of the 
Treasury. The majority of the Salaries and Expenses 
appropriation provides resources for policy formulation and 
implementation in the areas of domestic and international 
finance, terrorist financing and financial crimes, tax, 
economic, trade, financial operations and general fiscal 
policy. This appropriation also provides resources to support 
to the Secretary and policy components, and coordination of 
departmental administrative policies in financial and personnel 
management, procurement operations, and information systems and 
telecommunications.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $223,874,000 for the Salaries and 
Expenses appropriation of the Departmental Offices account of 
the Department of the Treasury for fiscal year 2007. This 
amount is equal to the budget request and $29,248,000 above the 
fiscal year 2006 enacted level. Within the funds provided under 
this account, the Committee has provided $3,000,000 for 
information technology modernization; $100,000 for official 
reception and representation expenses; $258,000 for unforeseen 
emergencies; and $5,114,000 for the Treasury-wide financial 
statement audits and other Treasury office and bureau audits. 
Bill language also is included establishing a staffing floor of 
139 FTEs and a funding level of $24,263,000 for the Office of 
Foreign Assets Control [OFAC].
    The Committee has established specific salaries and 
expenses spending limitations for each program activity within 
the Departmental Offices account. The Committee has included 
authority for the Department to request funding transfers 
between each of its program activities. The Department is 
required to submit any such transfer requests to the House and 
Senate Committees on Appropriations and receive approval prior 
to the execution of any such transfer.
    The following table compares the fiscal year 2006 enacted 
level to the fiscal year 2007 budget estimate and the 
Committee's recommendation for each office:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    Fiscal year     2007 budget      Committee
                                                                   2006 enacted      estimate     recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Executive direction.............................................      $8,556,000     $17,501,000      $8,760,000
General counsel.................................................       7,773,000  ..............       8,741,000
Economic policies and programs..................................      31,691,000      41,947,000      41,947,000
Financial policies and programs.................................      26,308,000      25,336,000      25,336,000
Terrorism and financial intelligence............................      39,540,000      45,401,000      45,701,000
Treasury-wide management and programs...........................      16,675,000      20,372,000      20,072,000
Administration..................................................      63,094,000      73,317,000      73,317,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Executive Direction.--The Committee has decided not to 
follow the budget request proposal to consolidate funding for 
the Office of General Counsel under the executive direction 
activity.
    The Committee remains concerned with the significant 
management challenges faced by the Department and believes that 
greater emphasis must be placed on effective management 
leadership. The Treasury Inspector General [IG] continues to 
cite concerns with the corporate management structure of the 
Treasury and believes that the lack of effective management 
leadership has contributed to serious deficiencies at some of 
the bureaus. In addition to concerns with corporate management, 
the IG continues to cite the Department's management of capital 
investments as a major management challenge. The IG 
specifically recommends that the Treasury needs to ensure 
consistency, cohesiveness, and economy among all bureaus by 
establishing clear lines of accountability, providing 
enterprise solutions for core business activities, and 
providing effective oversight of information technology 
investments and security. Given these concerns, the Committee 
directs the Department to provide an action plan, as part of 
its operating plan, on how it will address these issues. The 
action plan should specify the management officials who will be 
responsible for carrying out the plan.
    General Counsel.--As requested in the budget, the Committee 
has included an additional $542,000 to support three FTEs to 
support the growing workload of the Office of Terrorism and 
Financial Intelligence [TFI] and an additional $492,000 for 
three FTEs to provide legal support for OFAC.
    Economic Policies and Programs.--The Committee recommends 
an increase of $9,352,000 for the overseas attache program, as 
requested by the administration. The Committee strongly 
supports the expansion of this program.
    Financial Policies and Programs.--The Committee recommends 
$513,000 for the new Office of Dynamic Analysis as proposed by 
the budget request.
    The Committee urges the Department to create an external, 
independent panel of experts to guide the new Office of Dynamic 
Analysis. Members of the panel should be appointed by the 
Secretary and should embody diverse points of view on pertinent 
economic issues.
    Terrorism and Financial Intelligence.--The Committee has 
included an additional $5,861,000 as requested for TFI to 
support the hiring of additional intelligence analysts, 
training, travel, professional development, and additional 
secure workspace. Further, these additional funds will support 
OFAC's efforts in enforcing economic sanctions against 
terrorist networks. The Committee recognizes the diverse and 
broad operational responsibilities of OFAC and accordingly, the 
Committee has included bill language establishing a staffing 
floor of 139 full-time equivalent positions for this office. 
The Committee also strongly urges the Department and 
administration to budget additional resources to ensure OFAC 
has the capacity to carry out its responsibilities.
    Due to the significant dependence on information technology 
to carry out its activities and responsibilities, the Committee 
also has included an additional $300,000 for TFI to create a 
permanent position of Chief Technology and Information Officer 
[CTIO]. This position will be responsible for managing and 
overseeing all TFI information technology programs and needs, 
including projects under OFAC and FinCEN. The Committee directs 
that the CTIO will report directly to the Under Secretary for 
TFI. Until this position is filled, the Treasury's Chief 
Information Officer will continue to meet the IT needs of TFI.
    TFI has become an increasingly important player in the 
intelligence community and as a result, greater demands have 
been placed on the office. To ensure TFI has the necessary 
support to carryout its growing responsibilities and duties, 
the Committee has provided full funding for additional staffing 
resources, information technology systems, and other necessary 
resources. The Committee strongly urges the Department to 
provide the necessary support to TFI so it can meet its 
demands.
    Treasury-wide Management Policies and Programs.--The 
Committee has provided $20,072,000 for this activity, including 
$1,538,000 for performance management training. The Committee 
supports the additional funds to provide training to managers 
at the Department given the management challenges identified by 
the Treasury Inspector General. The budget justifications, 
however, do not provide adequate detail on the requested 
training funds. Accordingly, the Committee directs the 
Department to provide specific details on these training funds 
in the operating plan.
    Congressional Justifications.--The Committee finds the 
Department's congressional justifications to be lacking in some 
basic areas. For example, the justifications do not provide 
adequate explanation of legislative bill language changes and 
fail to identify the specific activity account for which new 
initiatives are proposed. Accordingly, the Committee directs 
that the Department to address these issues in its fiscal year 
2008 justifications.
    Information Security.--The Treasury Office of Inspector 
General [OIG] continues to cite the Department's information 
security as a management and performance challenge. 
Specifically, the Department faces serious challenges in 
bringing its systems into compliance with information 
technology security policies, procedures, standards, and 
guidelines. Moreover, the OIG cites the need to establish and 
maintain a system inventory as a core issue. This issue is 
particularly critical given the Internal Revenue Service's 
[IRS] recent loss of a laptop containing fingerprints of IRS 
employees. The Committee strongly urges the Department to 
address the OIG's findings and directs the Department to 
provide a status report to the Committee by March 1, 2007.

        DEPARTMENT-WIDE SYSTEMS AND CAPITAL INVESTMENTS PROGRAMS

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2006....................................     $24,168,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................      34,032,000
House allowance.........................................      34,032,000
Committee recommendation................................      34,032,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The 1997 Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act 
established this account, which is authorized to be used by or 
on behalf of Treasury bureaus, at the Secretary's discretion, 
to modernize business processes and increase efficiency through 
technology investments, as well as other activities that 
involve more than one Treasury bureau or Treasury's interface 
with other Government agencies.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $34,032,000 
for Department-wide systems and capital investment program 
[DSCIP]. This amount is equal to the budget request and 
$9,864,000 above the fiscal year 2006 enacted level.
    The following table compares the Committee recommendation 
with the budget request and the fiscal year 2006 enacted 
levels.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    Fiscal year     2007 budget      Committee
                             Project                               2006 enacted      estimate     recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treasury Foreign Intelligence Network...........................      $5,940,000     $21,200,000     $21,200,000
OFAC Enterprise Content Management..............................  ..............         627,000         627,000
Treasury Secure Data Network....................................       2,772,000       4,003,000       4,003,000
Critical Infrastructure Protection..............................       5,742,000       2,093,000       2,093,000
Back-up Disaster Recovery Capacity..............................       1,729,000       1,656,000       1,656,000
Cyber Security..................................................       2,281,000       2,244,000       2,244,000
E-Government initiatives........................................       2,734,000       2,209,000       2,209,000
Integrated Wireless Network.....................................       1,485,000  ..............  ..............
Enterprise Architecture.........................................         396,000  ..............  ..............
Defense Messaging System........................................         495,000  ..............  ..............
Documents Management............................................         594,000  ..............  ..............
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      Total DSCIP...............................................      24,168,000      34,032,000      34,032,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    TFIN.--The Committee strongly supports the upgrade to the 
Treasury Foreign Intelligence Network [TFIN] and considers this 
project to be one of the Department's top priorities due to its 
growing role in supporting the intelligence community and 
combating terrorist financing. The Committee recognizes that 
the additional funds provided will complete the redesign, 
modernization, and the installation of full back up and 
recovery capability for TFIN. Given the critical importance of 
this system to TFI and the intelligence community, including 
the Director of National Intelligence [DNI], the Committee 
strongly urges TFI to coordinate closely and seek assistance 
from the DNI's Office of Chief Information Officer and other 
intelligence agencies.
    ECM.--The Committee also strongly supports the OFAC 
Enterprise Content Management [ECM] system. The Committee 
believes that ECM is a high priority for OFAC to improve its 
ability to carry out its operations in managing records and 
responding to its customers. While the Committee appreciates 
the recent attention this project has received from the 
Department and the administration, it believes that more 
resources should be devoted to this project. Unfortunately, it 
appears that this project and other information technology 
projects are being penalized in the administration's budget 
process due to the Department's inability to develop an 
enterprise architecture.
    Working Capital Fund.--The Treasury working capital fund 
[WCF] was established in 1970 to provide centrally common 
administrative services across the Department, achieve 
economies of scale, and eliminate duplication of effort and 
redundancies. However, the Treasury's WCF lacks adequate 
transparency as identified by the Treasury Inspector General. 
The Committee, therefore, directs the Department to include in 
its operating plan and its fiscal year 2008 congressional 
justifications the following information: the estimated budget 
of the WCF in total and by program; the projected WCF budgets 
in total and by program for the next 2 budget years; the 
estimated contributions to the WCF by bureau/office, by program 
and how these contributions are determined; and a description 
and amount of any long-term contracts, leases, or commitments 
(those exceeding 1 year) of the WCF. The Committee also directs 
the Department to include a new ``Working Capital Fund'' 
appropriations account in its fiscal year 2008 budget 
submission. Lastly, the Committee directs the Department to 
notify the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations of any 
new working capital fund program exceeding $5,000,000.

                      OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2006....................................     $16,830,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................      17,352,000
House allowance.........................................      17,352,000
Committee recommendation................................      18,352,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    As a result of the 1988 amendments to the Inspector General 
[IG] Act, the Secretary of the Treasury established the Office 
of Inspector General [OIG] in 1989.
    The OIG conducts and supervises audits, evaluations, and 
investigations designed to: (1) promote economy, efficiency, 
and effectiveness and prevent fraud, waste, and abuse in 
departmental programs and operations; and (2) keep the 
Secretary and Congress fully and currently informed of problems 
and deficiencies in the administration of departmental programs 
and operations. The audit function provides program audit, 
contract audit 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 audit 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. These 
audits contribute significantly to improved financial 
management by helping Treasury managers identify improvements 
needed in their accounting and internal control systems. The 
evaluations function reviews program performance and issues 
critical to the mission of the Department, including assessing 
the Department's implementation of the Government Performance 
and Results Act [GPRA]. 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 $18,352,000 
for salaries and expenses of the Office of Inspector General. 
This amount is $1,000,000 above the budget request and 
$1,522,000 above the fiscal year 2006 enacted level. The 
Committee has provided additional funds above the budget 
request to support additional audit work on the Department's 
working capital fund and other management issues.

           TREASURY INSPECTOR GENERAL FOR TAX ADMINISTRATION

                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2006....................................    $131,953,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................     136,469,000
House allowance.........................................     136,469,000
Committee recommendation................................     136,469,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration 
[TIGTA] was established by the IRS Restructuring and Reform Act 
of 1998 (Public Law 105-206). Funding was first appropriated 
for this account in the fiscal year 2000 Treasury and General 
Government Appropriations Act (Public Law 106-58).
    TIGTA conducts audits, investigations, and evaluations to 
assess the operations and programs of the Internal Revenue 
Service [IRS] and related entities, the IRS Oversight Board and 
the Office of Chief Counsel 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, and keep the Secretary and Congress 
fully and currently informed of these issues and the progress 
made in resolving them. TIGTA reviews existing and proposed 
legislation and regulations relating to the programs and 
operations of the IRS and related entities and makes 
recommendations concerning the impact of such legislation and 
regulations on the economy and efficiency in the administration 
of programs and operations of the IRS and related entities. The 
audit function provides program audit, limited contract audit 
and financial audit services. Program audits review and audit 
all facets of IRS and related entities in an effort to improve 
IRS systems and operations, while ensuring fair and equitable 
treatment of taxpayers. Contract audits focus on invoices/
vouchers submitted to the IRS to determine whether charges are 
valid. The investigative function provides for the detection 
and investigation of improper and illegal activities involving 
IRS programs and operations and protects the IRS and related 
entities against external attempts to corrupt or threaten their 
employees.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $136,469,000 
for the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration. This 
amount is an increase of $4,516,000 above the fiscal year 2006 
enacted level and the same as the budget request.
    The Committee commends TIGTA for the audit work in 
reviewing the IRS's response to Hurricane Katrina in the gulf 
coast area. The Committee also commends TIGTA for reviewing the 
IRS's business systems modernization program and other 
information technology projects.

            AIR TRANSPORTATION STABILIZATION PROGRAM ACCOUNT

Appropriations, 2006....................................      $2,723,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................................
House allowance.........................................................
Committee recommendation................................................

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Air Transportation Safety and System Stabilization Act, 
Public Law 107-42, established the Air Transportation 
Stabilization Board. The Board may issue up to $10,000,000,000 
in loan guarantees.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee does not provide any appropriation funding, 
as requested, for the Air Transportation Stabilization Program 
for fiscal year 2007. Bill language, as requested, is included 
that allows the ATSB to charge fees to a borrower. The Board 
expects to negotiate repayment or remarketing of its remaining 
loans by the end of fiscal year 2006 and will terminate its 
activities in 2007.

                  Financial Crimes Enforcement Network


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2006....................................     $72,894,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................      89,794,000
House allowance.........................................      84,066,000
Committee recommendation................................      77,321,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network [FinCEN], a bureau 
within the Treasury Department's Office of Terrorism and 
Financial Intelligence, is the largest overt collector of 
financial intelligence in the United States. FinCEN's mission 
is to safeguard the financial system from the abuses of 
financial crime, including terrorist financing, money 
laundering and other illicit finance. FinCEN accomplishes its 
mission by administering the Bank Secrecy Act, a collection of 
statutes that form the Nation's anti-money laundering/counter-
terrorist financing regulatory regime. As the delegated 
administrator of the Bank Secrecy Act, FinCEN is responsible 
for the development and implementation of regulations, rules 
and guidance issued under the Bank Secrecy Act. FinCEN also 
oversees the work of eight Federal agencies that have been 
delegated responsibility to examine various sectors of the 
financial industry for compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act's 
requirements. FinCEN is responsible for collecting, 
maintaining, and disseminating the information reported by 
financial institutions under the Bank Secrecy Act through a 
Government-wide access service. In coordination with Treasury's 
Office of Intelligence and Analysis, FinCEN analyzes this 
financial information and other information and intelligence to 
develop both strategic and tactical analytical products that 
support law enforcement, intelligence and regulatory agencies. 
FinCEN is the United States' Financial Intelligence Unit [FIU] 
and a founding member of the Egmont Group of Financial 
Intelligence Units. As the United States FIU, FinCEN routinely 
shares information and cooperates with other FIUs around the 
world to address the global problems of terrorist financing, 
money laundering, and other illicit finance.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $77,321,000 for the Financial 
Crimes Enforcement Network [FinCEN]. This amount is $4,427,000 
above the fiscal year 2006 enacted level and $12,473,000 below 
the budget request.
    The Committee does not recommend $12,473,000 in additional 
funds for the ``BSA Direct'' system due to the major failures 
of the system as identified by the Government Accountability 
Office [GAO] and the FinCEN Director. The Committee strongly 
believes that based on the GAO's assessment, FinCEN will not be 
in position in fiscal year 2007 to ensure it can spend 
effectively and efficiently the additional funds requested for 
BSA Direct. Further, the Committee understands that the IRS has 
developed a new system that meets the needs of FinCEN and its 
BSA users.
    In the GAO's July 14, 2006 report on FinCEN's management of 
BSA Direct (GAO-06-947R), the GAO found that FinCEN did not 
always apply effective investment management processes to 
oversee the BSA Direct Retrieval and Sharing project. As a 
result, the GAO recommended that the Director of FinCEN direct 
the Chief Information Officer [CIO] to develop a plan with 
specific actions for improving the agency's capabilities for 
overseeing the BSA Direct project. Further, the GAO noted that 
the problems with BSA Direct indicate systemic problems with 
FinCEN's management and oversight of IT projects. Accordingly, 
the Committee directs FinCEN to develop a plan that addresses 
the GAO's concerns in its July 14, 2006 report and to ensure 
FinCEN has an executive level review process for IT projects. 
The Committee directs the Director of FinCEN to submit a report 
to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations on these 
matters by no later than 90 days after the date of enactment of 
this act.
    The Committee understands that FinCEN will require funds to 
terminate the existing contract for BSA Direct, including costs 
for the audit agency that will negotiate the termination costs. 
Further, the Director of FinCEN will determine additional 
financial requirements to achieve the BSA Direct Retrieval and 
Sharing Component's long-term vision. The Committee supports 
these efforts and looks forward in working with the Director in 
meeting FinCEN's future needs.

                      Financial Management Service


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2006....................................    $233,881,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................     233,654,000
House allowance.........................................     233,654,000
Committee recommendation................................     233,654,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    In 1940, the United States Department of the Treasury 
established the Fiscal Service, which consisted of the Bureau 
of Accounts, the Bureau of the Public Debt, and the Office of 
the Treasurer. A 1974 reorganization of the Fiscal Service 
created the Bureau of Government Financial Operations, which 
was formed from a merger of the Bureau of Accounts and most 
functions of the Office of the Treasurer. In 1984, the Bureau 
of Government Financial Operations was renamed the Financial 
Management Service [FMS].
    FMS implements payment policy and procedures for the 
Federal program agencies, issues and distributes payments, 
promotes the use of electronics in the payment process, and 
assists agencies in converting payments from paper checks to 
electronic funds transfer [EFT]. FMS also provides debt 
collection operational services to client agencies and 
implements collections policy, regulations, standards and 
procedures for the Federal Government and assists agencies in 
converting collections from paper to electronic media.
    FMS also provides financial accounting, reporting, and 
financing services to the Federal Government and the 
Government's agents who participate in the payments and 
collections process by generating a series of daily, monthly, 
quarterly and annual Government-wide reports. FMS also works 
directly with agencies to help reconcile reporting differences.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $233,654,000 for salaries and 
expenses for FMS. This amount is the same as the budget request 
and $227,000 below the fiscal year 2006 enacted level.

                Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2006....................................     $90,215,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................      63,964,000
House allowance.........................................      92,604,000
Committee recommendation................................      92,604,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Homeland Security Act created the Alcohol and Tobacco 
Tax and Trade Bureau [TTB] within the Department of the 
Treasury and charged TTB with collecting revenue and protecting 
the public.
    TTB enforces the Federal laws and regulations relating to 
alcohol and tobacco. Its responsibilities include maintaining a 
sound revenue management and regulatory system that continues 
to reduce the taxpayer burden, improve service, collect the 
revenue due, prevent tax evasion and other criminal conduct, 
and protecting the public and preventing consumer deception in 
regulated commodities.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $92,604,000 for TTB for fiscal 
year 2007. This amount is an increase of $28,640,000 over the 
budget request and an increase of $2,389,000 over the fiscal 
year 2006 enacted level. The increase over the budget request 
is due to the assumption of $28,640,000 in revenues from new 
user fees. The new user fee legislative proposal, however, has 
not been authorized and is not supported by the Committee.

                    Bureau of Engraving and Printing


                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Bureau of Engraving and Printing [BEP] has been the 
sole manufacturer of U.S. paper currency for almost 150 years. 
The origin of the BEP is traced to an Act of Congress passed on 
February 25, 1862, 12 Stat. 345, authorizing the Secretary of 
the Treasury to issue a new currency--United States notes. 
While this law was the cornerstone authority for the operations 
of the engraving and printing division of the Treasury for many 
years, it was not until an Act of June 20, 1874, 18 Stat. 100, 
that the Congress first referred to this division as the 
``Bureau of Engraving and Printing.'' The Bureau's status as a 
distinct bureau within the Department of the Treasury was 
solidified by section 1 of the Act of June 4, 1897, 30 Stat. 
18, which placed all of the business of the BEP under the 
immediate control of a director, subject to the direction of 
the Secretary of the Treasury. The 1897 law is now codified in 
31 U.S.C. 303.
    The BEP designs, manufactures, and supplies Federal Reserve 
notes, and other security documents issued by the Federal 
Government. The BEP executes certain printings for various 
territories administered by the United States, particularly 
postage and revenue stamps.
    The operations of the BEP are currently financed by means 
of a revolving fund established in accordance with the 
provisions of Public Law 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.
    No direct appropriation is required to cover the activities 
of the BEP.

                       Bureau of the Public Debt


                     ADMINISTERING THE PUBLIC DEBT

Appropriations, 2006....................................    $175,154,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................     177,789,000
House allowance.........................................     177,789,000
Committee recommendation................................     177,789,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Public Debt Service was formed in 1919 with the 
appointment of the first Commissioner of the Public Debt. The 
Public Debt Service took general charge debt operations 
including debt accounting and securities issue and retirement, 
which had been conducted by several independent divisions 
within the Treasury. Acting under the authorization of the 
Reorganization Act of 1939, the President created the Bureau of 
the Public Debt, which was established as part of the Fiscal 
Service in the Department of the Treasury effective June 30, 
1940, (31 U.S.C. 306). In 1993, the Savings Bonds Division, a 
separate organization, was made part of the Bureau.
    This appropriation provides funds for the conduct of all 
public debt operations and the promotion of the sale of U.S. 
savings-type securities.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends the budget request level of 
$177,789,000 for the Bureau of the Public Debt for fiscal year 
2007. This amount is an increase of $2,635,000 above the fiscal 
year 2006 enacted level.

           Community Development Financial Institutions Fund


   COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS FUND PROGRAM ACCOUNT

Appropriations, 2006....................................     $54,450,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................       7,821,000
House allowance.........................................      40,000,000
Committee recommendation................................      55,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Community Development Financial Institutions Fund makes 
investments in the form of grants, loans, equity investments, 
deposits, and technical assistance grants to new and existing 
community development financial institutions [CDFIs], through 
the CDFI program. CDFIs include community development banks, 
credit unions, venture capital funds, revolving loan funds, and 
microloan funds, among others. Recipient institutions engage in 
lending and investment for affordable housing, small business 
and community development within underserved communities. The 
CDFI Fund administers the Bank Enterprise Award [BEA] Program, 
which provides a financial incentive to insured depository 
institutions to undertake community development finance 
activities. The CDFI Fund also administers the New Markets Tax 
Credit Program, a program that provides an incentive to 
investors in the form of a tax credit, which is expected to 
stimulate private community and economic development 
activities.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $55,000,000 for the CDFI Fund, 
which is $550,000 above the fiscal year 2006 enacted level and 
$47,179,000 above the budget request. The Committee recommends 
that the entire program, not just the New Markets Tax Credit 
program, remain at the Department of the Treasury as opposed to 
the administration's proposal of moving the program to the 
Department of Commerce under the Strengthening America's 
Communities Initiative.
    The Committee is again concerned about the proposed 
reductions to CDFI and the respective programs within CDFI, 
such as the Bank Enterprise Award [BEA]. These programs play an 
important role in providing financial services to underserved 
communities in both urban and rural communities across the 
country. The Committee expects the BEA program to be funded at 
no less than $10,000,000 for fiscal year 2007.
    The Committee also recommends a set-aside of $3,000,000 for 
grants, loans, and technical assistance and training programs 
to benefit Native America, Alaskan Natives, and Native Hawaiian 
communities in the coordination of development strategies, 
increased access to equity investments, and loans for 
development activities.

                           United States Mint


               UNITED STATES MINT PUBLIC ENTERPRISE FUND

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The United States Mint manufactures coins, sells numismatic 
and investment products, and provides for security and asset 
protection. Public Law 104-52 established the U.S. Mint Public 
Enterprise Fund (the Fund). The Fund encompasses the previous 
Salaries and Expenses, Coinage Profit Fund, Coinage Metal Fund, 
and the Numismatic Public Enterprise Fund. The Mint submits 
annual audited business-type financial statements to the 
Secretary of the Treasury and to Congress in support of the 
operations of the revolving fund.
    The operations of the Mint are divided into two major 
activities: Manufacturing and Sales (including circulating 
coinage and numismatic and investment products); and 
Protection. The Mint is credited with receipts from its 
circulating coinage operations, equal to the full cost of 
producing and distributing coins that are put into circulation, 
including depreciation of the Mint's plant and equipment on the 
basis of current replacement value. Those receipts pay for the 
costs of the Mint's operations, which include the costs of 
production and distribution. The difference between the face 
value of the coins and these costs are profits, which is 
deposited as seigniorage to the general fund. In fiscal year 
2005, the Mint transferred $775,000,000 to the general fund. 
Any seigniorage used to finance the Mint's capital acquisitions 
is recorded as budget authority in the year that funds are 
obligated for this purpose and as receipts over the life of the 
asset.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends a spending level of $30,200,000 
for circulating coinage and protective service capital 
investments for the Mint. This amount is an increase of 
$3,432,000 above the fiscal year 2006 enacted level and is 
equal to the budget request.

                        Internal Revenue Service


                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Internal Revenue Service [IRS] history dates back to 
1862. In 1953, following a reorganization of its function, its 
name became the Internal Revenue Service. The IRS administers 
the Nation's tax laws and collects the revenue that funds most 
of the Federal Government's operations and public services. The 
IRS's mission is to provide taxpayers with quality service by 
helping them understand and meet their tax responsibilities and 
by applying the tax law with integrity and fairness to all. The 
IRS focuses its enforcement programs toward increasing 
voluntary tax compliance by deterring taxpayers inclined to 
evade their tax obligations while vigorously pursuing those who 
violate the law. It deals directly with more Americans than any 
other institution, public or private. In 2005, the IRS 
collected over $2,000,000,000,000 in revenue and processed more 
than 208 million tax returns. During the 2005 filing season, 
more than half of all individual taxpayers (nearly 68 million) 
filed electronically. Also, in 2005, the IRS provided 
assistance more than 95 million times through toll-free 
telephone lines, correspondence or visits to its more than 400 
offices nationwide. An important focus for the IRS in recent 
years has been to undertake a major modernization of its 
systems, including expanding its Internet services, and 
business operations to serve better taxpayers and enforce the 
law.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $10,655,972,000 for the Internal 
Revenue Service for fiscal year 2007. This is an increase of 
$82,266,000 above the fiscal year 2006 enacted level and 
$64,135,000 above the budget request.
    New Appropriations Account Structure.--The Committee has 
created a new appropriations account structure for fiscal year 
2007. Under this structure, the IRS's activities are more 
properly aligned to budget activities by creating new 
``Taxpayer Services'', ``Enforcement'', and ``Operations 
Support'' accounts in place of the old ``Processing, 
Assistance, and Management'', ``Tax Law Enforcement'', and 
``Information Systems'' accounts. The ``Business Systems 
Modernization'' and ``Health Insurance Tax Credit 
Administration'' accounts are maintained. Further, the 
Committee has broken out the ``IRS Oversight Board'' as a new 
separate account.
    The Committee developed the new account structure in 
consultation with the Department of the Treasury, the IRS, and 
the House Committee on Appropriations. The Committee has 
provided the IRS with some administrative flexibility in 
transitioning to the new account structure by allowing the IRS 
to transfer funds among the taxpayer services, enforcement, and 
operations support accounts. This new administrative 
flexibility provided as an administrative provision.
    Tax Gap.--The IRS updated its results of a 3-year study on 
the difference between what taxpayers are supposed to pay and 
what they actually do pay, the so-called ``tax gap.'' The IRS 
found that for tax year 2001, about 84 percent of owed taxes 
were paid voluntarily and timely. However, a significant number 
of taxpayers do not comply with the Tax Code resulting in an 
estimated gross tax gap of $345,000,000,000. The IRS estimates 
that after enforcement and other late payments are factored 
into the gross tax gap, the net tax gap is about 
$290,000,000,000. The most current estimate of the tax gap 
remains largely unchanged from the IRS's initial update 
conducted last year and has remained relatively stable for the 
past three decades based on previous IRS studies. The accuracy 
of the tax gap, however, is uncertain given the use of outdated 
information and questionable methodology. Some experts, 
including the GAO and TIGTA, believe that the tax gap may 
actually be higher than estimated by the IRS. The Committee 
strongly believes that the IRS must and can reduce the tax gap 
if the IRS is given additional resources and is able to improve 
its operational capabilities (most notably through the Business 
Systems Modernization program).
    To reduce the tax gap, the IRS's budget request has set a 
goal of increasing the voluntary compliance rate from a current 
estimate of about 83.7 percent to 85 percent by 2009. However, 
the budget request does not include a strategic plan to achieve 
this goal. To reduce the tax gap, experts recommend a number of 
approaches, such as: improving information reporting, improving 
taxpayer services, increasing research on noncompliance, 
improving the partnership between the IRS and the tax 
administration community, and leveraging technology to improve 
IRS's systems. The Committee supports all of these approaches 
and believes that the administration must develop a detailed 
business plan on how it will reduce the tax gap. Accordingly, 
the Committee has included an administrative provision that 
requires the IRS to develop a detailed, strategic plan that 
demonstrates how it will achieve and how it will measure the 
voluntary compliance goal of 85 percent by 2009.
    Operating Plan and Notification.--In addition to the normal 
operating plan requirements detailed in the introduction in 
this report, the Committee directs the IRS to include details 
on any planned reorganization, job reductions or increases to 
offices or activities within the agency, and modifications to 
any service or enforcement activity. Some past examples that 
would qualify under this directive include: the Modernization 
and Information Technology Systems [MITS] reorganization and 
the proposed closure of taxpayer assistance centers. The 
Committee also directs the IRS to obtain the approval of the 
IRS Oversight Board prior to submitting its operating plan to 
the Committee. Further, the IRS should promptly notify the 
Committee and the IRS Oversight Board if there are any 
substantial changes of these plans.
    The Committee continues to remain concerned about any 
efforts to reduce significantly taxpayer services. Therefore, 
the Committee directs that should the IRS propose further 
reductions in taxpayer service, such reductions must be 
consistent with the budget justification, operating plan, and 
Taxpayer Assistance Blueprint.
    Privacy Regulations.--The Committee notes that the 
authorizing committee has approved legislation (S. 832) that 
addresses the troubling aspects of the use and disclosure of 
taxpayer information by return preparers for non-tax purposes 
and offshore disclosures. The Committee directs the IRS to be 
strictly attentive to this legislation in promulgating the 
final regulation relating to section 7216 of the Internal 
Revenue Code.
    IRS Staffing Plans.--The Committee continues to support 
adequate staffing levels for effective tax administration and 
supports the staffing plans for the Internal Revenue Service 
facilities in the communities of Martinsburg and Beckley, West 
Virginia. Therefore, the Committee urges the IRS, within the 
constraints of the fiscal year 2007 funding levels, to make no 
staffing reductions at the Martinsburg National Computing 
Center and the programmed level at the Finance Center in 
Beckley, West Virginia. Further, the Committee directs the IRS 
to provide an annual report to the Committee on its efforts to 
protect and increase staffing levels at the Martinsburg and 
Beckley IRS facilities.
    Taxpayer Services in Alaska and Hawaii.--Given the remote 
distance of Alaska and Hawaii from the U.S. mainland and the 
difficulty experienced by Alaska and Hawaii taxpayers in 
receiving needed tax assistance by the national toll-free line, 
it is imperative that the Taxpayer Advocate Service Center in 
each of these States is fully staffed and capable of resolving 
taxpayer problems of the most complex nature. The Committee 
directs the Internal Revenue Service to continue to staff each 
Taxpayer Advocate Service Center in each of these States with a 
Collection Technical Advisor and an Examination Technical 
Advisor in addition to the current complement of office staff.

                           TAXPAYER SERVICES

Appropriations, 2006....................................  $2,142,275,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................   2,079,151,000
House allowance.........................................   2,059,151,000
Committee recommendation................................   2,110,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Taxpayer Services appropriation provides for taxpayer 
services, including forms and publications; processing tax 
returns and related documents; filing and account services; 
taxpayer advocacy services; and assisting taxpayers to 
understand their tax obligations, correctly file their returns, 
and pay taxes due in a timely manner.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $2,110,000,000 for Taxpayer 
Services, which is $32,275,000 below the fiscal year 2006 
enacted level and $30,849,000 above the budget request. Bill 
language is included providing not less than $4,500,000 for the 
tax counseling for the elderly program and not less than 
$9,000,000 for low-income taxpayer clinic grants.
    Taxpayer Assistance Blueprint.--In response to the 
Committee's directive in the fiscal year 2006 Treasury 
Appropriations Act, the IRS, in consultation with the IRS 
Oversight Board and the National Taxpayer Advocate, began 
developing a ``Taxpayer Assistance Blueprint'' to develop a 5-
year strategic plan on taxpayer services. As directed by the 
Committee, the IRS is reviewing its current portfolio of 
taxpayer services and exploring other types of services to meet 
the needs of taxpayers. Further, this plan will detail how it 
plans to meet the service needs on a geographic basis (by State 
and major metropolitan area), including any proposals to 
realign existing resources to improve taxpayer access to 
services, and address how the plan will improve taxpayer 
service based on reliable data on taxpayer service needs. The 
plan will also address efforts to expand efforts to partner 
with State and local governments and private entities to 
improve taxpayer services. The Committee commends the IRS, the 
IRS Oversight Board, and the National Taxpayer Advocate for 
their time and efforts on the Blueprint. Further, the Committee 
appreciates the efforts to conduct research on taxpayer needs 
and taxpayer service performance.
    The Committee understands that the Blueprint may not be 
completed in time to be used as part of the development of the 
fiscal year 2008 budget request. However, the Committee 
strongly believes that the Blueprint should be incorporated in 
subsequent budget requests.
    E-Filing.--The Committee is disappointed with the IRS's 
performance in increasing the number of tax filers who submit 
their returns electronically and without additional cost. Most 
experts, including the IRS Oversight Board, believe that the 
IRS will not meet its congressionally mandated goal of having 
80 percent of tax returns filed electronically by 2007. 
Accordingly, the Committee directs the IRS, in consultation 
with stakeholders, such as the National Taxpayer Advocate, to 
develop a detailed strategic plan to meet the 80 percent e-File 
goal. This plan should be submitted to the House and Senate 
Committees on Appropriations by no later than June 4, 2007.
    Research.--The Committee believes that the IRS will provide 
better taxpayer service, resulting in improved compliance, if 
taxpayer behavior is better understood and applied research is 
integrated into the development of taxpayer service and 
enforcement initiatives. Toward that end, the Committee directs 
the National Taxpayer Advocate, in consultation with IRS Office 
of Research, to report to the Appropriations Committees of the 
House and Senate by September 30, 2007, on activities that tax 
administrators in other nations undertake to understand 
taxpayer behavior. The report shall also make recommendations 
for the establishment of a cognitive learning and applied 
research laboratory. In addition, the report should identify 
innovative methods of understanding taxpayer behavior, 
including the use of agent-based computer simulations, and 
recommend whether the establishment of a cognitive learning 
laboratory would improve tax administration.

                              ENFORCEMENT

Appropriations, 2006....................................  $4,701,970,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................   4,797,126,000
House allowance.........................................   4,757,126,000
Committee recommendation................................   4,797,126,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Enforcement 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; identifying under reporting of tax obligations; securing 
unfiled tax returns; and collecting unpaid accounts.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends the budget request level of 
$4,797,126,000 for enforcement activities for fiscal year 2007. 
This amount is $95,156,000 above the fiscal year 2006 enacted 
level. Bill language is included to transfer not less than 
$55,584,000 to the Interagency Crime and Drug Enforcement 
[ICDE] program and to transfer up to $10,000,000 from 
enforcement to the Operations Support account to support the 
ICDE program.
    National Research Program.--The Committee strongly supports 
the work of the National Research Program [NRP] to increase 
understanding on the tax gap. While the IRS's NRP has done a 
commendable job in updating the tax gap estimates, there remain 
significant gaps in the gap. The IRS and others have expressed 
concerns with the certainty of the overall tax gap estimate in 
part because some areas of the estimate rely on old data (from 
the 1970s and 1980s) and it has no estimates for other areas of 
the tax gap. GAO, TIGTA, the National Taxpayer Advocate, and 
the IRS Oversight Board also have all recommended greater and 
more frequent data collection and studies of the tax gap. The 
Committee agrees with this recommendation. Accordingly, the 
Committee directs the IRS to submit a detailed research plan 
that will address the shortfalls in the NRP. The plan should 
include the use of a rolling sample, which was recommended by 
the IRS Oversight Board and GAO that covers all types of tax 
returns. Under this approach, one-fifth of the sample could be 
collected every year. The plan should include cost estimates of 
implementing the plan. The plan should be developed in 
consultation with the National Taxpayer Advocate and approved 
by the IRS Oversight Board prior to its submission to the House 
and Senate Committees on Appropriations by no later than March 
12, 2007. Finally, to cover the costs of implementing the plan, 
the Committee encourages the IRS to request the use of 
unobligated funds as part of the reprogramming authority 
provided under this act.
    The Committee believes that an understanding of the causes 
of inadvertent noncompliance and the role of preparers in 
facilitating both inadvertent and intentional noncompliance 
will improve tax administration and should inform IRS's 
allocation of resources. Thus, in administering its NRP for 
fiscal year 2007, the Committee directs the IRS to collect 
information on the causes of inadvertent noncompliance, the 
type of return preparation method (self, volunteer, or paid 
preparer), and whether the taxpayer was represented during the 
examination. The Committee directs the National Taxpayer 
Advocate to assist with this effort.
    Misclassification of Contractors.--The Committee is 
concerned with the misclassification of workers as independent 
contractors, who are filed under IRS form 1099. Many of these 
workers should be correctly classified as employees and filed 
under W-2 forms. This misclassification leads to the 
underreporting of self-employment taxes, which the IRS 
estimates accounts for $148,000,000,000 per year and 43 percent 
of the gross tax gap. Therefore, the Committee strongly urges 
the IRS to provide increased tax enforcement in industries 
where misclassification of employees is widespread.

                           OPERATIONS SUPPORT

Appropriations, 2006....................................  $3,467,443,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................   3,488,404,000
House allowance.........................................   3,459,152,000
Committee recommendation................................   3,487,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Operations Support appropriation provides for overall 
planning and direction of the IRS including shared service 
support related to facilities services, rent payments, 
printing, postage, and security; other support functions that 
are considered overhead but essential to the successful 
operation of IRS programs including resources for headquarters 
management activities, including IRS-wide support for strategic 
planning, communications and liaison, finance, human resources, 
EEO and diversity; research and statistics of income; and 
necessary expenses for information systems and 
telecommunication support, including developmental information 
systems and operational information systems.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $3,487,000,000 for Operations 
Support for fiscal year 2007. This amount is $19,557,000 above 
the fiscal year 2006 enacted level and $1,404,000 below the 
budget request. Bill language is included allowing $75,000,000 
of these funds to remain available until September 30, 2009; up 
to $1,000,000 for research activities; and $50,000 for official 
reception and representation. The Committee has provided 
additional reception and representation funds due to the IRS's 
growing role in international tax administration. These funds 
will be used to host meetings with international tax 
organizations such as the Joint International Tax Shelter 
Information Centre, Inter-American Center for Tax 
Administrators, and others.
    IT Management and Oversight.--The IRS has made significant 
strides in improving the management and oversight of its 
business systems modernization [BSM] program. Unfortunately, 
the IRS has not adequately addressed major systemic problems 
with its non-BSM portfolio of information technology projects 
as demonstrated by recent failures during the past filing 
season. TIGTA has identified problems in several areas of IT 
management and oversight including, but not limited to, such 
areas as: classification of investment projects, oversight and 
governance structure, risk management, contingency planning, 
and contractor performance and accountability. Further, it 
appears that the Department of the Treasury and the Office of 
Management and Budget have not exercised proper oversight for 
the business cases (OMB Circular A-11 Exhibit 300) used to 
justify the funding of the IRS's IT projects.
    To the IRS's credit, it has begun addressing some of its IT 
problems through a reorganization of the Modernization and 
Information Technology Services [MITS] organization that began 
earlier this year. Nevertheless, the Committee remains troubled 
by the IT management and oversight problems at the IRS, as 
demonstrated by the failures with the Electronic Fraud 
Detection System, and it expects better performance to ensure 
it can support its tax administration activities. Accordingly, 
the Committee directs the IRS to review its entire non-BSM IT 
portfolio (regardless of tier classification) and make any 
changes as necessary to ensure that each project has (1) been 
properly classified for investment decision and management 
purposes, (2) the appropriate governance structure in place 
(such as an executive steering committee), (3) a risk 
management plan, (4) a contingency plan in case of breakdowns 
or failures in scheduled deliverables, (5) adequate provisions 
in the contracts to ensure penalties and repayment to the 
agency if performance is not met, (6) adequate contractor 
staffing and management in place to fulfill the contract terms 
and deliverables, and (7) been certified by the head of the 
relevant IRS business unit that the project is deemed necessary 
for its operations and meets its requirements. The Committee 
also directs the Chief Information Officer to certify that this 
review has been completed and submits such certification to the 
IRS Oversight Board, the Department of the Treasury, the Office 
of Management and Budget, the House and Senate Committees on 
Appropriations, the House Ways and Means Committee, and the 
Senate Finance Committee by no later than 90 days after the 
date of enactment of this act. This certification should be 
accompanied by a report on every individual IT project 
reviewed, a list of projects considered to be high risk, and 
any actions being taken to address problems identified by this 
review. Last, the Committee directs the IRS to provide monthly 
briefings to the IRS Oversight Board and TIGTA on the status of 
its IT portfolio and to report immediately on any project that 
has experienced significant cost variances or milestone 
delivery date slippages.
    Modernization Vision and Strategy.--The Committee highly 
commends the IRS for developing a new vision and strategy plan 
for IT modernization. This plan was a joint effort between the 
MITS organization and the IRS business units to develop a 
comprehensive business strategy for the IRS's IT needs. The 
Committee recommends that the plan be further refined to 
include a finer level of detail, and specifically, to include 
milestones and out-year cost estimates.
    BSA Direct.--The Committee appreciates the IRS's assistance 
provided to FinCEN in preventing any disruption in information 
technology service in administering BSA filing data activities 
by allowing FinCEN to use the IRS's WebCBRS system. The 
Committee directs the IRS to continue providing such assistance 
and to coordinate with FinCEN on future BSA filing data needs.

                     BUSINESS SYSTEMS MODERNIZATION

Appropriations, 2006....................................    $242,010,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................     212,310,000
House allowance.........................................     197,060,000
Committee recommendation................................     245,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    This account provides for revamping business practices and 
acquiring new technology. The agency is using a formal 
methodology to prioritize, approve, fund, and evaluate its 
portfolio of business systems modernization investments. This 
methodology is designed to enforce a documented, repeatable, 
and measurable process for managing investments throughout 
their life cycle. The process is reviewed by the Government 
Accountability Office on a regular basis as part of the 
submission requirements for expenditure plans to the House and 
Senate Committees on Appropriations. The expenditure plan 
approval process prior to the use of appropriated funds 
continues for fiscal year 2007.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $245,000,000 for Business Systems 
Modernization [BSM] for fiscal year 2007. This amount is 
$32,690,000 above the budget request and $2,990,000 above the 
fiscal year 2006 enacted level. Bill language is included 
requiring an expenditure plan for these funds. Under the new 
appropriations account structure, the BSM account has been 
modified to include funding for IRS staffing associated with 
direct management of the BSM program.
    The Committee continues to believe that BSM is the IRS's 
highest management and administrative priority that will 
require management's focus and attention for several years. To 
the IRS's credit, the program has made steady progress over the 
past 2 years. Unfortunately, the budget request cuts BSM by 
$29,700,000 or 15.2 percent from the fiscal year 2006 enacted 
level. The Committee is troubled by the proposed cut since it 
will slow the momentum of the BSM's progress in modernizing 
IRS's antiquated tax administration and financial systems. GAO 
noted that the proposed funding level would likely affect the 
IRS's ability to deliver the functionality planned for the 
fiscal year and could result in project delays and/or scope 
reductions. Further, this could in turn impact the long-term 
pace and cost of modernizing IRS tax systems and of ultimately 
improving taxpayer service and strengthening enforcement.
    Based on the views of the GAO and the IRS Oversight Board, 
the Committee has included an additional $32,690,000 for the 
BSM program. The Committee directs that these additional funds 
be used for the modernized e-File program based on the 
recommendation of the IRS Oversight Board.

               HEALTH INSURANCE TAX CREDIT ADMINISTRATION

Appropriations, 2006....................................     $20,008,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................      14,846,000
House allowance.........................................      14,846,000
Committee recommendation................................      14,846,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    This appropriation provides operating funds to administer 
the advance payment feature of a new Trade Adjustment 
Assistance health insurance tax credit program to assist 
dislocated workers with their health insurance premiums. The 
tax credit program was enacted by the Trade Act of 2002 (Public 
Law 107-210) and became effective in August 2003.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommendation provides the budget request 
level of $14,846,000 for the Health Insurance Tax Credit 
Administration in fiscal year 2007. This amount is $5,162,000 
below the fiscal year 2006 enacted level.

                          IRS OVERSIGHT BOARD

Appropriations, 2006....................................      $1,500,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................       1,500,000
House allowance.........................................       1,500,000
Committee recommendation................................       2,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The IRS Oversight Board was established by the Congress 
under the IRS Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998 [RRA]. Its 
legislatively-mandated mission is to oversee the IRS in its 
administration, management, conduct, direction, and supervision 
of the execution and application of the internal revenue laws. 
The Board is composed of nine members, appointed by the 
President and confirmed by the Senate. RRA provided the Board 
with specific responsibilities to review and approve strategic 
and performance plans; review operational functions; review the 
selection, evaluation, and compensation of senior executives; 
and review and approve the budget request of the IRS.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $2,000,000 for the IRS Oversight 
Board for fiscal year 2007. This amount is $500,000 above the 
budget request and the fiscal year 2006 enacted levels. These 
additional funds are provided to increase the Board's oversight 
of IRS operations, primarily in the area of information 
technology.

          ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS--INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

    The Committee has included five administrative provisions 
carried in prior appropriations acts and six new administrative 
provisions. The administrative provisions are as follows:
    Section 201 continues a provision allowing the IRS to 
transfer up to 5 percent of any appropriation made available to 
the Agency in fiscal year 2007 to any other IRS account, with 
the exception of the Enforcement account, which is limited to 3 
percent. The IRS is directed to follow the Committee's 
reprogramming procedures outlined earlier in this report.
    Section 202 continues a provision maintaining a training 
program in taxpayers' rights and cross-cultural relations.
    Section 203 continues a provision requiring the IRS to 
institute and enforce policies and procedures, which will 
safeguard the confidentiality of taxpayer information.
    Section 204 continues a provision directing that funds 
shall be available for improved facilities and increased 
manpower to support a 1-800 help line service for taxpayers.
    Section 205 continues a provision designating not less than 
$170,000,000 for the Taxpayer Advocate Service [TAS]. Further, 
this amount does not include the normal overhead expenses that 
IRS provides outside of the TAS account. Accordingly, the 
Committee directs the IRS to continue providing overhead 
support from accounts outside of TAS.
    Section 206 includes a new provision requiring the IRS to 
submit its fiscal year 2008 budget justification in the same 
format provided under this act.
    Section 207 is a new provision that allows the IRS to 
transfer up to $10,000,000 from IRS appropriations accounts to 
manage the Earned Income Tax Credit program.
    Section 208 is a new provision that allows the IRS to 
transfer up to $35,000,000 from the Taxpayer Services or 
Enforcement accounts to the Operations Support account for 
purposes of enhancing information technology systems that 
support taxpayer service and enforcement activities.
    Section 209 is a new provision that establishes new IRS 
appropriations accounts as Taxpayer Services, Enforcement, and 
Operations Support.
    Section 210 is a new provision that allows the IRS to 
transfer funds among its new accounts to implement the new 
account structure in this act.
    Section 211 is a new provision that requires the IRS to 
develop a tax gap strategic plan that details the approaches it 
will use to achieve a voluntary compliance rate of 85 percent 
in 2009. This goal was established by the administration in its 
fiscal year 2007 budget justifications.

         Administrative Provisions--Department of the Treasury


                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

    The Committee includes nine administrative provisions 
carried over from prior appropriations acts and two new 
administrative provisions. The administrative provisions are as 
follows:
    Section 212 authorizes certain basic services within the 
Treasury Department in fiscal year 2007, including purchase of 
uniforms; maintenance, repairs, and cleaning; purchase of 
insurance for official motor vehicles operated in foreign 
countries; and contracts with the Department of State for 
health and medical services to employees and their dependents 
serving in foreign countries.
    Section 213 authorizes transfers, up to 2 percent, between 
Departmental Offices, Office of 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 214 authorizes transfer, up to 2 percent, between 
the Internal Revenue Service and the Treasury Inspector General 
for Tax Administration under certain circumstances.
    Section 215 requires the purchase of law enforcement 
vehicles be consistent with Departmental vehicle management 
principles.
    Section 216 prohibits the Department of the Treasury and 
the Bureau of Engraving and Printing from redesigning the $1 
Federal Reserve Note.
    Section 217 authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to 
transfer funds from Salaries and Expenses, Financial Management 
Service, to the Debt Collection Fund as necessary to cover the 
costs of debt collection. Such amounts shall be reimbursed to 
the Salaries and Expenses account from debt collections 
received in the Debt Collection Fund.
    Section 218 amends section 122 of Public Law 105-119 (5 
U.S.C. 3104 note), by striking ``8 years'' and inserting ``9 
years''.
    Section 219 requires prior approval for the construction 
and operation of a museum by the United States Mint.
    Section 220 prohibits the merger of the United States Mint 
and the Bureau of Engraving and Printing without prior approval 
of the committees of jurisdiction.
    Section 221 is a new provision that authorizes the 
Department's intelligence activities. This language was 
included at the request of the Office of the Director of 
National Intelligence.
    Section 222 is a new provision that requires the Department 
to submit quarterly reports to the House and Senate Committees 
on Appropriations regarding all uncommitted, unobligated, 
unexpended, and excess funds in each program and activity and 
requires the Department to submit additional, updated budget 
information to these Committees upon request.

                               TITLE III

              DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

Appropriations, 2006.................................... $33,593,827,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................  34,118,007,000
House allowance.........................................  35,297,266,000
Committee recommendation................................  36,587,572,000

                          program description

    The Department of Housing and Urban Development [HUD] was 
established by the Housing and Urban Development Act (Public 
Law 89-174), effective November 9, 1965. This Department is the 
principal Federal agency responsible for programs concerned 
with the Nation's housing needs, fair housing opportunities, 
and improving and developing the Nation's communities.
    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 that help families become homeowners and 
facilitate the construction of rental housing; rental and 
homeownership subsidy programs for low-income families who 
otherwise could not afford decent housing; programs to combat 
discrimination in housing and affirmatively further fair 
housing opportunity; programs aimed at ensuring an adequate 
supply of mortgage credit; and programs that aid neighborhood 
rehabilitation, community development, and the preservation of 
our urban centers from blight and decay.
    HUD administers programs to protect the homebuyer in the 
marketplace and fosters programs and research that stimulate 
and guide the housing industry to provide not only housing, but 
better communities and living environments.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends for fiscal year 2007 an 
appropriation of $36,587,572,000 for the Department of Housing 
and Urban Development. This is $2,993,745,000 above the fiscal 
year 2006 enacted level and $2,469,565,000 above the budget 
request.

                     TENANT-BASED RENTAL ASSISTANCE

             (INCLUDING RESCISSION AND TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2006 \1\................................ $15,417,919,000
Budget estimate, 2007 \1\...............................  15,920,000,000
House allowance \1\.....................................  15,846,400,000
Committee recommendation \1\............................  15,920,000,000

\1\ Include an advance appropriation of some $4,200,000,000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    This account provides funding for the section 8 tenant-
based (voucher) program. Section 8 tenant-based housing 
assistance is one of the principle appropriations for Federal 
housing assistance and provides rental housing assistance to 
over 2 million families. Further, it funds incremental vouchers 
to assist non-elderly disabled families, to provide vouchers 
for tenants that live in projects where the owner of the 
project has decided to leave the section 8 program, or for 
replacement of units lost from the assisted housing inventory 
(tenant protection vouchers), etc. Under these programs, 
eligible low-income families pay 30 percent of their adjusted 
income for rent, and the Federal Government is responsible for 
the remainder of the rent, up to the fair market rent or some 
other payment standard. This account also provides funding for 
the Contract Administrator program, Family Self-Sufficiency 
[FSS] and the Family Unification program. Under FSS, families 
receive job training and employment that should lead to a 
decrease in their dependency on welfare programs and move 
towards economic self-sufficiency.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
$15,920,000,000 for fiscal year 2007, including $4,200,000,000 
as an advance appropriation to be made available on October 1, 
2007. These funds are $502,081,000 above the fiscal year 2006 
level. Of these amounts, the Committee has allocated 
$14,436,200,000 for the renewal of all expiring section 8 
contracts; $149,300,000 for section 8 preservation contracts 
through tenant protections; $47,500,000 for family self-
sufficiency contracts; $1,271,100,000 for administrative fees; 
up to $10,000,000 for the Family Unification program that 
provides vouchers to families for whom the lack of adequate 
housing is a primary factor in the separation, or the threat of 
imminent separation, of children from their families, and also 
provides vouchers to youths 18 to 21 years old who left foster 
care at age 16 or older and lack adequate housing; and 
$5,900,000 for transfer to the Working Capital Fund.
    This account provides funding for section 8 tenant-based 
housing programs based on a budget-based approach that seeks to 
ensure funding for vouchers in use while permitting public 
housing agencies [PHAs] to fund vouchers up to the authorized 
level. This account funds housing for over 2 million families. 
Moreover, this level of funding will ensure that PHAs have 
adequate funds for all vouchers-in-use. The Committee expects 
that many PHAs will be able to pay the cost of all vouchers up 
to the legal authorized level.
    In addition, the account funds incremental vouchers to 
assist non-elderly disabled families, vouchers for tenants that 
live in projects where the owner of the project has decided to 
opt-out of the section 8 project-based program, or for the 
replacement of other units lost from the assisted housing 
inventory. The Committee remains concerned over the increased 
costs of section 8 rents over the last few years and what these 
costs could mean to this program in the future expecially in 
consideration of increasing utility costs. Nevertheless, the 
Committee believes that many PHAs have not taken prudent steps 
in reducing the energy costs associated with public housing. 
High costs of fuel are only one component related to high 
energy bills.
    The Committee believes that the budget-based approach will 
ensure a more rigorous rent policy and fiscally responsible 
approach. As a result, the Committee directs HUD to report 
semi-annually on rent increases for affordable, low-income 
housing throughout the Nation, including the cost to the 
Government for its failure to promote or implement a policy for 
developing low-income housing, especially in tight rental 
housing markets. The Committee also directs HUD to report 
annually, beginning no later than June 30, 2007 on the 
effectiveness of this budget-based approach to vouchers, 
including the extent to which available housing units are lost 
because of new cost adjustments as well as the impact of this 
policy on extremely low-income families (those at or below 30 
percent of median income for an area).
    The Committee has also broadened the base for determining 
the funding for section 8 vouchers for each PHA by eliminating 
the 3 month May through July snapshot of voucher costs and 
replacing it with the most recent 12 month period as a method 
for providing accurate and reliable data. The legislation also 
includes up to $100,000,000 for HUD to award funds to PHAs that 
were unfairly disadvantaged from excessive costs due to 
portability over the last year as well as other anomolies such 
as high utility costs. This funding should eliminate the need 
for any central fund.
    The Committee includes $149,300,000 for tenant protection 
assistance. This is the same as the budget request and 
$28,900,000 less than the fiscal year 2006 level.
    The Committee remains concerned that HUD is not committed 
to maintaining section 8 project-based housing and may be 
encouraging owners to opt out of the program. This would be a 
tremendous mistake since affordable housing needs are growing 
while the stock of affordable low-income housing is shrinking. 
HUD is directed to report no later than June 30, 2007 on the 
status of HUD's efforts to retain section 8 project-based 
housing, including a 5-year analysis of units lost and 
retained, by year, State, and locality. HUD is also directed to 
provide an analysis of all efforts made by HUD to preserve low-
income section 8 units. The Committee also directs GAO to again 
assess HUD's efforts and success in preserving HUD-assisted 
low-income housing, especially section 8 project-based housing, 
including recommendations on how better to preserve this 
housing. The Committee expects an annual report on this issue.
    The Committee directs the Secretary of Housing and Urban 
Development, in consultation with the Secretary of Veterans 
Affairs, to conduct a study of the Rental Vouchers for Veterans 
Affairs Supported Housing Program authorized under title 42 
United States Code section 1437f(o)(19) and provide an overview 
of the program including the total number of vouchers, average 
cost, locations receiving vouchers, selection procedure and the 
cost of maintaining such vouchers. The Secretary shall submit 
such report to the Committees on Appropriation not later than 
120 days after the enactment of this act.
    The Committee recommends $1,271,100,000 for administrative 
fees for PHAs. These funds are to be allocated on a formula 
tied to units under lease. These funds are intended to ensure 
the success of the section 8 voucher program, but can be used 
to provide related low-income housing, including development 
costs.
    The Committee provides $47,500,000 for Family Self-
Sufficiency coordinators. These funds are designed to promote 
self-sufficiency by moving from welfare to work.
    The Committee includes $5,900,000 to transfer to HUD's 
Working Capital Fund which is needed for HUD to complete an 
effective IT system to track HUD funding.

                        HOUSING CERTIFICATE FUND

                              (RESCISSION)

Appropriations, 2006.................................... -$2,050,000,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................  -2,000,000,000
House allowance.........................................  -2,000,000,000
Committee recommendation................................  -2,000,000,000

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends a rescission of $2,000,000,000, 
the same as the budget request and $50,000,000 less than the 
fiscal year 2006 rescission level. The administration has been 
unable to demonstrate there are adequate ``excess'' section 8 
funds available for rescission, which has been the source for 
prior year rescissions. Instead, the administration appears 
likely to rescind funds from congressional priority programs 
such as the Homeless Assistance programs, HOME, HOPE VI section 
202 housing for elderly and section 811 Housing for Persons 
with Disabilities. As a result, because both HUD and OMB have 
recommended this rescission from section 8 funds, to the extent 
there are inadequate ``excess'' section 8 funding for the 
rescission, the next source of rescission funding is to be 
obtained, in part, first from an amount equal to 10 percent of 
HUD salaries and expenses and an amount equal to 10 percent of 
OMB funding. Only after this source of funds are exhausted can 
unobligated funds from other HUD programs be used to satisfy 
this rescission.

                    PROJECT-BASED RENTAL ASSISTANCE

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2006....................................  $5,037,417,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................   5,675,700,000
House allowance.........................................   5,475,700,000
Committee recommendation................................   5,675,700,000

                          PROJECT DESCRIPTION

    Section 8 project-based rental assistance provides a rental 
subsidy to a private landlord that is tied to a specific 
housing unit as opposed to a voucher which allows a recipient 
to seek a unit, subject primarily to certain rent caps. Amounts 
in this account include funding for the renewal of expiring 8 
project-based contracts, including section 8, moderate 
rehabilitation, and single room occupancy [SRO] housing.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee provides a total of $5,675,700,000 for the 
annual renewal of project-based contracts, of which up to 
$145,500,000 is for the cost of contract administrators, 
$3,960,000 is for the Working Capital Fund. This funding is 
equal to the budget request and $635,937,000 above the fiscal 
year 2006 level. As discussed in the Tenant-Based Rental 
Assistance account, GAO is directed to annually assess the 
status of HUD's efforts to preserve assisted housing.

                      PUBLIC HOUSING CAPITAL FUND

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2006....................................  $2,438,964,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................   2,178,000,000
House allowance.........................................   2,208,000,000
Committee recommendation................................   2,460,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    This account provides funding for modernization and capital 
needs of public housing authorities (except Indian housing 
authorities), including management improvements, resident 
relocation and homeownership activities.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,460,000,000 
for the public housing capital fund, which is $282,000,000 
above the budget request and $21,036,000 above the fiscal year 
2006 enacted level.
    Of the amount made available under this section, up to 
$30,000,000 is for supportive services for residents of public 
housing. Per the budget request, $7,920,000 is available from 
this account to pay for the costs of administrative and 
judicial receiverships and $14,850,000 shall be transferred to 
the Working Capital Fund.
    HUD is prohibited from using any funds under this account 
as an emergency reserve under section 9(k) of the United States 
Housing Act of 1937, but is provided up to $19,800,000 for 
emergency capital needs.
    The bill includes up to $15,345,000 to support the ongoing 
financial and physical assessment activities at the Real Estate 
Assessment Center [REAC].

                     PUBLIC HOUSING OPERATING FUND

Appropriations, 2006....................................  $3,564,000,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................   3,564,000,000
House allowance.........................................   3,564,000,000
Committee recommendation................................   3,660,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    This account provides funding for the payment of operating 
subsidies to some 3,050 public housing authorities (except 
Indian housing authorities) with a total of over 1.2 million 
units under management in order to augment rent payments by 
residents in order to provide sufficient revenues to meet 
reasonable operating costs.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,660,000,000 
for the public housing operating fund, which is $96,000,000 
above the fiscal year 2006 level and $96,000,000 more than the 
budget request. Additional funds have been included in 
anticipation of high utility costs.
    HUD is prohibited from using any funds under this account 
as an emergency reserve under section 9(k) of the United States 
Housing Act of 1937. The bill includes language from the fiscal 
year 2004 appropriations bill that prohibits the use of 
operating funds to pay for the operating expenses for a prior 
fiscal year.

     REVITALIZATION OF SEVERELY DISTRESSED PUBLIC HOUSING [HOPE VI]

Appropriations, 2006....................................     $99,000,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................................
House allowance.........................................................
Committee recommendation................................     100,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The ``Revitalization of severely distressed public 
housing'' [HOPE VI] account makes awards to public housing 
authorities on a competitive basis to demolish obsolete or 
failed developments or to revitalize, where appropriate, sites 
upon which these developments exist. This is a focused effort 
to eliminate public housing which was, in many cases, poorly 
located, ill-designed, and not well constructed. Such 
unsuitable housing has been very expensive to operate, and 
difficult to manage effectively due to multiple deficiencies.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $100,000,000 
for the ``HOPE VI'' account, which is $100,000,000 above the 
budget request and $1,000,000 above the fiscal year 2006 level. 
The administration also sought to eliminate this program by 
rescinding $99,000,000 of the fiscal year 2006 funding. The 
Committee urges the Department to reconsider the elimination of 
the HOPE VI program, and consider a restructured HOPE VI 
program that is more efficient, cost effective and still 
capable of leveraging other funds for rebuilding often 
distressed communities in which these ``HOPE VI'' projects are 
located.
    This is an important program that has revitalized many 
distressed properties and has anchored revitalization 
activities for the many communities in which these properties 
are located. The Committee acknowledges that many of the funds 
appropriated for this program have yet to be expended as 
projects are delayed and remain in the pipeline due to the 
complexities related to the funding of these types of projects 
as well as local controversies between interested local 
parties. Nevertheless, the program has proven to be very 
successful in transforming the lives of the assisted families 
and in rebuilding often distressed communities.

                  NATIVE AMERICAN HOUSING BLOCK GRANT

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2006....................................    $623,700,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................     625,680,000
House allowance.........................................     625,680,000
Committee recommendation................................     625,680,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    This account funds the native American housing block grants 
program, as authorized under title I of the Native American 
Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act of 1996 
[NAHASDA]. This program provides an allocation of funds on a 
formula basis to Indian tribes and their tribally designated 
housing entities to help them address the housing needs within 
their communities. Under this block grant, Indian tribes will 
use performance measures and benchmarks that are consistent 
with the national goals of the program, but can base these 
measures on the needs and priorities established in their own 
Indian housing plan.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $625,680,000 for the Native 
American Housing Block Grant, of which $1,980,000 is set aside 
for a credit subsidy for the section 601 Loan Guarantee 
Program. The Committee recommendation is the same as the budget 
request and $1,980,000 above the fiscal year 2006 enacted 
level.
    The Committee continues to believe that training and 
technical assistance in support of NAHASDA should be shared, 
with $2,000,000 to be administered by the National American 
Indian Housing Council [NAIHC] and $3,465,000 by HUD in support 
of the inspection of Indian housing units, contract expertise, 
training and technical assistance in the training, oversight, 
and management of Indian housing and tenant-based assistance. 
The Committee is concerned that HUD has attempted to micro 
manage many activities of the NAIHC to the detriment of NAIHC, 
the tribes, and the program. These policies have also led to 
unacceptable levels of carryover. The Committee expects HUD to 
resolve these issues while ensuring NAIHC is able to make 
effective and meaningful contributions to tribal heads.
    The Committee continues to be very concerned with both the 
policy and method by which HUD revised the eligibility 
requirements under which HUD allocates the Native American 
Housing Assistance Block Grant [NAHASDA]. On April 19, 2004, 
HUD issued its NAHASDA funding for fiscal year 2004 by using 
``multi-race'' census data for making funding allocations as 
opposed to funding tribes based on members of a ``single 
race''. While this may be a legitimate approach, HUD's 
allocation is based on census date that relies on self-
certification. Equally troubling is the fact that HUD failed to 
use ``notice and comment'' rulemaking in making such a 
substantial policy change. This concern is reinforced by the 
fact that HUD was unable to reach a consensus among tribal 
groups on this policy change. Consequently, while the Committee 
is not looking to challenge the policy change at this time, the 
Committee does direct HUD to reassess this decision through 
notice and comment rulemaking. The Committee also directs HUD 
to establish oversight procedures to ensure that tribal members 
are qualified for purposes of the NAHASDA tribal funding 
allocations.

                  NATIVE HAWAIIAN HOUSING BLOCK GRANT

Appropriations, 2006....................................      $8,727,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................       5,940,000
House allowance.........................................       8,815,000
Committee recommendation................................       8,815,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Hawaiian Homelands Homeownership Act of 2000 created 
the Native Hawaiian Housing Block Grant program to provide 
grants to State of Hawaiian Home Lands for housing and housing 
related assistance to develop, maintain, and operate affordable 
housing for eligible low income Native Hawaiian families.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $8,815,000 for this program which 
is $88,000 more than the fiscal year 2006 enacted level and 
$2,875,000 more than the budget request. Of the amount 
provided, $299,211 shall be for training and technical 
assistance activities.

           INDIAN HOUSING LOAN GUARANTEE FUND PROGRAM ACCOUNT

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          Limitation on
                                        Program account    direct loans
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2006..................       $3,960,000     $116,276,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................        5,940,000      251,000,000
House allowance.......................        3,960,000      116,276,000
Committee recommendation..............        5,940,000      251,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    This program provides access to private financing for 
Indian families, Indian tribes and their tribally designated 
housing entities who otherwise could not acquire housing 
financing because of the unique status of Indian trust land. As 
required by the Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990, this account 
includes the subsidy costs associated with the loan guarantees 
authorized under this program.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $5,940,000 in program subsidies to 
support a loan guarantee level of $251,000,000. This is 
$1,980,000 more than both the fiscal year 2006 enacted level 
and the same as the budget request.

      NATIVE HAWAIIAN HOUSING LOAN GUARANTEE FUND PROGRAM ACCOUNT

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          Limitation on
                                        Program account    direct loans
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2006..................         $891,000      $35,714,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................        1,010,000       43,000,000
House allowance.......................        1,010,000       43,000,000
Committee recommendation..............        1,010,000       43,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    This program provides access to private financing for 
native Hawaiians who otherwise could not acquire housing 
finance because of the unique status of the Hawaiians Home 
Lands as trust land. As required by the Federal Credit Reform 
Act of 1990, this account includes the subsidy costs associated 
with the loan guarantees authorized under this program.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $1,010,000 in program subsidies to 
support a loan guarantee level of $43,000,000. The subsidy 
level is $119,000 more than the fiscal year 2006 level and the 
same as the budget request.

                   Community Planning and Development


          HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR PERSONS WITH AIDS [HOPWA]

Appropriations, 2006....................................    $286,110,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................     300,100,000
House allowance.........................................     300,100,000
Committee recommendation................................     295,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS [HOPWA] 
Program is designed to provide States and localities with 
resources and incentives to devise long-term comprehensive 
strategies for meeting the housing needs of persons living with 
HIV/AIDS and their families.
    Statutorily, 90 percent of appropriated funds are 
distributed by formula to qualifying States and metropolitan 
areas on the basis of the number and incidence of AIDS cases 
reported to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention by March 
31 of the year preceding the appropriation year. The remaining 
10 percent of funds are distributed through a national 
competition.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $295,000,000 
for this program, which is $8,890,000 more than the fiscal year 
2006 enacted level and $5,100,000 below the budget request. The 
Committee also requires HUD to allocate these funds in a manner 
that preserves existing HOPWA programs to the extent these 
programs are determined to be meeting the needs of persons with 
AIDS.

            OFFICE OF RURAL HOUSING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

Appropriations, 2006....................................     $16,830,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................................
House allowance.........................................................
Committee recommendation................................      20,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Office of Rural Housing and Economic Development was 
established to ensure that the Department has a comprehensive 
approach to rural housing and rural economic development 
issues. The account includes funding for technical assistance 
and capacity building in rural, underserved areas, and grants 
for Indian tribes, State housing finance agencies, State and 
local economic development agencies, rural nonprofits and rural 
community development corporations to pursue strategies 
designed to meet rural housing and economic development needs.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $20,000,000 for the Office of 
Rural Housing and Economic Development for fiscal year 2007 to 
support housing and economic development in rural communities 
as defined by USDA and HUD. This funding level is $3,170,000 
above the fiscal year 2006 level and $20,000,000 above the 
budget request.
    The Committee does not accept the administration's 
recommendation to eliminate funding for this program. The 
Committee believes that the Office of Rural Housing and 
Economic Development plays an important role in HUD's community 
development activities. Twenty-five percent of nonmetropolitan 
homes are renter-occupied, and the high cost of housing burdens 
those in rural areas, as it does in urban communities. 
Furthermore, the Committee notes that the programs of the 
Office of Rural Housing and Economic Development are 
sufficiently different from the housing programs administered 
by the Department of Agriculture to warrant separate 
appropriations.
    HUD is directed to administer this program according to 
existing regulatory requirements. It is expected that any 
changes to the program shall be made subject to notice and 
comment rulemaking.

                       community development fund


                     (INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2006....................................  $4,177,800,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................   3,032,000,000
House allowance.........................................   4,215,000,000
Committee recommendation................................   4,215,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    Under title I of the Housing and Community Development Act 
of 1974, as amended, the Department is authorized to award 
block grants to units of general local government and States 
for the funding of local community development programs. A wide 
range of physical, economic, and social development activities 
are eligible with spending priorities determined at the local 
level, but the law enumerates general objectives which the 
block grants are designed to fulfill, including adequate 
housing, a suitable living environment, and expanded economic 
opportunities, principally for persons of low and moderate 
income. Grant recipients are required to use at least 70 
percent of their block grant funds for activities that benefit 
low- and moderate-income persons.
    Funds are distributed to eligible recipients for community 
development purposes utilizing the higher of two objective 
formulas, one of which gives somewhat greater weight to the age 
of housing stock. Seventy percent of appropriated funds are 
distributed to entitlement communities and 30 percent are 
distributed to nonentitlement communities after deducting 
designated amounts for special purpose grants and Indian 
tribes.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,215,000,000 
for the Community Development Fund in fiscal year 2007. This is 
an increase of $1,183,000,000 above the budget request for 
fiscal year 2007 and $37,200,000 over the fiscal year 2006 
enacted level.
    The administration has proposed to reform and dramatically 
reduce funding for the Community Development Block Grant [CDBG] 
program in fiscal year 2007 by $1,183,000,000 or 28 percent 
from the fiscal year 2006 level. The Committee recognizes that 
adequately funding the CDBG program is essential for HUD to 
meet its core mission in addressing State and local community 
needs for low and moderate income residents across this Nation. 
While some reforms may be warranted, the reforms presented by 
the administration are very controversial.
    The Committee has not included funding for Youthbuild. The 
fiscal year 2007 budget proposes to transfer Youthbuild from 
HUD to the Department of Labor. The Committee recognizes that 
authorizing language to initiate the transfer is currently 
under consideration by Congress and will continue to work with 
the Department and interested parties to ensure that this 
program will not expire for fiscal year 2007.
    The Committee also funds the Economic Development 
Initiative at $250,000,000 and the Neighborhood Initiatives 
program at $30,000,000.
    The Economic Development Initiatives are as follows:
    $750,000 for the city of Craig, Alaska to acquire the Ward 
Cove Cannery Property in the city of Craig;
    $250,000 for the Rural Alaska Community Action Program in 
Anchorage, Alaska for improvements to Head Start and Early Head 
Start facilities in rural communities in Alaska;
    $2,500,000 for the Tongass Coast Aquarium in Ketchikan, 
Alaska for the construction of the aquarium;
    $1,000,000 for the Bering Straits Native Corporation in 
Nome, Alaska for Cape Nome Quarry upgrades;
    $1,000,000 for the city of Phenix City, Alabama for the 
redevelopment of downtown and riverfront;
    $400,000 for the city of Eutaw, Alabama for the 
revitalization of the Greene County Courthouse Square;
    $400,000 for the Cleburne County Economic and Industrial 
Authority, Alabama, for the development of Industrial Park;
    $500,000 for Troy University, Alabama for the establishment 
of the Center for International Business and Economic 
Development;
    $500,000 for the city of Abbeville, Alabama for a downtown 
revitalization project;
    $200,000 for the Tannehill Ironworks Historical State Park, 
Alabama for science and technology enhancements;
    $500,000 for the Calhoun County Commission, Alabama for 
economic development of Old Fort McClellan;
    $300,000 to the Black Warrior and Cahaba Rivers Land Trust 
to purchase multi-acre tract of land along Red Mountain in 
Jefferson County, Alabama;
    $250,000 to the Blount County Commission for updates, 
improvements, and the expansion of existing outdoor 
recreational facilities at Rickwood Caverns State Park;
    $200,000 to the Historic Blakeley State Park for 
infrastructure development and improvements to Blakeley State 
Park;
    $250,000 to the Clark County Commission to identify and 
prioritize infrastructure needs including acquisition of 
property for industrial parks, development of roads, and rail 
spurs;
    $500,000 for Miami Dade College in Miami-Dade County, 
Florida for the design and construction of the Cuban American 
Historical Museum at the Miami Dade College Freedom Tower;
    $300,000 for the Tampa Metropolitan Area YMCA in Tampa, 
Florida for construction of transitional housing for foster 
youth;
    $200,000 for the city of Sarasota, Florida for the planning 
and construction of the Robert L. Taylor Community Center;
    $800,000 for the Cobb Performing Arts Centre, Georgia for 
the Cobb Performing Arts Centre construction in Cobb County, 
Georgia;
    $200,000 for the city of Chickamauga, Georgia, for the 
acquisiton of the Gordon Lee Mansion, in Walker County, 
Georgia;
    $200,000 city of Moultrie, Georgia for the creation of the 
Moultrie-Community Multi-Purpose Facility;
    $200,000 Morehouse School of Medicine, for the Atlanta 
West-End Community Revitalization Initiative, Atlanta, Georgia;
    $200,000 Cusseta-Chattahoochee County, Georgia for downtown 
revitalization in Cusseta-Chattahoochee County;
    $200,000 Paulding County, Georgia, for industrial park site 
preparation for Paulding County Airport and BusinessTechnology 
Park;
    $200,000 Henry County, Georgia for the creation of a 
Veterans Wall of Honor in Henry County;
    $500,000 for the city of Storm Lake, Iowa for the 
destination park in Storm Lake;
    $380,000 for the National Cattle Congress in Waterloo, Iowa 
for renovations of facilities;
    $220,000 for the city of Mt. Pleasant, Iowa for 
redevelopment activities;
    $200,000 for the city of Sioux City, Iowa for the 
demolition of the former swift plant in the yards in Sioux 
City;
    $200,000 for the city of Waterloo, Iowa for the demolition 
of the Chamberlain Manufacturing facility in Waterloo;
    $1,000,000 for the city of Caldwell, Idaho for downtown 
revitalization;
    $500,000 for the Western Elmore County Recreation District 
in Mountain Home, Idaho for planning, design, and construction 
of a community center complex;
    $750,000 for Boise State University in Boise, Idaho for 
planning, design, and construction of an environmental science 
and economic development building;
    $500,000 for the Idaho Migrant Council for planning, 
design, and construction of a community center in Burley, 
Idaho;
    $250,000 for the Idaho State Historical Society for the 
Idaho Heritage Tourism and Historic Preservation Community 
Development Project;
    $300,000 for the Second Harvest Food Bank of East Central 
Indiana, Anderson, Indiana; for the construction of a 
warehouse;
    $400,000 for the Unity Center, Muncie, Indiana; for the 
construction of a community center;
    $300,000 for the Randolph County YMCA, Winchester, Indiana; 
for the expansion of the child day care space;
    $750,000 for Sedgwick County, Kansas for the construction 
of a technical education and training center;
    $750,000 for TLC for Children and Families in Olathe, 
Kansas for the construction of a residential treatment center;
    $500,000 for the Greater Kansas City Community Foundation 
in Kansas City, Missouri for the NeighborhoodsNOW neighborhood 
revitalization project in Wyandotte County, Kansas;
    $600,000 for the Kansas Polymer Research Center at 
Pittsburg State University for the purchase of equipment for 
its facility in Pittsburg, Kansas;
    $500,000 for the city of Atchison, Kansas to redevelop the 
central businesss district pedestrian mall in the city of 
Atchison;
    $500,000 for the city of Kansas City, Kansas for the 
downtown redevelopment and revitalization project in the city 
of Kansas City, Kansas;
    $200,000 for the city of Wichita, Kansas for the 21st 
Street industrial corridor revitalization plan and pre-
engineering designs in the city of Wichita;
    $200,000 for World Impact Incorporated's Good Samaritan 
Clinic to renovate existing clinic facilities in the city of 
Wichita, Kansas;
    $1,000,000 for LaRue County, Kentucky for an Abraham 
Lincoln Bicentennial development project;
    $2,000,000 for the the Murray-Calloway Industrial Authority 
in Murray, Kentucky, for the Murray-Calloway Industrial Park 
Development Project;
    $250,000 for the Robinson Film Center is Shreveport, 
Louisiana, for facility renovations;
    $250,000 for the Robert E. Nims Center for Entertainment 
Arts and Multi-Media Technology in Jefferson Parish, to upgrade 
existing facilities, equipment, and curriculum;
    $400,000 for the city of Brewer, Maine for a redevelopment 
project on the site of the former Eastern Fine Paper Mill;
    $200,000 for the town of Rumford, Maine to create 
affordable quality housing;
    $200,000 for the city of Gardiner, Maine for shore 
stabilization and waterfront infrastructure;
    $200,000 for community concepts in Lewiston, Maine to 
construct a family service center;
    $200,000 for the Shalom House in Portland, Maine to develop 
affordable housing for the homeless and disabled;
    $200,000 for the Holbrook Community Foundation in 
Harpswell, Maine to purchase Holbrook's Wharf for continued use 
as a working waterfront;
    $200,000 for the Penobscot Theatre Company in Bangor, Maine 
to renovate the Bangor Opera House;
    $200,000 for the Maine Historical Society in Portland, 
Maine to renovate and expand its research library;
    $200,000 to the Office of Community Development, Maine 
Department of Economic and Community Development, for 
construction of public facilities and site improvements to 
support education in horticultural and environmental 
stewardship;
    $200,000 for the Red Lake Band of Chippewa Indians, in Red 
Lake, Minnesota, to expand and upgrade the Red Lake Criminal 
Justice Complex;
    $200,000 for the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency, in St. 
Paul, Minnesota, for supportive housing for long-term homeless 
providing eight long-term homeless families and individuals 
with housing and rehabilitation;
    $200,000 for the Mesabi Academy of KidsPeace in Buhl, 
Minnesota, to renovate their therapeutic programming center;
    $200,000 for the Sheriff's Youth Programs of Minnesota, in 
Rochester, Minnesota, to be used for the construction of a new 
facility in Dodge County and a permanent chemical dependency 
outpatient facility in Rochester;
    $200,000 for the Audubon Center of the North Woods in 
Sandstone, Minnesota, for facilities construction and 
renovation to their center;
    $1,000,000 for the University of Mississippi Innovation and 
Outreach Center;
    $1,000,000 for the Historic Madison Gateway Project in 
Madison, Mississippi;
    $400,000 for the University of Montana Law School's 
facility construction and expansion, Missoula, Montana;
    $400,000 for the Southwestern Montana Family YMCA, facility 
construction, Dillon, Montana;
    $750,000 for Montana State University to purchase the 
historic Story Mansion, Bozeman, Montana;
    $500,000 for the Rocky Boy Reservation's utilization of 
Malmstrom Air Force Base's excess housing, Montana;
    $350,000 for Butte-Silver Bow County's rehabilitation of 
the Butte Naval Reserve Recreational Center, Butte, Montana;
    $500,000 for the Big Sky Economic Development Authority's 
redevelopment of a recreational facility, Billings, Montana;
    $400,000 for Gallatin County's efforts to redevelop a 
recreational facility, Bozeman, Montana;
    $200,000 for the town of Eureka, Montana to construct a 
community center, Eureka, MT;
    $200,000 for the city of Wilson, North Carolina to clear 
dilapidated buildings and warehouses;
    $200,000 for the city of Fayetteville, North Carolina for 
Military Business Park Development;
    $200,000 for the the Charlotte Mecklenburg Housing 
Partnership in Charlotte, North Carolina to redevelop the 
Statesville Avenue Corridor;
    $200,000 to the city of Monroe, North Carolina for the 
renovation of Old Armory for neighborhood revitalization;
    $200,000 to the city of Greenville, North Carolina for 
neighborhood revitalization;
    $200,000 for Rocky Mount, North Carolina for the Booker T. 
Washington renovations to provide the city with a recreational 
community center;
    $200,000 for Ayden, North Carolina for renovations to the 
Ayden Arts and Recreation Community Center;
    $200,000 for the Sabre Society of Hickory, North Carolina 
to construct a military avaiation and tranportation musuem for 
economic development;
    $200,000 for the city of Durham, North Carolina for the 
West Point on the Eno Education and Resource Center;
    $200,000 for the city of Ahoskie, North Carolina for the 
Senior Citizen Housing Project;
    $250,000 for University of Nebraska-Omaha to develop its 
Center for Business Intelligence and Visualization;
    $250,000 for Northeast Community College to develop a 
collaborative education center in South Sioux City, Nebraska;
    $250,000 for Heartland Family Service's Sarpy County Family 
Services Center in Papillion, Nebraska;
    $250,000 for People's City Mission to develop Transitional 
Housing for Domestic Violence Victims in Lincoln, Nebraska;
    $1,000,000 for the Northern Community Investment 
Corporation in Saint Johnsbury, Vermont, for a broadband 
initiative serving the North Country of New Hampshire;
    $300,000 for Operation Flood Relief by the Southwestern 
Community Services, New Hampshire, to assist with damages 
suffered in October 2005 flood;
    $300,000 for the State of New Hampshire Department of 
Resources and Economic Development, for the reconstruction of 
the Robert Frost Farm;
    $400,000 for the Harbor Homes, Inc, Buckingham Place, 
Nashua New Hampshire, for the construction of transitional 
housing and support services for homeless military veterans;
    $400,000 NH Community Technical College-Pease Campus, 
Portsmouth, New Hampshire, for a photonics and laser laboratory 
to develop an undergraduate and certificate program to support 
high technology manufacturing jobs;
    $400,000 Easter Seals, Manchester, New Hampshire, to assist 
with the repair and renovation of the Easter seals facility 
following major flood damage;
    $200,000 Southwestern Community Services, Operation Flood 
Relief, Keene, New Hampshire, to assist with the repair and 
rehabilitation of housing for flood victims with uninsured, and 
otherwise unmet, losses following severe flooding in Cheshire 
and Sullivan Counties in October 2005;
    $250,000 for Dona Ana County, New Mexico, for expansion of 
facilities for La Pinon Sexual Assault Recovery Services in Las 
Cruces, New Mexico;
    $200,000 for the city of Las Cruces, New Mexico, for 
expansion of La Casa, Inc. facilities;
    $800,000 for Presbyterian Medical Services in Santa Fe, New 
Mexico, for construction of the Aztec-Bloomfield, New Mexico 
Head Start Facility;
    $500,000 for the city of Belen, New Mexico, for the 
construction of its community multi-purpose center;
    $750,000 for Bernalillo County, New Mexico, for 
construction of its Metropolitan Assessment and Treatment 
Transitional Housing Facility;
    $500,000 for Eastern New Mexico University in Portales, New 
Mexico for technology infrastructure and equipment;
    $1,000,000 for the Nathan Adelson Hospice in Henderson, 
Nevada for the construction of an adult day care center;
    $200,000 for the Transitional Housing, Inc. in Cleveland, 
Ohio for capitol improvements to its facility;
    $200,000 for the city of Cincinnati, Ohio for acquistion 
and remediation of the Queen City Barrel area;
    $200,000 for the Washington State Community College 
Foundation in Marietta, Ohio for planning and design of a 
health resources building;
    $200,000 for Defiance County in Defiance, Ohio for 
construction of the Defiance County Senior Services Center;
    $1,300,000 for Youngstown Central Area Community 
Improvement Corporation for the Youngstown Technology Center, 
Ohio, for land and site acquisition, demolition, facilities 
construction and parking facilities;
    $200,000 for Rhodes State College, Lima, Ohio, for the 
Integrated Manufacturing Training Center (IMTC), for equipment;
    $200,000 for Connecting our Workforce to the Future (CWF) 
program, Clark State Community College, Ohio for land and site 
acquisition, demolition, facilities construction and equipment;
    $200,000 for Glen Helen Ecology Institute, Yellow Springs, 
Ohio, to upgrade facilities;
    $300,000 for the Lorain County Community College Foundation 
in Elyria, Ohio for the construction of the Entrepreneurship 
Innovation Center;
    $200,000 for the city of Ardmore, Oklahoma, to construct 
the Ardmore Community Resources Center;
    $200,000 for Rural Enterprises Institute of Oklahoma to 
continue the HUD Employer Assisted Housing Project;
    $200,000 for Norman Economic Development Coalition, Norman, 
Oklahoma, to construct an aerospace engineering incubator;
    $200,000 for the Native American Cultural and Educational 
Authority, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, to construct the American 
Indian Cultural Center;
    $200,000 for the Oklahoma Medical Research Foundation, 
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, for the Acree-Woodworth/Massman 
Expansion Project;
    $200,000 for Neighbors for Kids in Depoe Bay, Oregon for 
the Depoe Bay Kids Zone Facility Expansion Project;
    $300,000 for the port of Toledo to develop a marine 
industrial site in Toledo, Oregon;
    $300,000 for the Portland Development Commission to develop 
affordable housing within the South Waterfront District in 
Portland, Oregon;
    $200,000 for the Port of Cascade Locks in Cascade Locks, 
Oregon for its waterfront development project;
    $200,000 for the borough of Kennett Square, Pennsylvania, 
for the Kennett Square Downtown Revitalization Project;
    $200,000 for the Urban League of Pittsburgh in Pittsburgh, 
Pennsylvania to establish The Urban Entrepreneurial Development 
Center;
    $200,000 for the city of Hermitage, Pennsylvania, to 
construct the LindenPointe Technology and Innovation Center;
    $200,000 for the Sharon Reed Development Corporation, 
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania for renovations as part of the 59th 
Street project;
    $200,000 for the Beaver County Planning Commission, Beaver, 
Pennsylvania, for development of the Hopewell Industrial Park 
Phase II;
    $200,000 for the city of Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania for 
construction at the Coal Street complex rehabilitation project;
    $200,000 for the Allegheny County Department of Planning, 
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania for mixed-use development of the Mt. 
Ararat Community Renaissance;
    $200,000 for Erie County, Erie, Pennsylvania, to build 
technology-based incubator at Gannon University in the city of 
Erie;
    $200,000 for Muhlenberg Township, Pennsylvania for site 
improvement, and other pre-development preparation of a 
brownfield site;
    $200,000 for the city of Johnstown, Pennsylvania for the 
conversion of an existing brownfield into public space;
    $200,000 for Our City Reading in Reading, Pennsylvania to 
rehabilitate abandoned houses and provide down payment 
assistance to home buyers;
    $200,000 for the Redevelopment Authority of the County of 
Washington in Washington, Pennsylvania to rehabilitate, 
renovate, and restore the former Western Center Administration 
building into a Regional Learning Center;
    $200,000 for Universal Community Homes in Philadelphia, 
Pennsylvania for planning, design, demolition and construction 
of affordable housing units;
    $200,000 for Edgemont Community Improvement Association in 
Harrisburg, Pennsylvania for the renovation, rehabilitation and 
conversion of a former school building into a community center;
    $200,000 for the city of Hazleton, in Hazelton, 
Pennsylvania for planning and rehabilitation of the Markle 
Building and Market Faire;
    $200,000 for the Erie Municipal Airport Authority in Erie, 
Pennsylvania for redevelopment and construction of a multi-
modal cargo distribution center;
    $200,000 for the August Wilson Center for African American 
Culture in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania for planning, site 
preparation and construction of an African American Cultural 
Center;
    $200,000 for the city of Bethlehem in Bethlehem, 
Pennsylvania to support the redevelopment, renovation and 
construction of a South Bethlehem Workforce Training and 
Development Center at Northampton Community College;
    $200,000 for the Redevelopment Authority of the city of 
Coatesville in Coatesville, Pennsylvania for planning site 
preparation, revitalization and construction of a New 
Coatesville Incubator;
    $200,000 for the Economic Development Company of Lancaster 
in Lancaster, Pennsylvania for demolition, redevelopment and 
construction at the site of the former Armstrong Liberty Street 
plant;
    $200,000 for the Stadium Theatre in Woonsocket, Rhode 
Island for building renovations;
    $200,000 for the town of Lincoln, Rhode Island for 
improvements at Barney Pond;
    $200,000 for the Town of Warren, Rhode Island for 
improvements to the Town Wharf;
    $200,000 for the town of West Warwick for improvements at 
Riverpoint Park;
    $200,000 for the Cranston Alternate Education Program in 
Cranston, Rhode Island for building improvements;
    $200,000 for the Providence Performing Arts Center in 
Providence, Rhode Island for building renovations;
    $200,000 for the town of Burrillville, Rhode Island for 
construction of the Jesse Smith Library and Meeting Center;
    $200,000 for Meeting Street School in Providence, Rhode 
Island for the construction of the Meeting Street National 
Center of Excellence;
    $200,000 for the CVS/Highlander Charter School in 
Providence, Rhode Island for the construction of the Broad 
Street Children's Zone;
    $200,000 for the World War II Memorial Commission of Rhode 
Island for the construction of the World War II Memorial;
    $500,000 for the city of Union, South Carolina to develop a 
regional robotics training center;
    $400,000 for the city of Florence, South Carolina to 
develop a community/activity center;
    $200,000 for York County, South Carolina to develop a 
business/industry incubator project;
    $200,000 for Dillon County, South Carolina to develop an I-
95 Gateway Industrial Park Spec Building;
    $500,000 for the city of Rock Hill, South Carolina for the 
infrastrcutre improvements for the Hagins-Fewell Neighborhood 
with the installation of a new storm water system;
    $200,000 for the city of Greenville, South Carolina to 
redevelop the community recreation center;
    $400,000 to the Wakpa Sica Reconciliation Place in Fort 
Pierre, South Dakota for construction of the Wakpa Sica 
Reconciliation Place;
    $600,000 to the Childrens Home Society in Sioux Falls, 
South Dakota for at-risk youth facilities expansion;
    $500,000 for Middle Tennessee State University in 
Murfreesboro, Tennessee to construct an education and 
conference center;
    $500,000 for the African American History Foundation of 
Nashville, Inc. in Nashville, Tennessee for construction of 
facilities and equipment;
    $500,000 for the city of Jackson, Tennessee to construct 
community facilites and infrastructure;
    $200,000 for the town of Pittman Center, Tennessee to 
construct a community center;
    $250,000 for Cumberland County, Tennessee to establish a 
business incubator;
    $300,000 for the city of Memphis, Tennessee for the 
University Place housing revitalization project;
    $300,000 for the PNI Neighborhood Commercial and Small 
Business Development Program in Knoxville, Tennessee to support 
economic development activities;
    $250,000 for the city of Johnson City, Tennessee to 
construct infrastructure and facilities at the Innovation Park;
    $200,000 for the Tri-Cities Economic Development Alliance 
in Blountville, Tennessee to support the regional World Trade 
Center;
    $200,000 for Tom Green County, Texas, for the relocation 
and expansion of the Tom Green County Library;
    $200,000 for Laredo, Texas, for the renovation of the 
Historic Plaza Theatre;
    $200,000 for Beaumont, Texas, for downtown improvements in 
the city of Beaumont;
    $200,000 for Harris County, Texas, for the Hurricane 
Katrina Evacuee Workforce Development Initiative;
    $200,000 for the North Texas Food Bank in Dallas, Texas, 
for facility renovation and expansion;
    $200,000 for Marshall, Texas, for the renovation of the 
Memorial Hall Visitor and History Center;
    $200,000 for Hillsboro, Texas, for downtown streetscape 
improvements in the city of Hillsboro;
    $200,000 for Temple, Texas, for the development of the 
Performing Arts Centre;
    $200,000 for Brownwood, Texas, for downtown streetscape 
improvements in the city of Brownwood;
    $200,000 for Midland, Texas, for downtown redevelopment in 
the city of Midland;
    $200,000 for the city of Pearland, Texas for the planning 
and design of the Pearland Business and Commerce Park in the 
city of Pearland;
    $300,000 for the city of Abilene, Texas for the 
construction of a new hanger at the Abilene Regional Airport 
Industrial Park in the city of Abilene;
    $300,000 for Global Samaritan Resources, Inc. in Abilene, 
Texas for the construction of a food distribution warehouse;
    $200,000 for the Houston Community College in Houston, 
Texas for the enhancement and expansion of the Multi-Cultural 
Business Entrepreneurial Center;
    $400,000 for the city of Smithfield, Utah to construct a 
plaza for the new city center;
    $450,000 for the city of Salina, Utah to construct a 
community center;
    $450,000 for Grand County, Utah to construct a senior 
citizen housing center;
    $200,000 for the city of Ogden, Utah for rehabilitation of 
affordable housing;
    $200,000 for Provo City Downtown Parking Structure in 
Provo, Utah, to develop a parking structure for approximately 
400 vehicles;
    $200,000 for community development and park facility 
improvements for Eagle Mountain's Pony Express Regional Park, 
Eagle Mountain, Utah;
    $200,000 for municipal offices project in Syracuse City, 
Utah, for the construction of a new city office building;
    $200,000 for Brigham City, Utah, to renovate a building for 
use as a regional innovation center in Northern Utah;
    $200,000 for San Juan County, Utah, to move the fairgrounds 
site, including a new exhibit building/indoor-arena and other 
livestock exhibits for 4-H, Junior Livestock, and other 
activities to site located south of Monticello, Utah;
    $200,000 for the city of Newport News, Virginia for the 
enhancement of the J. Clyde Morris ``Avenue of the Arts'';
    $200,000 for the city of Suffolk, Virginia for improvements 
of the Museum of African-American History;
    $200,000 for the Staunton Performing Arts Center in 
Staunton, Virginia, for continued enhancements of the Center;
    $200,000 for the Shenandoah County Arts Center Foundation 
in Edinburg, Virginia for the renovation and expansion of the 
Center;
    $300,000 for the Appalachian Service Project in Jonesville, 
Virginia to support the year round home repair program;
    $400,00 for the Christopher Newport University Real Estate 
Foundation in Newport News, Virginia, for the Warwick Boulevard 
Commercial Corridor Redevelopment Project;
    $300,000 for the Alexandria Branch of the Boys and Girls 
Club in Alexandria, Virginia, for the renovation and expansion 
of the Alexandria Branch of the Boys and Girls Club;
    $200,000 for the The Mariners' Museum in Newport News, 
Virginia, for the The USS Monitor Center at the Mariners' 
Museum;
    $400,000 for the University of Wyoming Technology Business 
Center, Laramie Wyoming, for information technology, among 
other things servers, routers, photonics for high-speed data 
transmission;
    $200,000 for the Campbell County Senior Center, city of 
Gillette Wyoming, to conduct an assessment of existing 
infrastructure for future growth and expansion;
    $200,000 for the Wyoming Rural Development Council, 
Cheyenne Wyoming, for county assistance to Wyoming counties to 
conduct community assessments to look at their respective 
economic development assets and liabilities;
    $200,000 for the Lander Business Park, city of Lander 
Wyoming, for the installation of enhancements to complete the 
business park;
    $200,000 for the city of Gillette, Wyoming for construction 
of the Wyoming Technical Training Center at the Gillette Campus 
of the Northern Wyoming Community College;
    $200,000 for the Central Wyoming College Foundation in 
Riverton, Wyoming for construction and the purchase of 
equipment for the Intertribal Education and Community Center;
    $200,000 for the Sheridan Heritage Center in Sheridan, 
Wyoming for restoration of the Sheridan Inn;
    $200,000 for the city of Kemmerer, Wyoming to purchase 
necessary technology equipment for the South Lincoln Events 
Center;
    $200,000 for the city of Cheyenne, Wyoming for construction 
of the Community Recreation Center;
    $900,000 for Northeast Mississippi Community College for 
facility renovations;
    $1,500,000 for the University of Mississippi for facilities 
restoration and development;
    $700,000 for the town of Marietta, Mississippi for the 
multi purpose building;
    $800,000 for Hinds Community College Utica Campus facility 
restoration and development;
    $500,000 to for the city of Hattiesburg, Mississippi to 
redevelop the Hattiesburg High School;
    $400,000 for the city of Canton, Mississippi to redevelop 
the historic Canton High School;
    $200,000 for the city of Vicksburg, Mississippi to renovate 
St. Francis Xavier auditorium;
    $200,000 for the town of Bolton, Mississippi municipal 
building;
    $800,000 for Delta State University facility restoration 
and development;
    $1,000,000 for the development of the Center for Functional 
Foods, Missouri, for construction and equipment costs;
    $875,000 for the development of the Agricultural Complex, 
Stoddard County, Missouri, for transportation and 
infrastructure improvements;
    $875,000 for the Mobile Biosciences Education Unit at the 
St. Louis Science Center, St. Louis, Missouri, for equipment 
and programmatic costs;
    $500,000 for the development of the George Washington 
Carver Building Restoration Project, Jackson County, Missouri, 
for safety and environmental improvements;
    $750,000 for the development of the Allied Health Building 
at North Central Missouri College, Grundy County, Missouri, for 
infrastructure expansion;
    $250,000 for the redevelopment of the William Jewell 
College Student Union, Clay County, Missouri, for the 
reconstruction of a new facility;
    $250,000 for the development of a planetarium at Truman 
State University, Adair County, Missouri, for construction and 
equipment costs;
    $250,000 for the development of the Winston Churchill 
Memorial, Callaway County, Missouri, for the continued 
restoration costs;
    $250,000 for the development of the Downtown West Plains 
Business Incubator, Howell County, Missouri, for construction 
and equipment costs;
    $200,000 for planning and construction of the Kauai 
Children's Discovery Museum and the Garden Island Arts Council 
Joint Venture: Visitors Center, Kauai County, Hawaii;
    $200,000 for Gregory House renovations, Honolulu, Hawaii. 
Gregory House provides transitional housing for individuals 
with HIV/AIDS;
    $200,000 for planning and construction of the Arc of Hilo's 
Client Support Services Facility in Hilo, Hawaii;
    $200,000 for the Harvest Community Foundation to build the 
Billings Heights Community Center;
    $200,000 for CommunityWorks to build the facility and 
create the exhibits for the ExplorationWorks Center which will 
be an innovative, hands-on museum of science and culture;
    $200,000 for Butte Silver Bow Arts Foundation to renovate 
their building in Historic Uptown Butte to create a world-class 
art museum, an accredited arts school, and an art incubator;
    $200,000 for the University Montana to renovate and upgrade 
its law school;
    $200,000 for the Daly Mansion Preservation Trust to restore 
and preserve the Daly Mansion;
    $200,000 for Columbus, Indiana to build and equip the Mill 
Race Center for seniors;
    $200,000 to the St. Michael's School and Nursery, Inc. in 
Wilmington, Delaware for the continued expansion of the school;
    $200,000 for the Ministry of Caring, Sacred Heart Village, 
in Wilmington, Delaware for renovation of the facility;
    $200,000 for expansion of the Beautiful Gate Outreach 
Center, Wilmington, Delaware;
    $300,000 for the city of Coral Gables, Florida for the 
renovation of the Historic Biltmore complex;
    $300,000 for the city of Orlando, Florida for the Parramore 
Neighborhood Revitalization Project;
    $200,000 for the city of Miami, for the Performing Arts 
Center;
    $200,000 for the city of Hollywood for the renovation of 
the Holocaust Education and Documentation Center;
    $200,000 for the city of Miami for the Elderly Assistance 
Program;
    $200,000 for the Central Florida YMCA for construction of 
the Viera Project;
    $200,000 for the Old Town Boys and Girls Club, Albuquerque, 
New Mexico, for a facility;
    $200,000 for a Veterans' War Memorial in Carlsbad, New 
Mexico;
    $250,000 for TV-I's Southwest Center for Advanced 
Manufacturing and Mechatronics Education facility, Albuquerque, 
New Mexico;
    $300,000 for the Boys and Girls club of Socorro County, New 
Mexico, for a facility;
    $250,000 for the South Valley Regional Recreational Center 
in Dona Ana County, New Mexico;
    $200,000 for a city-county public safety building in 
McKinley County, New Mexico;
    $400,000 for the Boys and Girls Club, San Bernardino, 
California, for repair and renovations of the current facility 
to provide academic and afterschool programs for at-risk youth 
in a low income area;
    $200,000 for the Carl R. Hansen Teen Center, Sacramento, 
California, for construction of a new teen center facility in 
the South Natomas area that will expand the capability of 
serving youth ages 12-18 in a low income area;
    $1,000,000 to repair and renovate the Memorial Building in 
Princeton, West Virginia, for an All-Wars Museum;
    $1,400,000 to support the construction of a new training 
facility for the PACE Training and Evaluation Center (PACE Tec) 
in Morgantown, West Virginia. PACE Tec is a non-profit 
vocational rehabilitation center that provides vocational 
opportunities to people with disabilities;
    $100,000 for the Raleigh County, WV, Branch of the NAACP 
for the development of a Multi-Cultural Museum and Community 
Center;
    $200,000 for the city of Lewes, Delaware, for the reuse of 
a brownfield site and the adjacent asphalt parking area as 
community space and recreation area along the canalfront in 
Lewes, Delaware;
    $200,000 for the Riverfront Redevelopment Corporation to 
construct a children's museum as part of the larger effort to 
remove blight and redevelop brownfields along the Christina 
Riverfront in Wilmington, Delaware;
    $200,000 for the expansion of the Middletown-Odessa-
Townsend Senior Center in Middletown, Delaware, to respond to 
the burgeoning senior population and help the elderly poor in 
the area to remain independent;
    $800,000 for the construction and expansion of the National 
Women's Hall of Fame for economic development in Seneca Falls, 
New York;
    $200,000 for the construction of the Schenectady YMCA for 
economic development in Schenectady, New York;
    $200,000 for the construction and expansion of wireless 
services for underserved areas in the city of Albany, New York;
    $200,000 for the construction and expansion of the St. 
Lawrence County Regional Rural Broadband in Canton, New York;
    $200,000 for renovation of the Strand for Economic 
Development in Plattsburgh, New York;
    $200,000 for the Williston Area Economic Development 
Partnership, Williston, North Dakota, for the construction of a 
petroleum safety and technology training center;
    $200,000 for the United Tribes Technical College in 
Bismarck, North Dakoa, for the construction of student family 
housing;
    $200,000 for the Minot Area Development Corporation, Minot, 
North Dakoa, for the construction a value-added agricultural 
complex;
    $200,000 for the Greater Minneapolis Council of Churches, 
Division of Indian Work in Minneapolis, Minnesota to renovate 
the Healing Spirit House which provides housing for American 
Indian foster children;
    $200,000 for the Lao Advancement Association of America in 
Minneapolis, Minnesota for structural repairs to the interior 
and exterior of the Lao Cultural Center;
    $200,000 for the town of Vernon, Connecticut, for necessary 
interior and exterior renovations to the Amberbelle Mill 
facility that will prevent blight and keep the structure viable 
for commercial purposes in a low-income neighborhood;
    $200,000 for Empower New Haven, Inc., New Haven, 
Connecticut, for assisting low-income homeowners in making 
necessary repairs to their properties;
    $200,000 for the city of Hartford, Connecticut, 
homeownership initiative for increasing the city's current 
homeownership rate of 25 percent;
    $200,000 for The Children's Home, Cromwell, Connecticut, 
for the reconstruction of its facilities serving children with 
special needs and their families;
    $400,000 for REAP Zones, Rugby North Dakota, for 
continuation of economic development initiatives;
    $350,000 for the Dakota Boys and Girls Ranch, Minot North 
Dakota, for facility improvements;
    $300,000 for the University of North Dakota BLS-3 Lab, 
Grand Forks North Dakota, for research and development for 
therapeutic agents and vaccines;
    $300,000 for the Bismarck State College National Energy 
Technology Training Center, Bismarck North Dakota, to acquire 
additional classroom space;
    $250,000 for the Sitting Bull College Student Center, Fort 
Yates North Dakota, for construction of a student support 
center;
    $200,000 for the Turtle Mountain Youth Center, Belcourt 
North Dakota, for construction of a center to provide a safe-
haven for youth;
    $300,000 for the Looking for Lincoln Heritage Coalition for 
the ongoing Looking for Lincoln economic development and 
tourism initiative in more than 12 Illinois communities;
    $500,000 statewide for utilization and capital expenses for 
broadband installation in underserved and low-income areas. 
Administered by the Illinois Department of Commerce and 
Economic Opportunity;
    $250,000 for Boys and Girls Club of Springfield for a new 
community center on Springfield's East Side;
    $250,000 for the city of Quincy's riverfront infrastructure 
improvement initiative, connecting public facilities and public 
space in an economically distressed area;
    $200,000 to help construct a senior citizen Lifespan Center 
for the Coles County Council on Aging;
    $200,000 for Community Support Services, Inc in Brookfield 
to construct a facility that will provide support services for 
families with disabilities;
    $250,000 for the city of Des Plaines for construction of a 
youth and community center to supplement existing, overcrowded 
facilities;
    $250,000 for the Lakeview Museum in Peoria to match non-
federal funds for construction of a museum facility designed to 
promote economic development and tourism in downtown Peoria;
    $250,000 for the city and county of San Francisco, 
California for Mason Street Housing supportive housing for the 
homeless;
    $250,000 for the city of Redding, California for the 
Stillwater Business Park economic development project;
    $250,000 for the city of Fresno, California for the 
Regional Economic Development and Research Center;
    $250,000 for the Watts Cinema and Education Center, Los 
Angeles, California, for the Wattstar Theatre and Education 
Center job creation and economic development project;
    $200,000 for the county of Fresno, California for the 
Westside Vocational Training Center;
    $800,000 for the Iowa Department of Economic Development 
for the Main Street Program;
    $300,000 for Council Bluffs, Iowa for the 23rd Avenue 
Neighborhood Project;
    $300,000 for Cedar Rapids, Iowa for redevelopment;
    $300,000 for the Scott County Iowa Housing Council for 
affordable housing;
    $300,000 for the Iowa Finance Authority for assisted living 
facilities;
    $300,000 for the Keehi Memorial Organization, Honolulu, 
Hawaii, for the establishment of a Keehi Adult Day Health 
Center to provide social, cultural educational, and 
recreational activities for economically disadvantaged senior 
citizens;
    $300,000 for the Waipahu Jack Hall Memorial Housing 
Corporation, Honolulu, Hawaii, to repair, operate, and maintain 
the Kunia Village's housing infrastructure. Kunia Village is a 
rural complex that houses employees of Del Monte Fresh Produce 
Hawaii, a pineapple company that is terminating its operations 
in 2008;
    $200,000 for the Agribusiness Development Corporation, 
Honolulu, Hawaii, to initiate the planning and designing of dam 
safety improvements of the Lake Wilson Dam, to ensure the 
recreational and residential integrity of this community 
resource;
    $200,000 for the Goodwill Industries of Hawaii, Inc., to 
build a career and learning center in Leeward Oahu, for job 
training and development programs, as well as a Goodwill retail 
store and donation center;
    $200,000 for the Easter Seals Hawaii, to construct an 
18,000 square foot program service center in Kapolei, Hawaii, 
to serve 500 youths and adults with autism, cerebral palsy, 
Down's Syndrome, and other disabilities within the West Oahu 
community;
    $200,000 for the construction of a research center at the 
Kauai Botanical Gardens, to preserve the rare plant and book 
collection, and to protect them from the extreme weather 
conditions that the Kauai Island frequently faces;
    $200,000 for the Hawaii Nature Center, Honolulu, Hawaii, to 
design, develop, and construct interactive exhibits that would 
create community awareness on environmental issues;
    $200,000 for the Catholic Charities Hawaii, to purchase and 
renovate facilities for a Catholic Charities Hawaii Social 
Service Community Center;
    $200,000 for the Arc of Hilo, to build a 17,000 square foot 
client support services facility in Hilo, to expand its 
services in meeting the needs of persons with disabilities;
    $200,000 for the expansion and preservation of the Calvin 
Coolidge State historic site in Plymouth Notch, Vermont;
    $200,000 for the Vermont Housing and Conservation Board to 
construct affordable housing in Windham County and Caledonia 
County, Vermont;
    $200,000 for accessibility improvements to the River Arts 
community facility in Morrisville, Vermont;
    $1,000,000 to the University of South Dakota in Vermillion, 
South Dakota, for medical school construction;
    $400,000 to Four Bands Community Fund in Eagle Butte, South 
Dakota, for revolving loan fund recapitalization;
    $500,000 for City Year, Inc., Boston, Massachusetts, for 
the acquisition and design of a new headquarters facility;
    $300,000 for the city of Pittsfield, Massachusetts for the 
redevelopment of a historic building;
    $200,000 for Mont Marie Senior Residence, Inc., Holyoke, 
Massachusetts, for the development of a low-income senior 
housing facility;
    $200,000 for the city of Northampton, Massachusetts for the 
design and construction of an affordable housing development;
    $200,000 for the city of North Adams, Massachusetts for the 
redevelopment of a historic building;
    $200,000 for the Boys and Girls Club of Greater Westfield, 
Inc., Westfield, Massachusetts for facility renovations and 
repairs;
    $200,000 for the city of Taunton, Massachusetts for 
renovations to senior housing facility;
    $200,000 for the city of Milwaukee, Wisconsin, for the 
Convent Hill low income housing development;
    $200,000 for the Waukesha Technical College, Waukesha, 
Wisconsin, for the expansion of the Printing Applied Technology 
Center;
    $200,000 for the city of Rhinelander, Wisconsin for the 
construction of a business park;
    $200,000 for the city of Beloit, Wisconsin, for the Beloit 
Neighborhood Development Low Income Housing restoration and 
infrastructure improvements;
    $200,000 for the town of Madison, Wisconsin, for the 
remediation of a Brownfield on the Novation Technology Campus;
    $200,000 for the Agape Community Center Expansion in 
Milwaukee, Wisconsin;
    $200,000 for the riverfront expansion project in La Crosse, 
Wisconsin;
    $200,000 for the town of Grantsburg, Wisconsin, for the 
Northwest Enterprise Center Expansion Project;
    $200,000 for the Redevelopment Authority of the city of 
Milwaukee, Wisconsin, for the Milwaukee VA Medical Campus 
Redevelopment;
    $200,000 for the city of Racine, Wisconsin, for the 
Redevelopment of the Walker Manufacturing Property;
    $200,000 for the city of Lake Charles to build a wetlands 
center to increase public awareness of the conservation efforts 
taking place in South Louisiana;
    $200,000 for the Audubon Living Science Museum to develop 
and design the second phase of the insectarium;
    $200,000 for the Center for Planning Excellence to fund the 
Old South Baton Rouge Strategic Plan Pilot Project by 
developing affordable housing, neighborhood rehabilitation and 
to create and improve public spaces;
    $200,000 for the Edison Wetlands Association in Edison, New 
Jersey for the Dismal Swamp Conservation Trails Project. 
Funding will be used for the design and construction of trails 
for passive public recreation in the Dismal Swamp Conservation 
Area;
    $200,000 for the Tri-County Community Action Partnership in 
Bridgeton, New Jersey for the Southeast Gateway Project. Funds 
will go to construction of neighborhood parks, gardens, 
acquisition of property for retail opportunities, providing 
grants for home repair;
    $200,000 for Wynona's House Capital Improvements, Newark, 
New Jersey.Funds will go towards renovating its permanent home 
to establish a new child advocacy center that provides a 
spectrum of services to victims of child abuse;
    $2,000,000 for the Vermont Housing and Conservation Board, 
Montpelier, Vermont, for projects throughout Vermont to enhance 
affordable housing, economic development, land conservation and 
historic preservation;
    $200,000 to Michigan Technological University in Houghton, 
Michigan for the relocation of the A.E. Seaman Mineral Museum 
to the Keweenaw National Park Site;
    $200,000 for the city of Benton Harbor, Michigan for costs 
associated with the Harbor Shores Development Project;
    $200,000 for the Ruth Ellis Center in Highland Park, 
Michigan for costs associated with their Street Outreach 
Program;
    $200,000 for the Horace Bushnell Memorial Hall Corporation 
in Hartford, Connecticut for facility repair and renovation;
    $200,000 for the town of Branford, Connecticut for the 
repair and restoration of the James Blackstone Memorial 
Library;
    $200,000 for Empower New Haven in New Haven, Connecticut 
for the New Haven Home Repair Program;
    $200,000 for the town of Manchester, Connecticut for 
construction of a youth development center on Spruce Street;
    $300,000 for the University of Arkansas at Pine Bluff for 
the construction of the Business Support Incubator in Pine 
Bluff, Arkansas;
    $300,000 for the University of Arkansas-Monticello for the 
construction of the Forest Resources Center in Monticello, 
Arkansas;
    $200,000 for Audubon Arkansas for the development of the 
Audubon Nature Center at Gillam Park in Little Rock, Arkansas;
    $200,000 for Hudson County, New Jersey for the 
redevelopment of the Koppers Coke brownfields site;
    $200,000 for borough of Collingswood, New Jersey for the 
Collingswood Community Theatre;
    $200,000 for Monmouth County, New Jersey for the Monmouth 
County Children's Advocacy Center;
    $200,000 for the Housing and Neighborhood Development 
Services, Inc., Orange, New Jersey for the Berg Hat Factory 
Commercial Arts Center;
    $200,000 for the Mercer County Improvement Authority, 
Trenton, New Jersey for the renovation of the American Steel 
and Wire Company Factory Building;
    $300,000 for the Diakon Housing and Development, Baltimore, 
Maryland for costs related to the development of Diakon Place, 
a child care and youth services center;
    $1,000,000 for the East Baltimore Development Project, 
Maryland for services to the low-income residents of East 
Baltimore and for general operating costs;
    $300,000 for the Patterson Park Community Development 
Corporation, Baltimore, Maryland for acquisition and 
redevelopment of blighted property in and around Library 
Square;
    $200,000 for the Washington County Free Library, Boonsboro, 
Maryland for the design and construction of a new library;
    $400,000 for Montgomery County, Maryland for pedestrian 
safety improvements in the Long Branch community;
    $250,000 for the city of Bellingham, Washington for 
construction of the Bellingham Marine Trades Center;
    $500,000 for the city of Everett, Washington for to 
renovate and expand the Everett Senior Activity Center;
    $250,000 for the Northwest Maritime Center in Port 
Townsend, Washington for redevelopment of the former Thomas Oil 
Brownfield Site;
    $500,000 for the Asian Counseling and Referral Service in 
Seattle, Washington for facility construction;
    $300,000 for El Centro de la Raza in Seattle, Washington 
for facility improvements and repairs;
    $450,000 for FareStart in Seattle, Washington for 
construction and rehabilitation of its new facility;
    $250,000 for the Seattle Housing Authority in Seattle, 
Washington for construction of the High Point Neighborhood 
Center;
    $250,000 for the Nisei Veterans Committee in Seattle, 
Washington for renovations to its Memorial Hall;
    $400,000 for the Boys and Girls Clubs of King County in 
Seattle, Washington for construction of the Rainier Vista Boys 
and Girls Club;
    $300,000 for the East Central Community Organization in 
Spokane, Washington for facility improvements and expansion;
    $300,000 for the Boys and Girls Club of King County in 
Seattle, Washington for facility renovation and construction of 
the Jim Wiley Community Center at Greenbridge;
    $250,000 for the YMCA of Tacoma-Pierce County in Tacoma, 
Washington for construction of a YMCA facility in Gig Harbor, 
Washington;
    $600,000 for the Boys and Girls Home of Nebraska for 
construction of a residential treatment facility for children 
and adolescents in South Sioux City, Nebraska;
    $400,000 for Northeast Community College for construction 
of an education center in South Sioux City, Nebraska;
    $200,000 for Heartland Family Service for construction of 
the Sarpy County Family Service Center in Papillion, Nebraska;
    $200,000 to the county of Peoria, Illinois for equipment 
and costs related to the physical lead removal program for 
domestic dwellings and structures in order to reduce the 
occurrences of childhood lead poisoning in low income families 
most affected by this problem;
    $200,000 to the city of Shawneetown, Illinois for 
construction of a children's park, including a play station and 
adjoining community center to serve as the centerpiece for 
redevelopment of the largest town in Gallatin County, one of 
the poorest counties in Illinois;
    $200,000 to the Decatur Park District, Illinois for 
construction and development of the lakefront area in order to 
promote the economic development of the currently diminished 
area;
    $200,000 to the city of Rock Island, Illinois for 
renovation and construction on the Martin Luther King, Jr. 
Community Center serving the surrounding low-income community;
    $200,000 for the Jeanne Jugan Residence of the Poor, 
Pawtucket, Rhode Island, for tuck pointing and roof replacement 
of the building;
    $500,000 for the Urban League of Rhode Island, Providence, 
Rhode Island, for construction of an addition to its South 
Providence Neighborhood Center;
    $300,000 for Crossroads Rhode Island, North Kingstown, 
Rhode Island, for renovation of the affordable housing 
development located on Navy Drive;
    $200,000 for Coventry Friends of Human Services, Coventry, 
Rhode Island, for renovations and construction to the Coventry 
CARES Community Center;
    $500,000 for the construction of a Trade Training Center in 
Las Vegas, Nevada;
    $300,000 for Opportunity Village in Las Vegas, Nevada for 
construction of an Employment and Training Center;
    $250,000 for the city of Reno, Nevada for construction of 
the Community Assistance Center;
    $300,000 for Washoe County, Nevada for construction of a 
senior center;
    $250,000 for the city of Las Vegas, Nevada for improvements 
to the Fifth Street School;
    $200,000 for the city of Sparks, Nevada for construction of 
the West End Community Center;
    $200,000 for the city of North Las Vegas, Nevada for 
construction of a multi-generational recreation facility;
    $200,000 for the city and county of Denver, Colorado 
Homeless Veterans Supportive Housing Project;
    $200,000 for the Gateway Park at the Historic Arkansas 
Riverwalk of Pueblo, Colorado;
    $200,000 for the Old Blair Auditorium Community Center 
renovation project, Silver Spring, Maryland;
    $200,000 for the facility improvements and training for the 
Baltimore Child Abuse Center, Baltimore, Maryland;
    $200,000 for the Points North Housing Coalition, Watertown, 
New York to establish emergency housing for at risk families;
    $200,000 for the Fordham University Regional Science 
Center, Bronx, New York for the art science center that will 
serve the Bronx and lower Westchester communities;
    $200,000 for the Syracuse Area Landmark Theater, Syracuse, 
New York for the reconstruction and expansion of the historic 
theater;
    $200,000 for the Hudson Valley Community College Model 
Automotive Dealership, Troy, New York for a new building for 
intraining auto technicians;
    $200,000 for the Catholic Family Center, Rochester, New 
York Ways to Work Program providing small loans for automobile 
purchase or repair to help low-income families access 
employment, school, and day care facilities;
    $600,000 for expansion of The United Way Training Center in 
Detroit, Michigan;
    $500,000 for development and expansion of the TechTown 
Training and Business Technology Incubator in Detroit, 
Michigan;
    $200,000 for the Housing Commission of Muskegon Heights, 
Michigan for its Neighborhood Networks Initiative;
    $250,000 for Saginaw, Michigan for renovations of abandoned 
buildings;
    $250,000 for Presbyterian Villages of Michigan of 
Southfield, Michigan for facility renovations;
    $800,000 for the city of Portland, Oregon for the Regional 
Bridges to Housing Program.
    The Neighborhood Initiative Programs awards are as follows:
    $1,000,000 for the city of Fulton, Mississippi for economic 
development;
    $500,000 to the Self Reliance Network to support the 
National Hispanic Financial Literacy and Homeownership 
Initiative;
    $2,750,000 for West Virginia University to complete the 
development of a facility to house forensic science research 
and academic programs;
    $1,000,000 for economic development and infrastructure 
activities in Mingo County, West Virginia;
    $1,000,000 for the development of Camp Barnabas, Barry 
County, Missouri, for the construction and equipment necessary 
for handicap accessible housing for children with special 
needs;
    $325,000 for research Examining Policy Options to Increase 
Minority Homeownership and Eradicate Urban Poverty at the 
University of Missouri, St. Louis;
    $675,000 for construction and equipment needs at 
Morningstar Youth and Family Life Center, Jackson County, 
Missouri, for construction and equipment needs.

         COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT LOAN GUARANTEES PROGRAM ACCOUNT

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      Limitation on
                                     guaranteed loans    Program costs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2006..............       $137,500,000         $2,970,000
Budget estimate, 2007.............  .................  .................
                                           ..........         ..........
House allowance...................  .................          2,970,000
                                           ..........
Committee recommendation..........        137,500,000          3,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    Section 108 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 
1974, as amended, authorizes the Secretary to issue Federal 
loan guarantees of private market loans used by entitlement and 
non-entitlement communities to cover the costs of acquiring 
real property, rehabilitation of publicly owned real property, 
housing rehabilitation, and other economic development 
activities.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,000,000 for 
program costs associated with the section 108 loan guarantee 
program. This amount is $30,000 above the fiscal year 2006 
enacted level and $3,000,000 more than the budget request. The 
administration recommended no funding for this program. While 
the program has had an uneven history, it does afford some 
communities the ability to leverage private capital for large 
projects through a pledge of future CDBG funds.
    Of the funds provided, $3,000,000 is for credit subsidy 
costs to guarantee $137,500,000 in section 108 loan commitments 
in fiscal year 2007, and $750,000 is for administrative 
expenses to be transferred to the salaries and expenses 
account.

                       BROWNFIELDS REDEVELOPMENT

Appropriations, 2006....................................      $9,900,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................................
House allowance.........................................................
Committee recommendation................................................

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    Section 108(q) of the Housing and Community Development Act 
of 1974, as amended, authorizes the Brownfields Redevelopment 
program. This 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 program supports 
the cleanup and economic redevelopment of contaminated sites.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends no funding for this program. This 
amount is $9,900,000 less than the fiscal year 2006 enacted 
level and the same as the budget request. The administration 
requested no funding for this program. While this program has 
been instrumental in the redevelopment of many communities, 
funds have been made available for a similar program through 
the Environmental Protection Agency.

                  home investment partnerships program


                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2006....................................  $1,757,250,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................   1,916,640,000
House allowance.........................................   1,916,640,000
Committee recommendation................................   1,941,640,000

                          program description

    Title II of the National Affordable Housing Act, as 
amended, authorizes the HOME Investment Partnerships Program. 
This program provides assistance to States and units of local 
government for the purpose of expanding the supply and 
affordability of housing to low- and very low-income people. 
Eligible activities include tenant-based rental assistance, 
acquisition, and rehabilitation of affordable rental and 
ownership housing and, also, construction of housing. To 
participate in the HOME program, State and local governments 
must develop a comprehensive housing affordability strategy. 
There is a 25 percent matching requirement for participating 
jurisdictions which can be reduced or eliminated if they are 
experiencing fiscal distress. Funding for the American Dream 
Downpayment Assistance initiative is also provided through the 
HOME program. This initiative provides downpayment assistance 
to low income families to help them achieve homeownership.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,916,640,000 
for the HOME Investment Partnerships Program, including 
$25,000,000 for the American Dream Downpyment Fund. This amount 
is $184,390,000 more than the fiscal year 2006 enacted level 
and $25,000,000 more than the budget request.
    The Committee includes $9,000,000 for technical assistance, 
the same amount as provided in fiscal year 2006. Of this 
amount, $2,700,000 is for qualified nonprofit intermediaries to 
provide technical assistance to Community Housing and 
Development Organizations [CHDOs]. The remaining $6,300,000 is 
for intermediaries to provide technical assistance to HOME 
participating jurisdictions. The Committee objects to any 
proposal by the Department that ties the use of HOME funds for 
homeownership to the allocation of funds under the American 
Dream Downpayment Fund.
    The Committee includes $25,000,000 for the administration's 
American Dream Downpayment Fund [ADDF]. The Committee supports 
expanding homeownership opportunities, but is concerned that 
this program may be helping families with excessive credit risk 
and who may not be the best candidates for homeownership. The 
Committee requests that HUD report to the House and Senate 
Committees on Appropriations on the rate of default by those in 
the program as well as the numbers of participants who have 
missed their mortgage payments by 30 days, by 60 days and by 90 
days and/or who have received some form of relief to keep their 
mortgages current. This report is due no later than July 31, 
2006 and shall be repeated annually.
    In addition the Committee notes that GAO-06-677 report 
cites several weakness in the ADDF, including large unexpended 
balances since the programs inception and HUD's inability to 
segregate ADDF funding from non-ADDF funding as required to 
measure performance.
    Of the amount provided for the HOME program, $42,000,000 is 
for housing counseling assistance. The Committee does not fund 
housing assistance counseling in a new account, as proposed by 
the administration. The Committee views homeownership 
counseling, including pre- and post-purchase counseling, as an 
essential part of successful homeownership. The Committee 
expects that this program will remain available to those 
participating in all HUD's homeownership programs. The 
Committee continues to urge HUD to utilize this program as a 
means of educating homebuyers on the dangers of predatory 
lending, in addition to the administration's stated purpose of 
expanding homeownership opportunities.

                  SELF-HELP AND ASSISTED HOMEOWNERSHIP

Appropriations, 2006....................................     $60,390,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................      39,700,000
House allowance.........................................      60,390,000
Committee recommendation................................      66,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    Self-Help Homeownership Opportunity Program [SHOP] funds 
assist low-income homebuyers willing to contribute ``sweat 
equity'' toward the construction of their houses. The funds 
will increase nonprofit organization's ability to leverage 
funds from other sources and produce at least 2,000 new 
homeownership units. In 2006, SHOP became a separate account. 
SHOP was previously funded as a set-aside within the Community 
Development Fund.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $66,000,000 for the Self Help and 
Assisted Homeownership Program which is $5,610,000 more than 
the fiscal year 2006 enacted level and $26,300,000 more than 
the budget request. The budget request did not propose any 
funding in this account beyond the Self-Help Homeownership 
Opportunity Program. The Committee has included funding for 
additional programs to enhance affordable housing though 
capacity building to maximize Federal investments. The 
Committee has provided $35,000,000 for capacity building. Set-
asides include $3,500,000 for the Housing Assistance Council; 
$2,000,000 for the National American Indian Council; $2,500,000 
for the National Council of La Raza; $31,000,000 for LISC and 
Enterprise Foundation; $4,000,000 for Habitat for Humanity 
International.

                       HOMELESS ASSISTANCE GRANTS

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2006....................................  $1,326,600,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................   1,535,990,000
House allowance.........................................   1,535,990,000
Committee recommendation................................   1,511,190,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Homeless Assistance Grants Program provides funding to 
break the cycle of homelessness and to move homeless persons 
and families to permanent housing. This is done by providing 
rental assistance, emergency shelter, transitional and 
permanent housing, and supportive services to homeless persons 
and families. The emergency grant is a formula funded grant 
program, while the supportive housing, section 8 moderate 
rehabilitation single-room occupancy program and the shelter 
plus care programs are competitive grants. Homeless assistance 
grants provide Federal support to one of the Nation's most 
vulnerable populations. These grants assist localities in 
addressing the housing and service needs of a wide variety of 
homeless populations while developing coordinated Continuum of 
Care [CoC] systems that ensure the support necessary to help 
those who are homeless to attain housing and move toward self-
sufficiency.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $1,511,190,000 for homeless 
assistance grants. This amount is $184,590,000 above the fiscal 
year 2006 enacted level and $24,800,000 below the budget 
request. Of the amount provided, $285,000,000 is to fund fully 
Shelter Plus Care renewals on an annual basis, $10,395,000 is 
for technical assistance and data analysis, and $2,475,000 is 
for the Department's working capital fund. Bill language also 
is included that (1) requires not less than 30 percent of the 
funds appropriated, excluding renewal costs, for permanent 
housing; (2) requires the renewal of all expiring Shelter Plus 
Care contracts on an annual basis if the contract meets certain 
requirements; (3) requires a 25 percent match for social 
services; and (4) requires all homeless funding recipients to 
coordinate and integrate their programs with other mainstream 
and targeted social programs. No funding is provided for the 
Prisoner Re-Entry initiative due to budget constraints.
    The Committee continues to be committed to ending chronic 
homelessness over 10 years and supports the President's stated 
goal of achieving this goal by 2012. To that end, the Committee 
supports Federal, State, and local efforts to increase the 
supply of permanent housing until the need of an estimated 
150,000 units is met. Accordingly, the Committee again includes 
bill language that requires the Department to spend a minimum 
of 30 percent of funds appropriated under this account for 
permanent housing. This set-aside has been critical in re-
balancing the homeless assistance account so that more 
permanent housing is being developed. Prior to the 
establishment of this set-aside, a small portion of homeless 
assistance was being used for permanent housing. Research and 
anecdotal results clearly indicate that permanent housing is a 
critical component of ending homelessness among all types of 
homeless people. Cities that have seized the opportunity to 
develop more permanent housing have begun to see concrete 
results in the form of less chronic homelessness, among 
individuals and families with disabilities, veterans and 
others.
    To assist States and localities create more permanent 
housing, the Committee supports the Department's request to use 
technical assistance funding to address capital financing 
issues.
    The Committee appreciates the Department's sustained 
commitment to meeting the needs of homeless families. Although 
one-third of homeless people are members of homeless families, 
about half of the persons served by HUD homeless programs are 
members of homeless families. This demonstrates that, while the 
Department has placed an emphasis on chronic homelessness, it 
has continued to address the needs of homeless families.
    The Committee also continues to support an effort begun in 
2001 that charged the Department with collecting homeless data 
through the implementation of a new Homeless Management 
Information System [HMIS]. The Department has recently begun 
collecting data on the Nation's homeless population and 
developing annual reports through an Annual Homeless Assessment 
Report [AHAR] through the HMIS. Further, the Committee supports 
the Department's efforts to ensure participation of HMIS 
through financing and other incentives. Nevertheless, the 
Committee continues to believe that the Department must ensure 
full participation by all grantees in the HMIS effort and 
ensure that grantees and interested stakeholders fully 
understand the importance of this effort and that adequate 
protections are in place for homeless people. Due to the 
Committee's continued interest in the Department's data 
collection and analysis efforts, the Committee again directs 
HUD to report on its progress by no later than March 23, 2007.
    The Committee also reiterates the directive included in the 
conference report for the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2005 
(House Report 108-792) regarding out-year costs of renewing 
HUD's permanent housing programs. Therefore, the Department 
should continue to include 5-year projects, on an annual basis, 
for the cost of renewing the permanent housing component of the 
Supportive Housing program and the Shelter Plus Care program in 
its fiscal year 2008 budget justifications.

                            Housing Programs


                        HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2006....................................    $734,580,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................     545,490,000
House allowance.........................................     746,580,000
Committee recommendation................................     750,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    This account provides funding for housing for the elderly 
under section 202. Under this program, the Department provides 
capital grants to eligible entities for the acquisition, 
rehabilitation, or construction of housing for seniors.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $750,000,000 
for the section 202 program, an increase of $15,420,000 over 
the fiscal year 2006 level and an increase of $204,510,000 over 
the budget request. Of these funds, $59,400,000 is for service 
coordinators and for the continuation of existing congregate 
service grants; up to $24,750,000 for the conversion of 
projects to assisted living housing for substantial 
rehabilitation an for emergency capital repairs; $20,000,000 
for grants to nonprofits for architectural and engineering 
work, site control and planning activities. The Committee also 
includes $1,980,000 for the Working Capital Fund.
    According to a 2003 GAO report, section 202 has reached 
only 8 percent of very low income elderly households. The 
Committee believes that greater resources should be devoted to 
the section 202 program and continues to encourage the 
Department to make this program more of a priority, including 
better targeting to extremely low-income elderly households. 
Further, the Department needs to facilitate the construction of 
section 202 projects. Finally, many of the existing 202 units 
have serious repair needs that are not being adequately 
addressed by the Department.

                 HOUSING FOR PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2006....................................    $236,610,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................     118,800,000
House allowance.........................................     239,610,000
Committee recommendation................................     240,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    This account provides funding for housing for the persons 
with disabilities under section 811. Under this program, the 
Department provides capital grants to eligible entities for the 
acquisition, rehabilitation, or construction of housing for 
persons with disabilities. Up to 25 percent of the funding may 
be made available for tenant-based assistance under section 8.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $240,000,000 
for the section 811 program, an increase of $3,390,000 over the 
fiscal year 2006 level and $121,200,000 over the budget 
request. HUD is directed to ensure that all tenant-based 
assistance made available under this account shall remain 
available for persons with disabilities upon turnover. The 
Committee has limited the amount of funds that may be used for 
incremental section 8 vouchers to $5,000,000. In addition, 
section 811 funds may be used for inspections by HUD's Real 
Estate Assessment Center [REAC] and for related inspection 
activities. HUD is directed to submit a budget to the House and 
Senate Committees on Appropriations before funding any REAC 
inspections. The Committee also includes $990,000 for the 
Working Capitol Fund.

                    OTHER ASSISTED HOUSING PROGRAMS

                       RENTAL HOUSING ASSISTANCE

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    This account provides amendment funding for housing 
assisted under a variety of HUD housing programs.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $24,750,000 for HUD-assisted, 
State-aided, non-insured rental housing projects.

                         FLEXIBLE SUBSIDY FUND

                          (TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968 authorized 
HUD to establish a revolving fund for the collection of rents 
in excess of the established basic rents for section 236 
projects. Subject to appropriations, HUD is authorized to 
transfer excess rent collection received after 1978 to the 
Flexible Subsidy Fund.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends that the account continue to serve 
as the repository for the excess rental charges appropriated 
from the Rental Housing Assistance Fund; these funds will 
continue to offset flexible subsidy outlays and other 
discretionary expenditures to support affordable housing 
projects. The language is designed to allow surplus funds in 
excess of allowable rent levels to be returned to project 
owners only for purposes of the rehabilitation and renovation 
of projects.

                  MANUFACTURED HOUSING FEES TRUST FUND

Appropriations, 2006....................................     $13,000,000
Budget request, 2007....................................      16,000,000
House allowance.........................................      16,000,000
Committee recommendation................................      16,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The National Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety 
Standards Act of 1974, as amended by the Manufactured Housing 
Improvement Act of 2000, authorizes 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.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $16,000,000 to support the 
manufactured housing standards programs to be derived from fees 
collected and deposited in the Manufactured Housing Fees Trust 
Fund account. The amount recommended is the same as the budget 
request and $3,000,000 more than the fiscal year 2006 enacted 
level.
    The Committee thanks the Department for submitting line-
item expenses for the manufactured housing program in its 
proposed fiscal year 2007 budget request, and encourages the 
HUD to continue doing so in its future budgets. In addition, 
the Committee encourages HUD to continue to prioritize its 
expenditures for this program in accordance with the 
appropriate sections of the Manufactured Housing Improvement 
Act of 2000.

                     federal housing administration


               mutual mortgage insurance program account


                     (INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Limitation on       Limitation on      Administrative
                                                         direct loans      guaranteed loans        expenses
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2006................................         $50,000,000    $185,000,000,000        $351,450,000
Budget estimate, 2007...............................          50,000,000     185,000,000,000         351,450,000
House allowance.....................................          50,000,000     185,000,000,000         351,450,000
Committee recommendation............................          50,000,000     185,000,000,000         351,450,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                general and special risk program account


                     (INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Limitation on     Limitation on     Administrative
                                           direct loans     guaranteed loans      expenses        Program costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2006...................       $50,000,000    $35,000,000,000      $229,086,000        $8,712,000
Budget estimate, 2007..................        50,000,000     35,000,000,000       229,086,000         8,600,000
House allowance........................        50,000,000     35,000,000,000       229,086,000         8,600,000
Committee recommendation...............        50,000,000     35,000,000,000       229,086,000         8,600,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          program description

    The Federal Housing Administration [FHA] fund covers the 
mortgage and loan insurance activity of about 40 HUD mortgage/
loan insurance programs which are grouped into the mutual 
mortgage insurance [MMI] fund, cooperative management housing 
insurance [CMHI] fund, general insurance fund [GI] fund, and 
the special risk insurance [SRI] fund. For presentation and 
accounting control purposes, these are divided into two sets of 
accounts based on shared characteristics. The unsubsidized 
insurance programs of the mutual mortgage insurance fund and 
the cooperative management housing insurance fund constitute 
one set; and the general risk insurance and special risk 
insurance funds, which are partially composed of subsidized 
programs, make up the other.
    The amounts for administrative expenses are to be 
transferred from appropriations made in the FHA program 
accounts to the HUD ``Salaries and expenses'' accounts. 
Additionally, funds are also appropriated for administrative 
contract expenses for FHA activities.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee has included the following amounts for the 
``Mutual Mortgage Insurance Program'' account: a limitation on 
guaranteed loans of $185,000,000,000, a limitation on direct 
loans of $50,000,000, and an appropriation of $351,450,000 for 
administrative expenses. For the GI/SRI account, the Committee 
recommends $35,000,000,000 as a limitation on guaranteed loans, 
a limitation on direct loans of $50,000,000, and $229,086,000 
for administrative expenses, of which $347,490,000 shall be 
transferred to HUD ``Salaries and Expenses'', up to $3,960,000 
shall be transferred to the Office of the Inspector General, 
and $23,562,000 shall be transferred to the Working Capital 
Fund.
    In addition, the Committee directs HUD to continue direct 
loan programs in 2007 for multifamily bridge loans and single 
family purchase money mortgages to finance the sale of certain 
properties owned by the Department. Temporary financing shall 
be provided for the acquisition and rehabilitation of 
multifamily projects by purchasers who have obtained 
commitments for permanent financing from another lender. 
Purchase money mortgages will enable governmental and nonprofit 
intermediaries to acquire properties for resale to owner-
occupants in areas undergoing revitalization.
    HUD has submitting a number of initiatives designed to 
reform FHA mortgage insurance and allow HUD to begin to regain 
some market share while also attracting borrowers with positive 
credit ratings. In part, the intent of the legislation is to 
balance the adverse pool of borrowers who have come to 
characterize the FHA MMIF with FHA homeowners with better 
credit ratings and who pose less risk. Unfortunately, it is not 
clear that the legislation includes the necessary reforms that 
will allow HUD to compete in the housing marketplace without 
being subject to increased financial risk to the FHA MMIF as 
well as significant fraud and abuse. For example, HUD still 
intends to pursue products such as the Zero Downpayment program 
which would allow a homebuyer to use FHA mortgage insurance to 
purchase a home without any downpayment.
    As noted last year, the Zero Downpayment program, where all 
fees and costs are rolled into the mortgage, is a major policy 
change that generates receipts but poses substantial financial 
risks to the FHA Single Family program--this is a 100 percent 
loan guarantee where realtors and bankers have no disincentive 
against placing high-risk families in homes. New homeowners 
also would have no stake in these homes in the event of 
financial hardship as they also would have limited or no 
ability to pay for any big ticket costs such as a failed 
furnace or leaky roof. From a historical perspective, a similar 
policy almost bankrupted FHA in the late 1980s and economically 
hurt neighborhoods because large numbers of defaults in 
marginal neighborhoods often result in diminished property 
values for the entire neighborhood. Recent audits of the FHA 
Mutual Mortgage Insurance Fund have indicated that these 
policies likely would undermine the long-term financial 
soundness of the fund. For example, the HUD IG audit of FHA's 
financial statements for fiscal years 2004 and 2003 demonstrate 
a substantial increase in the default rate over the last 5 
years from 2.99 percent in fiscal year 2000 to 6.9 percent in 
fiscal year 2004. Moreover, claims have increased from some 
$5,500,000,000 in fiscal year 2000 to some $8,500,000,000 in 
fiscal year 2004, a 54 percent increase while insurance-in-
force decreased 13 percent to $430,000,000 during the same 
period. FHA is clearly becoming a lender of last resort, taking 
on the most risky mortgages, especially those likely to 
default.
    More recently, FHA's share of the market dropped 40 percent 
in fiscal year 2005--FHA's home sales were 4.3 percent for 
fiscal year 2005 compared with 7.6 percent in fiscal year 2004. 
In addition, home sales for the entire market were up 7 percent 
in fiscal year 2005. FHA endorsements dropped 46.7 percent in 
fiscal year 2005 and insurance-in-force dropped 13 percent in 
fiscal year 2005. Default rates increased to 6.36 percent in 
fiscal year 2005, compared to 6.13 percent in fiscal year 2004.
    While the Committee supports reform, it must be handled 
carefully. There must be controls in the law that minimize 
fraud and risk of loss. The Committee supports a balancing of 
the risk based on the creditworthiness of the homebuyer. 
However, there needs to be firm benchmarks and guidelines that 
ensure HUD does not remain the lender of last resort where its 
FHA mortgage pools are primarily made up of the most adverse 
credit risks in the marketplace. As a result, the Committee is 
very concerned that the proposed legislation does not include 
the necessary safeguards. In addition, the Committee is 
concerned that homebuyers with sub-prime loans will seek to 
refinance their debt through FHA. Clearly, these homeowners 
represent the greatest risk for default and loss to the MMIF 
and HUD is directed to develop safeguards to limit exposure of 
financial risk.
    The Committee is disappointed with HUD's endorsement of the 
Nehemiah program whereby certain nonprofits help homebuyers 
with downpayment assistance where the downpayment assistance 
does not meet FHA requirements of being a ``boni-fide gift''. 
In these cases, the nonprofit is being reimbursed by the 
property seller. A recent GAO audit was very critical of this 
practice, concluding that ``Nehemiah'' assistance from a seller 
financed nonprofit raised the claim rate 81 percent relative to 
similar loans with no assistance.
    The Committee again advises that HUD should assist in the 
education of potential homebuyers who plan to use FHA mortgage 
insurance as part of the purchase process. While the 
requirements for an appraisal are clear, HUD needs to educate 
homebuyers regarding the value of requiring a home inspection 
before a purchase is complete. In too many cases, homebuyers 
waive this option, thus exposing them to unforeseen and 
unexpected physical deficiencies in the purchased home. This 
especially is troubling with moderate- and low-income 
homebuyers who barely have enough funds to close on the house. 
Without a home inspection, these purchasers may find themselves 
responsible for such high-cost items as a new roof, furnace or 
other significant structural liabilities. In these cases, the 
cost to repair the home and pay for the mortgage may far exceed 
the financial ability of the homebuyer, thus putting the home 
at risk of foreclosure.
    The Committee is deeply concerned with the proposed 
increase in the annual premium charged for most multifamily 
loan guarantees in the fiscal year 2007 request. The stated 
rationale for this substantial premium increase is to offset 
administrative costs associated with these programs. This 
appears disingenuous since the CBO has scored the net increase 
of revenue at $70,000,000. However no detailed explanation has 
been given for the amount of this premium increase, its likely 
adverse effect on loan volume and affordable rental housing 
production, or the resulting rent increases necessary to cover 
the cost of the higher premium payments. Moreover, the Federal 
Credit Reform Act of 1990 specifically mandates that 
administrative costs associated with loan guarantee programs be 
paid from discretionary appropriations rather than being 
reflected in the credit programs financing.
    The Committee sees no merit in the administration's 
argument that these mortgage insurance premiums should be 
raised because these programs have not clearly demonstrated 
effectiveness in meeting affordable housing goals. Raising 
program costs can only diminish the contribution of these 
programs in expanding lower cost housing opportunities. In the 
face of the growing nationwide shortage of affordable housing, 
imposing further constraints on FHA rental housing development 
makes little sense. Further, the Committee believes that this 
action will drive the better quality projects to other sources 
of financing, thus causing an increase in the loss ratio for 
the FHA program in the long term.
    The proposed mortgage insurance premium increase reverses 
the previous policy of the administration to work toward the 
lowest premium allowable while still enabling FHA to offer this 
rental housing financing at no cost to the taxpayers. For the 
largest moderate income rental housing development program 
offered by FHA, the proposed premium represents more than a 71 
percent increase in annual cost. Very substantial premium 
increases would also be levied against the FHA nursing home and 
hospital financing programs.
    Given the very substantial size of the premium increase and 
the abrupt reversal of the underlying policy of the Department 
in setting these premiums, the Committee believes strongly that 
full notice and comment rulemaking would be the only 
appropriate mechanism to pursue prior to implementing this 
proposal. The failure of the Department to do this represents a 
serious breach with congressional policy. Such administrative 
procedures would accord FHA industry partners, including 
lenders, developers, and builders, an opportunity to comment on 
the proposal. It would also permit a full assessment of the 
likely impact of such a premium increase on the volume of 
multifamily rental housing development, and the consequential 
effects of higher financing costs on rents borne by moderate 
income residents.
    Therefore, the Department is directed to submit to the 
appropriate Committees of Congress a thorough assessment of the 
potential adverse effects of the proposed premiums structure, 
including the evaluation of alternatives such as utilizing 
negative subsidy and program revenues to cover administrative 
costs, before proceeding with implementation of the fee 
increases proposed in the budget. The Committee further directs 
that prior to increasing the mortgage insurance premiums the 
formula used for determining credit subsidy should be reviewed 
and revised to more heavily weight experience since 1990 when 
improvements in underwriting were implemented by FHA. The 
current formula appears to be extremely conservative in the 
context of recent experience, and, we believe the current 
mortgage insurance premium levels would generate significant 
negative credit subsidy without the proposed increase.

                Government National Mortgage Association


guarantees of mortgage-backed securities loan guarantee program account


                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2006:

    Limitation on guaranteed loans

                                                        $200,000,000,000

    Administrative expenses

                                                              10,700,000

Budget estimate, 2007:

    Limitation on guaranteed loans

                                                         100,000,000,000

    Administrative expenses

                                                              10,700,000

House allowance:

    Limitation on guaranteed loans

                                                         100,000,000,000

    Administrative expenses

                                                              10,700,000

Committee recommendation:

    Limitation on guaranteed loans

                                                         100,000,000,000
    Administrative expenses
                                                              10,700,000

                          program description

    The Government National Mortgage Association [GNMA], 
through the mortgage-backed securities program, guarantees 
privately issued securities backed by pools of mortgages. GNMA 
is a wholly owned corporate instrumentality of the United 
States within the Department. Its powers are prescribed 
generally by title III of the National Housing Act, as amended. 
GNMA is authorized by section 306(g) of the act to guarantee 
the timely payment of principal and interest on securities that 
are based on and backed by a trust, or pool, composed of 
mortgages that are guaranteed and insured by the Federal 
Housing Administration, the Rural Housing Service, or the 
Department of Veterans Affairs. GNMA's guarantee of mortgage-
backed securities is backed by the full faith and credit of the 
United States.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends a limitation on new commitments of 
mortgage-backed securities of $100,000,000,000. This amount is 
the same level as proposed by the budget request and 
$100,000,000,000 less than the fiscal year 2006 level. The 
Committee also has included $10,700,000 for administrative 
expenses, the same as the budget request and the fiscal year 
2006 enacted level.

                    Policy Development and Research


                        research and technology

Appropriations, 2006....................................     $55,787,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................      68,360,000
House allowance.........................................      55,787,000
Committee recommendation................................      60,000,000

                          program description

    Title V of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1970, 
as amended, directs the Secretary of the Department of Housing 
and Urban Development to undertake programs of research, 
evaluation, and reports relating to the Department's mission 
and programs. These functions are carried out internally and 
through grants and contracts with industry, nonprofit research 
organizations, educational institutions, and through agreements 
with State and local governments and other Federal agencies. 
The research programs seek ways to improve the efficiency, 
effectiveness, and equity of HUD programs and to identify 
methods to achieve cost reductions. Additionally, this 
appropriation is used to support HUD evaluation and monitoring 
activities and to conduct housing surveys.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends $60,000,000 for research and 
technology activities in fiscal year 2007. This amount is 
$4,213,000 more than the fiscal year 2006 enacted level and 
$8,360,000 below the budget request. Of this funding, 
$5,000,000 is for the Partnership for Advancing Technologies in 
Housing [PATH] program. Language is included to ensure the 
funding of existing cooperative agreements in fiscal year 2006. 
The Committee expects the PATH program to continue its cold 
climate housing research with the Cold Climate Housing Research 
Center in Fairbanks, Alaska. The Committee also supports the 
continuing research on promising technologies for the 
manufactured housing industry.
    In addition, because in the past HUD has used this office's 
broad authority to administer new and unauthorized programs, 
the Office of Policy Development and Research is denied 
demonstration authority except where approval is provided by 
Congress in response to a reprogramming request.

                   Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity


                        fair housing activities

Appropriations, 2006....................................     $45,540,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................      44,550,000
House allowance.........................................      44,550,000
Committee recommendation................................      44,550,000

                          program description

    The fair housing activities appropriation includes funding 
for both the Fair Housing Assistance Program [FHAP] and the 
Fair Housing Initiatives Program [FHIP].
    The Fair Housing Assistance Program helps State and local 
agencies to implement title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 
1968, as amended, which prohibits discrimination in the sale, 
rental, and financing of housing and in the provision of 
brokerage services. The major objective of the program is to 
assure prompt and effective processing of title VIII complaints 
with appropriate remedies for complaints by State and local 
fair housing agencies.
    The Fair Housing Initiatives Program is authorized by 
section 561 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 
1987, as amended, and by section 905 of the Housing and 
Community Development Act of 1992. This initiative is designed 
to alleviate housing discrimination by increasing support to 
public and private organizations for the purpose of eliminating 
or preventing discrimination in housing, and to enhance fair 
housing opportunities.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommendation provides $44,550,000, of which 
$19,800,000 is for the fair housing assistance program [FHAP] 
and no more than $24,759,000 is for the fair housing 
initiatives program [FHIP]. The total is $990,000 more than the 
fiscal year 2006 enacted level and the same as the budget 
request.
    The Committee emphasizes that State and local agencies 
under FHAP should have the primary responsibility for 
identifying and addressing discrimination in the sale, rental, 
and financing of housing and in the provision of brokerage 
services. It is critical that consistent fair housing policies 
be identified and implemented to insure continuity and 
fairness, and that States and localities continue to increase 
their understanding, expertise, and implementation of the law.

                     Office of Lead Hazard Control


                         LEAD HAZARD REDUCTION

Appropriations, 2006....................................    $150,480,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................     114,840,000
House allowance.........................................     149,840,000
Committee recommendation................................     152,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    Title X of the Housing and Community Development Act of 
1992 established the Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard 
Reduction Act under which HUD is authorized to make grants to 
States, localities and native American tribes to conduct lead-
based paint hazard reduction and abatement activities in 
private low-income housing. This has become a significant 
health hazard, especially for children. According to the 
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC], some 434,000 
children have elevated blood levels, down from 1.7 million in 
the late 1980's. Despite this improvement, lead poisoning 
remains a serious childhood environmental condition, with some 
2.2 percent of all children aged 1 to 5 years having elevated 
blood lead levels. This percentage is much higher for low-
income children living in older housing.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $152,000,000 for lead-based paint 
hazard reduction and abatement activities for fiscal year 2007. 
This amount is $37,160,000 more than the budget request and 
$1,520,000 more than the fiscal year 2006 enacted level. Of 
this amount, HUD may use up to $9,000,000 for the Healthy Homes 
Initiative under which HUD conducts a number of activities 
designed to identify and address housing-related illnesses.
    The Committee recommends $48,000,000 for the lead hazard 
reduction demonstration program which was established in fiscal 
year 2003 to focus on major urban areas where children are 
disproportionately at risk for lead poisoning.
    As previously discussed, there remains significant lead 
risks in privately owned housing, particularly in unsubsidized 
low-income units. For that reason, approximately 1 million 
children under the age of 6 in the United States suffer from 
lead poisoning. While lead poisoning crosses all socioeconomic, 
geographic, and racial boundaries, the burden of this disease 
falls disproportionately on low-income and minority families. 
In the United States, children from poor families are eight 
times more likely to be poisoned than those from higher income 
families. Nevertheless, the risks associated with lead-based 
paint hazards can be addressed fully over the next decade.
    As noted last year, the urban lead hazard reduction program 
is designed to target funding to major urban areas where the 
lead hazard risk for low-income children under the age of 6 is 
greatest. Qualified applicants are identified by the Secretary 
as having the highest number of pre-1940 units of rental 
housing and a disproportionately high number of documented 
cases of lead-poisoned children. At least 90 percent of funds 
must be used for abatement and interim control of lead-based 
paint hazards. Further, the program targets abatement to units 
that serve low-income families. As a condition of assistance, 
each applicant shall submit a detailed plan for use of funds 
that demonstrates sufficient capacity acceptable to the 
Secretary of Housing and Urban Development. The plans should 
identify units with the most significant risk, and should 
include strategies to reduce the risk of lead hazards and to 
mobilize public and private resources. The Committee fully 
expects that this program will be administered in a manner 
consistent with the guidelines and criteria used in the fiscal 
year 2003 and 2004 funding cycles.
    The Committee also encourages HUD to work with grantees on 
its lead-based paint abatement hazards programs so that 
information is disclosed to the public on lead hazard 
abatements, risk assessment data and blood lead levels through 
publications and internet sites such as Lead-SafeHomes.info.

                     Management and Administration


                         salaries and expenses


                     (INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

                                                                [In thousands of dollars]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                            Indian
                                                                                      FHA      GNMA      CDBG    Title VI   housing   Native
                                                                    Appropriation    funds     funds     funds   transfer    block   Hawaiian    Total
                                                                                                                             grant     loan
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2006..............................................      573,210     562,400    10,700       750       150       250        35  1,147,495
Budget estimate, 2007.............................................      594,000     556,776    10,593  ........       148       248        35  1,157,800
House allowance...................................................      493,240     556,776    10,700  ........       149       248        35  1,061,148
Committee recommendation..........................................      594,000     556,776    10,700       750       149       248        35  1,156,658
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          program description

    The ``Salaries and expenses'' account finances all salaries 
and related expenses associated with administering the programs 
of the Department of Housing and Urban Development. These 
include the following activities:
    Housing and Mortgage Credit Programs.--This activity 
includes staff salaries and related expenses associated with 
administering housing programs, the implementation of consumer 
protection activities in the areas of interstate land sales, 
mobile home construction and safety, and real estate settlement 
procedures.
    Community Planning and Development Programs.--Funds in this 
activity are for staff salaries and expenses necessary to 
administer community planning and development programs.
    Equal Opportunity and Research Programs.--This activity 
includes salaries and related expenses associated with 
implementing equal opportunity programs in housing and 
employment as required by law and Executive orders and the 
administration of research programs and demonstrations.
    Departmental Management, Legal, and Audit Services.--This 
activity includes a variety of general functions required for 
the Department's overall administration and management. These 
include the Office of the Secretary, Office of General Counsel, 
Office of Chief Financial Officer, as well as administrative 
support in such areas as accounting, personnel management, 
contracting and procurement, and office services.
    Field Direction and Administration.--This activity includes 
salaries and expenses for the regional administrators, area 
office managers, and their staff who are responsible for the 
direction, supervision, and performance of the Department's 
field offices, as well as administrative support in areas such 
as accounting, personnel management, contracting and 
procurement, and office services.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,156,658,000 
for salaries and expenses. This amount is $9,163,000 more than 
the fiscal year 2006 enacted level and $1,142,000 less than the 
budget request. The appropriation includes the requested amount 
of $550,766,000 transferred from various funds from the Federal 
Housing Administration, $10,700,000 transferred from the 
Government National Mortgage Association, $247,500 from the 
Indian Housing Loan Guarantee Fund Program, $148,500 from the 
Native American Housing Block Grant, and $35,000 from the 
Native Hawaiian Housing Program as well as $750,000 from the 
Community Development Loan Guarantee program, which the 
administration sought to eliminate.
    The Committee remains concerned about HUD's ability to 
administer its programs and place staff where most needed. 
Therefore, the Committee directs HUD to report quarterly to the 
House and Senate Committees on Appropriations on all hiring 
within the Department, including justifications for any 
significant increase in FTEs for any particular office or 
activity.
    In addition, the Department is prohibited from employing 
more than 77 schedule C and 20 noncareer senior executive 
service employees. The Committee understands that the 
Department is staffed largely by personnel who are close to 
retirement and at the top of the civil service pay schedule. 
The Committee encourages HUD to implement hiring practices that 
result in the hiring of young professionals who can gain 
experience and advancement.
    The Committee directs the Department to issue quarterly 
reports on HUD travel to the Senate Committee on 
Appropriations. These reports shall include a list of all HUD-
related trips, the names of all staff on each trip, and all 
costs, including the individual costs of lodging, food, 
transportation and any other costs.

                      Office of Inspector General


                     (INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                   FHA funds by
                                                                   Appropriation     transfer          Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2006............................................     $81,180,000     $23,760,000    $104,940,000
Budget estimate, 2007...........................................      83,240,000      23,760,000     107,000,000
House allowance.................................................      83,240,000      23,760,000     107,000,000
Committee recommendation........................................      83,240,000      23,760,000     115,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          program description

    This appropriation will finance all salaries and related 
expenses associated with the operation of the Office of the 
Inspector General [OIG].

                       committee recommendations

    The Committee recommends an overall funding level of 
$115,000,000 for the Office of Inspector General [OIG]. This 
amount is $10,060,000 above the fiscal year 2006 enacted level 
and $8,000,000 above the budget request. This funding level 
includes $23,760,000 by transfer from various FHA funds. The 
Committee commends OIG for its commitment and its efforts in 
reducing waste, fraud and abuse in HUD programs.

                          WORKING CAPITAL FUND

Appropriations, 2006....................................    $195,030,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................     219,780,000
House allowance.........................................................
Committee recommendation................................     219,780,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The working capital fund, authorized by the Department of 
Housing and Urban Development Act of 1965, finances information 
technology and office automation initiatives on a centralized 
basis.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $219,780,000 for the working 
capital fund for fiscal year 2007. These funds are the same as 
the budget request and $24,750,000 over the fiscal year 2006 
level. This fund is needed to enhance efficient use of 
appropriated funds and improve budget projections and needs for 
submission of the Committees on Appropriations.

             Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2006....................................     $60,000,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................      62,000,000
House allowance.........................................      62,000,000
Committee recommendation................................      67,600,000

                          program description

    This appropriation funds the Office of Federal Housing 
Enterprise Oversight [OFHEO], which was established in 1992 to 
regulate the financial safety and soundness of the two housing 
Government sponsored enterprises [GSE's], the Federal National 
Mortgage Association and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage 
Corporation. The Office was authorized in the Federal Housing 
Enterprise Safety and Soundness Act of 1992, which also 
instituted a three-part capital standard for the GSE's, and 
gave the regulator enhanced authority to enforce those 
standards.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends $67,600,000 for the Office of 
Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight, which is $5,600,000 above 
the budget request and $7,600,000 more than the fiscal year 
2006 enacted level.

                       Administrative Provisions

    The Committee recommends administrative provisions. A brief 
description follows.
    Sec. 301. This section promotes the refinancing of certain 
housing bonds.
    Sec. 302. This section clarifies a limitation on use of 
funds under the Fair Housing Act.
    Sec. 303. This section clarifies the allocation of HOPWA 
funding for fiscal year 2006.
    Sec. 304. This section clarifies housing issue in Michigan.
    Sec. 305. This section requires HUD to award funds on a 
competitive basis unless otherwise provided.
    Sec. 306. This section allows funds to be used to reimburse 
GSEs and other Federal entities for various administrative 
expenses.
    Sec. 307. This section limits HUD spending to amounts set 
out in the budget justification.
    Sec. 308. This section clarifies expenditure authority for 
entities subject to the Government Corporation Control Act.
    Sec. 309. This section requires HUD to submit certain 
additional information as part of its annual budget 
justifications.
    Sec. 310. This section requires quarterly reports on all 
uncommitted, unobligated and excess funds associated with HUD 
programs.
    Sec. 311. This section requires HUD to maintain section 8 
assistance on HUD-held or owned multifamily housing.
    Sec. 312. This section makes a number of corrections to the 
award of HOPWA funding.
    Sec. 313. This section requires HUD to submit annual 
reports on the number and cost of HUD-assisted units. The 
Committee is concerned that HUD's property disposition program 
is not adequately committed to preserving the affordability of 
formerly subsidized units, and directs HUD to establish and 
submit to the Committee workable criteria for ensuring the 
maintenance of project-based section 8 wherever possible. The 
Committee also expects HUD to improve its consultation and 
coordination with units of local government and residents. HUD 
is reminded that it should use its discretionary preservation 
authority for the purpose of preserving affordability.
    Sec. 314. This section requires HUD to submit its fiscal 
year 2008 budget justifications according to congressional 
requirements.
    Sec. 315. This section requires vouchers for non-elderly 
disabled families to be renewed, to the extent practicable, to 
non-elderly disabled families.
    Sec. 316. This section exempts Los Angeles County, Alaska, 
Iowa, and Mississippi from the requirement of having a PHA 
resident on the board of directors for fiscal year 2006. 
Instead, the public housing agencies in these States are 
required to establish advisory boards that include public 
housing tenants and section 8 recipients.
    Sec. 317. This section allows HUD to authorize the transfer 
of existing project-based subsidies and liabilities from 
obsolete housing to housing that better meets the needs of the 
assisted tenants.
    Sec. 318. This section provides allocation requirements for 
Native Alaskans under the Native American Indian Housing Block 
Grant program.
    Sec. 319. This section requires vouchers for family 
unification to be renewed, to the extent practicable, for the 
family unification.
    Sec. 320. This section reforms certain section 8 rent 
calculations as to athletic scholarships.
    Sec. 321. This section expands the availability of Reverse 
Equity Mortgage without limit and requires HUD to consider the 
number of HECM mortgages that are already insured in a 
geographic region.
    The Committee is concerned over what appears to be 
excessive fees that are charged to HECM loans. The combined 
fees range from $8,000 to $17,000, and are 2 to 4.5 times 
higher than forward loans. The most troubling fee is the 
origination fee. HUD allows origination fees of 2 percent of 
the loan amount or $2,000, whichever is higher. However, 
origination costs do not rise proportionally with the home's 
value for loans above a certain level. In addition, if there 
were an increase in HECM loan limits, the fees seniors pay may 
be even higher. The Committee also directs HUD and GAO to 
review the HECM program with particular emphasis on the 
financial risk to FHA and the homeowner if Congress were to 
raise the HECM loan limits. This report should include an 
assessment of the Fees that are charged in the HECM program as 
to whether the fees are fair and consistent with requirements 
of the HECM program. The report is due within 6 months of 
enactment.
    Sec. 322. This section extends mark-to-market until 2011.
    Sec. 323. This section prohibits HUD from insuring 
mortgages that are part of a nehemial program.
    Sec. 324. This section allows PHAs to use their capital 
funds for central office costs.
    Sec. 325. This section moves the date for subsidy 
reductions for PHAs to January 1, 2007. This section also 
allows operating subsidies to be reduced by 5 percent during 
calendar year 2007.
    Sec. 326. This section makes reforms to the tax credit 
program as it applies to section 8.
    Sec. 327. This section extends HOPE VI until September 30, 
2007.

                                TITLE IV

                             THE JUDICIARY

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    Established under Article III of the Constitution, the 
judicial branch of Government is a separate but equal branch. 
The Federal Judiciary consists of the Supreme Court, United 
States Courts of Appeals, District Courts, Bankruptcy Courts, 
Court of International Trade, Court of Federal Claims and 
several other entities and programs. The organization of the 
judiciary, the district and circuit boundaries, the places of 
holding court, and the number of Federal judges are legislated 
by the Congress and signed into law by the President.
    The Committee's recommended funding levels support the 
Federal judiciary's role of providing equal justice under the 
law and include sufficient funds to support this critical 
mission. The recommended funding level includes the salaries of 
judges and support staff and the operation and security of our 
Nation's courts.
    The judicial branch is reminded that it, too, is subject to 
the same funding constraints facing the executive and 
legislative branches and continues to urge the Federal 
judiciary to devote its resources primarily to the retention of 
staff. Further, the judiciary is encouraged to contain 
controllable costs such as travel, construction, and other non-
essential expenses.
    In addition, the judiciary is reminded that section 705 of 
the accompanying act applies to the judicial as well as the 
executive branch.

                   Supreme Court of the United States

                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2006....................................     $60,143,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................      63,405,000
House allowance.........................................      63,405,000
Committee recommendation................................      63,405,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The United States Supreme Court consists of nine justices 
appointed under Article III of the Constitution of the United 
States, one of whom is appointed as Chief Justice of the United 
States. The Supreme Court acts as the final arbiter in the 
Federal court system.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $63,405,000 
for the Justices, their supporting personnel, and the costs of 
operating the Supreme Court, excluding the care of the building 
and grounds. The recommendation is $3,262,000 above the fiscal 
year 2006 funding level and identical to the budget request.

                    CARE OF THE BUILDING AND GROUNDS

Appropriations, 2006....................................      $5,568,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................      12,959,000
House allowance.........................................      12,959,000
Committee recommendation................................      12,959,000

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $12,959,000 
for personnel and other services related to the Supreme Court 
building and grounds, which is supervised by the Architect of 
the Capitol. The recommendation is $7,391,000 above the fiscal 
year 2006 funding level and identical to the budget request.
    The Committee has provided the requested funds to complete 
the Supreme Court's building modernization project and the 
necessary renovations to the East and West Conference Room 
ceilings. The Committee has also provided the requested funds 
to begin needed repairs and renovations to the Court's roof 
system. Because this project will be phased over 5 years, the 
Committee directs the Court to report to the House and Senate 
Committee on Appropriations as the Court becomes aware of any 
changes in schedule or budgetary needs.

         United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit


                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2006....................................     $23,780,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................      26,300,000
House allowance.........................................      26,000,000
Committee recommendation................................      25,273,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 
was established under Article III of the Constitution on 
October 1, 1982. The court was formed by the merger of the 
United States Court of Customs and Patent Appeals and the 
appellate division of the United States Court of Claims. The 
court consists of twelve judges who are appointed by the 
President, with the advice and consent of the Senate. Judges 
are appointed to the court under Article III of the 
Constitution of the United States.
    The Federal Circuit has nationwide jurisdiction in a 
variety of subject matter, including international trade, 
government contracts, patents, certain claims for money from 
the United States Government, Federal personnel, and veterans' 
benefits. Appeals to the court come from all Federal district 
courts, the United States Court of Federal Claims, the United 
States Court of International Trade, and the United States 
Court of Veterans Appeals. The court also takes appeals of 
certain administrative agencies' decisions, including the Merit 
Systems Protection Board, the Board of Contract Appeals, the 
Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences, and the Trademark 
Trial and Appeals Board. Decisions of the United States 
International Trade Commission, the Office of Compliance of the 
United States Congress and the Government Accountability Office 
Personnel Appeals Board are also reviewed by the court.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $25,273,000. 
The recommendation is $1,493,000 above the fiscal year 2006 
funding level and $1,027,000 below the budget request.
    Of the amount provided, the Committee has funded the 
requested increase for disaster recovery of information, but 
denies the program increase requests for information technology 
upgrades and the retrofitting of courtrooms to provide enhanced 
technological capabilities. The Committee notes that the 
Federal Circuit currently has appropriate technology upgrades 
in one of its three courtrooms, which meets existing standards 
enacted by the Judicial Conference.

                   U.S. Court of International Trade


                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2006....................................     $15,345,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................      16,182,000
House allowance.........................................      16,182,000
Committee recommendation................................      16,182,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The United States Court of International Trade, located in 
New York City, consists of nine Article III judges. The court 
has exclusive nationwide jurisdiction over civil actions 
brought against the United States, its agencies and officers, 
and certain civil actions brought by the United States, arising 
out of import transactions and the administration and 
enforcement of the Federal customs and international trade 
laws.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $16,182,000. 
The recommendation is $837,000 above the fiscal year 2006 
funding level and the same as the budget request.

    Courts of Appeals, District Courts, and Other Judicial Services


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2006....................................  $4,308,345,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................   4,687,244,000
House allowance.........................................   4,556,114,000
Committee recommendation................................   4,583,360,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    Salaries and Expenses is one of four accounts that provide 
total funding for the Courts of Appeals, District Courts and 
Other Judicial Services. In addition to funding the salaries of 
judges and support staff, this account also funds the operating 
costs of appellate, district and bankruptcy courts, and 
probation and pretrial services offices.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
$4,583,360,000. The recommendation is $275,015,000 above the 
fiscal year 2006 funding level and $103,884,000 below the 
budget request.
    The Committee has adequately funded this account to enable 
the courts to meet their workload demands. As previously 
stated, the Committee urges the Judicial Conference to make the 
retention of personnel its top priority. The Committee supports 
the Federal judiciary sharing its case management electronic 
case filing system at the State level and urges the judiciary 
to undertake a study of whether sharing such technology, 
including electronic billing processes, is a viable option.
    Southwest Border.--The Committee is concerned about the 
impact that increased immigration funding and enforcement 
activities are having on the Federal judiciary's caseload and 
their ability to handle such a dramatic increase in filings. At 
present, the criminal cases filed in the five districts along 
the Southwest border account for nearly one-third of criminal 
cases nationwide. Since 2001, approximately 1,200 border agents 
have been added along the border with Mexico, resulting in a 
significant increase in caseload and workload levels. The 
judiciary plays an integral role in the Nation's homeland 
security efforts, and the Committee commends the numerous 
judges and staff who have ensured the continuing success of 
this vital piece of the Nation's border security strategy. 
Because the border courts remain critically understaffed, the 
Committee has provided $20,371,000, as requested, for 
magistrate judges and critical staff positions for those 
districts located along the Southwest border. The Committee 
directs the Administrative Office to include a plan for the 
hiring of these positions in its fiscal year 2007 financial 
plan and to keep the Committee apprised of the number of 
positions actually brought on board along the Southwest border 
throughout fiscal year 2007.
    Staffing Formulas.--The Committee is aware that the 
Administrative Office utilizes a sophisticated staffing formula 
to determine the staffing needs for the local courts. Due to 
the varied nature of caseload levels throughout the Nation, 
courts maintain different requirements for staffing. While the 
Southwest Border Courts have seen the greatest increase in 
funds allocated over the past several fiscal years, the gap 
between their funding allotment and their actual workload 
growth remains substantially greater when compared to the 
courts throughout the rest of the Nation. For example, during 
several of the past few fiscal years, supplemental funding from 
the administrative office and Congress has been required to 
meet the unique needs of the Southwest Border Courts. This 
consistent need for additional urgently needed funding in this 
one region demonstrates, at a minimum, the need for a thorough 
review of the staffing formulas used to determine local court 
needs. The Committee recognizes that the formulas currently 
employed to determine staffing needs place significant weight 
on the work requirements of the local courts' districts. 
However, due to the increasing gap between workload and 
staffing levels, the Committee is concerned that the current 
formula does not adequately address the differing staffing 
requirements that face courts located along the Southwest 
border. As such, the Administrative Office will report to the 
House and Senate Committees on Appropriations no later than 120 
days after the date of enactment of this act on what steps it 
has taken to ensure that its staffing formulas reflect these 
changing trends in caseload activity. The Committee also 
directs the administrative office to ensure that the staffing 
formula ensures that adequate resources are being directed to 
the Southwest border and particularly to the Probation and 
Pretrial Services program.
    Courthouse Construction.--The Committee is aware that the 
judiciary's self-imposed moratorium on courthouse construction 
projects ends September 30, 2006. The Committee notes that the 
judiciary continues to face rising rent costs that are, in 
part, a result of past courthouse construction projects that 
were not adequately reduced in scope. As such, the Committee 
strongly urges the Judicial Conference to weigh carefully its 
need for more space to adjudicate cases against the Federal 
judiciary's rent needs. The Committee encourages the Judicial 
Conference to ensure adequate checks are in place to guarantee 
that future construction requests and projects are subjected to 
the highest standards of cost-efficiencies. The June, 2006, GAO 
report entitled, ``Federal Courthouses: Rent Increases Due to 
New Space and Growing Energy and Security Costs Require Better 
Tracking and Management'' notes that there are currently no 
incentives for district and circuit courts to make more 
efficient use of their space. The Committee is concerned that 
such a lack of incentives has caused the judicial branch to pay 
rent for more space than is necessary. As such, the 
Administrative Office is directed to report to the House and 
Senate Committees on Appropriations no later than 120 days 
after the date of enactment of this act on steps that have been 
and are being taken to encourage more efficient use of space by 
district and circuit courts. Further, the Committee encourages 
the Administrative Office to continue to work with the General 
Services Administration to ensure fair and accurate rent 
charges and to pursue corrections to any inequities.
    Carryover Funds.--Due to unique circumstances, the 
judiciary reported significant carryover funds for fiscal year 
2005 and projects more carryover in funding for fiscal year 
2006. The Committee is concerned that the administrative office 
has not first used these carryover funds to offset projected 
decreases in fee collections and other projected needs and has, 
instead, used this funding to augment existing programs. This 
has resulted in an increase in the judiciary's uncontrollable 
costs, unnecessary funding requests and greater baseline needs. 
As such, the Administrative Office is directed to ensure that 
current and projected funding needs are met first with 
carryover funds before enhancing any program. The Committee 
directs the Administrative Office to separately include in 
future financial plans, for approval by the House and Senate 
Committees on Appropriations, all sources of carryover funds 
and their desired application.

                 VACCINE INJURY COMPENSATION TRUST FUND

Appropriations, 2006....................................      $3,795,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................       3,952,000
House allowance.........................................       3,952,000
Committee recommendation................................       3,952,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    Enacted by The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 
1986 (Public Law 99-660), the Vaccine Injury Compensation 
Program is a Federal no-fault program designed to resolve a 
perceived crisis in vaccine tort liability claims that 
threatened the continued availability of childhood vaccines 
nationwide. The statute's primary intention is the creation of 
a more efficient adjudicatory mechanism that ensures a no-fault 
compensation result for those allegedly injured or killed by 
certain covered vaccines. This program protects the 
availability of vaccines in the United States by diverting a 
substantial number of claims from the tort arena.
    Not only did this act create a special fund to pay 
judgments awarded under the act, but it also created the Office 
of Special Masters [OSM] within the United States Court of 
Federal Claims to hear vaccine injury cases. The act stipulates 
that up to eight special masters may be appointed for this 
purpose. The special masters expenditures are reimbursed to the 
judiciary for vaccine injury cases from a special fund set up 
under the Vaccine Act.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,952,000. 
The recommendation is $157,000 above the fiscal year 2006 
funding level and consistent with the budget request.

                           Defender Services

Appropriations, 2006....................................    $709,830,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................     803,879,000
House allowance.........................................     750,033,000
Committee recommendation................................     761,051,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Defender Services program ensures the right to counsel 
guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment, the Criminal Justice Act (18 
U.S.C. 3006A(e)) and other congressional mandates for those who 
cannot afford to retain counsel and other necessary defense 
services. The Criminal Justice Act provides that courts appoint 
counsel from Federal public and community defender 
organizations or from a panel of private attorneys established 
by the court. The Defender Services program helps to maintain 
public confidence in the Nation's commitment to equal justice 
under the law and ensures the successful operation of the 
constitutionally based adversary system of justice by which 
Federal criminal laws and federally guaranteed rights are 
enforced.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $761,051,000. 
The recommendation is $51,221,000 above the fiscal year 2006 
funding level and $42,828,000 below the budget request.
    While the Committee has provided sufficient funds to enable 
the Defenders Services program to continue to provide timely 
and quality counsel services, the Committee is concerned about 
recurring projected shortfalls in the Defender Services 
account. To the extent that the other salaries and expense 
accounts within the judiciary title must absorb certain 
mandatory adjustments to base, the Committee directs the 
Defender Services program to treat its Federal Defender 
Organizations in the same manner. The Committee has denied all 
program increase requests for this account and directs the 
Administrative Office to ensure that all resources provided are 
first used to ensure the timely payment of panel attorneys.
    Panel Attorney Pay Rates.--The Committee has included 
funding to annualize the fiscal year 2006 pay adjustment for 
capital and non-capital panel attorneys but denies all requests 
for cost of living adjustments and pay raises for panel 
attorneys for fiscal year 2007. The Committee notes that future 
cost of living adjustment requests should not be presented as 
adjustments to base, but should be requested as a program 
increase.

                    Fees of Jurors and Commissioners

Appropriations, 2006....................................     $60,705,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................      63,079,000
House allowance.........................................      63,079,000
Committee recommendation................................      63,079,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    This account provides for the statutory fees and allowances 
of grand and petit jurors and for the compensation of jury and 
land commissioners. Budgetary requirements depend primarily 
upon the volume and the length of jury trials demanded by 
parties to both civil and criminal actions and the number of 
grand juries being convened by the courts at the request of the 
United States Attorneys.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $63,079,000. 
The recommendation is $2,374,000 above the fiscal year 2006 
funding level and reflects the judiciary's reestimate of fiscal 
year 2007 requirements.

                             Court Security


                     (INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2006....................................    $368,280,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................     410,334,000
House allowance.........................................     400,334,000
Committee recommendation................................     397,737,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Court Security appropriation was established in 1983 
and funds the necessary expenses incident to the provision of 
protective guard services, and the procurement, installation, 
and maintenance of security systems and equipment for United 
States courthouses and other facilities housing Federal court 
operations, including building access control, inspection of 
mail and packages, directed security patrols, perimeter 
security provided by the Federal Protective Service, and other 
similar activities as authorized by section 1010 of the 
Judicial Improvement and Access to Justice Act (Public Law 100-
702).

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $397,737,000. 
The recommendation is $29,457,000 above the fiscal year 2006 
funding level and $12,597,000 below the budget request.
    The Committee is concerned about the security of the United 
States Courthouses and is committed to ensuring the Nation's 
Federal appellate and district courts possess adequate security 
measures. Sufficient funding has been provided to retain and 
hire all requested court security officers for fiscal year 
2007. While the Committee has provided funding for the digital 
video recording initiative, the Committee is concerned about 
the significant costs associated with procuring these systems. 
The Committee notes that the United States Marshall's Service 
has indicated that the vast majority of digital video recorders 
can be purchased for substantially less than expected and urges 
the Administrative Office to work with the United States 
Marshall's Service to ensure optimum cost efficiencies.
    The Committee has limited the judiciary's payments to the 
Federal Protective Service [FPS] to no more than $66,900,000 
and directs the Administrative Office to obtain regular 
notifications from the FPS on any changes in funding 
requirements.
    Judicial Facility Security Program.--As provided in bill 
language, the United States Marshals Service [USMS] is 
responsible for administering the Judicial Facility Security 
Program consistent with standards and guidelines agreed to by 
the Director of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts 
and the Attorney General. However, court security funding is 
appropriated by Congress directly to the judiciary which 
provides an important stewardship role, including financial and 
program oversight. While court security funding is subsequently 
transferred to the USMS, which is responsible for program 
administration, the Committee expects full cooperation from the 
USMS as the judiciary conducts the fiduciary and program 
oversight responsibilities pertaining to this funding.

           Administrative Office of the United States Courts


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2006....................................     $69,559,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................      75,333,000
House allowance.........................................      73,800,000
Committee recommendation................................      74,333,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Administrative Office [AO] of the United States Courts 
was created in 1939 by an Act of Congress. It serves the 
Federal judiciary in carrying out its constitutional mission to 
provide equal justice under the law. Beyond providing numerous 
services to the Federal courts, the AO provides support and 
staff counsel to the Judicial Conference of the United States 
and its committees, and implements Judicial Conference policies 
as well as applicable Federal statutes and regulations. The AO 
is the focal point for communication and coordination within 
the judiciary and with Congress, the executive branch, and the 
public on behalf of the judiciary.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $74,333,000. 
This recommendation is $4,774,000 above the fiscal year 2006 
funding level and $1,000,000 below the budget request.
    Edwin L. Nelson Local Initiative Program.--As established 
in the fiscal year 2005 appropriations act, the Edwin L. Nelson 
Local Initiative Program made grants available to local courts 
to develop and implement information technology solutions for 
the unique problems they face. Such grants ensure greater 
flexibility, access to funds, information sharing and input 
into the various obstacles that must be overcome to produce a 
more automated and efficient Federal judiciary. The Committee 
urges the AO to continue to work with and provide adequate 
resources to the local courts for this purpose.

                        Federal Judicial Center


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2006....................................     $22,127,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................      23,787,000
House allowance.........................................      23,500,000
Committee recommendation................................      23,390,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Federal Judicial Center, located in Washington, DC, 
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. The Center's responsibilities 
include educating judges and other judicial branch personnel 
about legal developments and efficient litigation management 
and court administration. Additionally, the Center also 
analyzes the efficacy of case and court management procedures 
and ensures the Federal judiciary is aware of the methods of 
best practice.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $23,390,000. 
The recommendation is $1,263,000 above the fiscal year 2006 
funding level and $397,000 below the budget request.
    The Committee has included all requested funds in the 
Center's adjustment to base and half the funds requested for 
education, research and technology enhancements. The Committee 
directs the Federal Judicial Center to keep the Committee 
apprised of staff brought on board throughout fiscal year 2007.

                       Judicial Retirement Funds


                    PAYMENT TO JUDICIARY TRUST FUNDS

Appropriations, 2006....................................     $40,600,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................      58,300,000
House allowance.........................................      58,300,000
Committee recommendation................................      58,300,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The funds in this account cover the estimated future 
benefit payments to be made to retired bankruptcy judges and 
magistrate judges, claims court judges, and spouses and 
dependent children of deceased judicial officers.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $58,300,000 
for payments to the Judicial Officers' Retirement Fund and the 
Claims Court Judges Retirement Fund. The recommendation is 
$17,700,000 above the fiscal year 2006 funding level and 
identical to the budget request.

                  United States Sentencing Commission


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2006....................................     $14,256,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................      15,740,000
House allowance.........................................      15,500,000
Committee recommendation................................      15,340,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The United States Sentencing Commission establishes, 
reviews and revises 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.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $15,340,000. 
The recommendation is $1,084,000 above the fiscal year 2006 
funding level and $400,000 below the budget request.

                Administrative Provisions--The Judiciary

    The Committee recommends the following administrative 
provisions for the judiciary.
    Section 401 allows the judiciary to expend funds for the 
employment of experts and consultant services.
    Section 402 allows the judiciary, subject to the 
Committee's reprogramming procedures, to transfer up to 5 
percent between appropriations, but limits to 10 percent the 
amount that can be transferred into any one appropriation.
    Section 403 limits official reception and representation 
expenses incurred by the Judicial Conference of the United 
States to no more than $11,000.
    Section 404 requires the Administrative Office to submit an 
annual financial plan for the judiciary.
    Section 405 allows for a salary adjustment for Justices and 
judges.
    Section 406 grants the judicial branch the same tenant 
alteration authorities as the executive branch.
    Section 407 prohibits any judge from being entitled to sole 
use of a courtroom and requires courtrooms to be scheduled 
based on the needs of the circuit and district courts. This is 
intended solely to address circumstances where courtrooms are 
not in full use and where the sharing of a courtroom will help 
reduce an overburdened judicial docket.

                                TITLE V

    EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT AND FUNDS APPROPRIATED TO THE 
                               PRESIDENT

                     Compensation of the President

Appropriations, 2006....................................        $450,000
Budget estimate, 2007 \1\...............................         450,000
House allowance.........................................         450,000
Committee recommendation................................         450,000

\1\ The budget proposes a consolidation of most accounts for the White 
House of $184,252,000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    This account provides 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. This is the same as the fiscal year 2006 enacted 
level and the same as the budget estimate. The expense account 
is for official use as authorized by title 3 of U.S. Code and 
is not considered taxable to the President. The bill specifies 
that any unused amount shall revert to the Treasury consistent 
with 31 U.S.C. 1552.

                           White House Office


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2006....................................     $53,292,000
Budget estimate, 2007 \1\...............................      51,952,000
House allowance.........................................      51,952,000
Committee recommendation................................      51,952,000

\1\ The budget proposes a consolidation of most accounts for the White 
House of $184,252,000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Salaries and Expenses account of the White House Office 
provides staff assistance and administrative services for the 
direct support of the President. The office also serves as the 
President's representative before the media. In accordance with 
3 U.S.C. 105, the office also supports and assists the 
activities of the First Lady.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $51,952,000 
for White House Office Salaries and Expenses. The 
recommendation is $1,340,000 less than the fiscal year 2006 
enacted level.
    The Committee has rejected the administration's request to 
include many of the offices under the Executive Office of the 
President under a single, consolidated account. The Committee 
objects to the overall proposal since it would undermine the 
ability of the Congress to exercise adequate oversight 
regarding how these funds are expended. Nevertheless, the 
Committee has incorporated the responsibilities of the Office 
of Policy Development [OPD] into the ``Salaries and Expenses'' 
account of the White House Office. This represents some 
$3,385,000 of funding for OPD. The Committee agrees with the 
administration that this consolidation is a logical approach 
that will allow the White House to better manage its resources. 
The Committee includes $1,500,000 for the Privacy and Civil 
Liberties Oversight Board as a separate account.
    The Executive Office of the President submitted its fiscal 
year 2007 budget request later than other agencies. This delay 
made it difficult for the Committee to begin its work. The 
Committee encourages the Executive Office of the President to 
submit its budget justification within a few days of the 
publication of the President's budget. The Committee directs 
the Executive Office of the President to include detailed 
budget information for the Civil Liberties Oversight Board in 
next year's justification.

                 Executive Residence at the White House


                           OPERATING EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2006....................................     $12,312,000
Budget estimate, 2007 \1\...............................      12,041,000
House allowance.........................................      12,041,000
Committee recommendation................................      12,041,000

\1\ The budget proposes a consolidation of most accounts for the White 
House of $184,252,000, including this account.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    These funds provide for the care, maintenance, repair, 
alteration, refurnishing, improvement, air-conditioning, 
heating, and lighting, of the White House and the official and 
ceremonial functions of the President.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $12,041,000 
for the Executive Residence at the White House. The Committee 
recommendation is $271,000 less than the fiscal year 2006 
enacted level and is equal to certain assumptions in the budget 
estimate. In particular, the administration's request includes 
many of the accounts under the Executive Office of the 
President under a single, consolidated account, including this 
account. The Committee objects to the overall proposal since it 
would undermine the ability of the Congress to exercise 
adequate oversight regarding how these funds are expended. The 
accompanying bill also continues certain restrictions on 
reimbursable expenses for use of the Executive Residence that 
were enacted for fiscal year 2004.

                   WHITE HOUSE REPAIR AND RESTORATION

Appropriations, 2006....................................      $1,683,000
Budget estimate, 2007 \1\...............................       1,600,000
House allowance.........................................       1,600,000
Committee recommendation................................       1,600,000

\1\ The budget proposes a consolidation of most accounts for the White 
House of $184,252,000, including this account.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    This account funds 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 the capital improvement projects at the 
Executive Residence at the White House.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,600,000 for 
White House Repair and Restoration, the same amount as assumed 
in the overall budget request and a reduction of $83,000 from 
the fiscal year 2006 enacted level.

                      Council of Economic Advisers


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2006....................................      $4,000,000
Budget estimate, 2007 \1\...............................       4,002,000
House allowance.........................................       4,002,000
Committee recommendation................................       4,002,000

\1\ The budget proposes a consolidation of most accounts for the White 
House of $184,252,000, including this account.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    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 the preparation of the 
annual Economic Report of the President to Congress.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,002,000 for 
salaries and expenses of the Council of Economic Advisers. This 
amount is the same as the amount assumed in the overall budget 
request and is $2,000 more than the fiscal year 2006 enacted 
level.

                      Office of Policy Development


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2006....................................      $3,465,000
Budget estimate, 2007 \1\...............................       3,385,000
House allowance.........................................       3,385,000
Committee recommendation................................       3,385,000

\1\ This budget proposes a consolidation of most accounts of the White 
House of $184,252,000, including this account.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    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 does not recommend funds for the Office of 
Policy Development as an independent office and has merged the 
office and funds into the White House Office. In particular, 
the administration's request includes many of the accounts 
under the Executive Office of the President under a single, 
consolidated account, including this account. While the 
Committee objects to the overall proposal since it would 
undermine the ability of the Congress to exercise adequate 
oversight regarding how these funds are expended, the Committee 
believes this merger will facilitate a better use of these 
funds while preserving adequate oversight of their use.

                       National Security Council


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2006....................................      $8,618,000
Budget estimate, 2007 \1\...............................       8,405,000
House allowance.........................................       8,405,000
Committee recommendation................................       8,405,000

\1\ The budget proposes a consolidation of most accounts of the White 
House of $184,252,000, including this account.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The National Security Council advises the President in 
integrating domestic, foreign, and military policies relating 
to the national security.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $8,405,000 for 
the salaries and expenses of the National Security Council 
[NSC]. This amount is the same as assumed in the budget request 
and $213,000 less than the fiscal year 2006 enacted level.

                        Office of Administration


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2006....................................     $88,429,000
Budget estimate, 2007 \1\...............................     102,417,000
House allowance.........................................      91,393,000
Committee recommendation................................      91,393,000

\1\ This budget proposes a consolidation of most accounts of the White 
House of $184,252,000, including this account.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Office of Administration's mission is to provide high-
quality, 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 has provided $91,393,000 to the Office of 
Administration for fiscal year 2007, an increase of $2,964,000 
over the fiscal year 2006 enacted level and a decrease of 
$11,024,000 below the budget request.
    The Committee includes the funding levels for the Office of 
Administration activities at the proposed levels included in 
its budget justifications. In addition to the recommended level 
of funding, the Office of Administration receives 
reimbursements for information management support and general 
office services.

                    Office of Management and Budget


                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2006 \1\................................     $76,161,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................      68,780,000
House allowance.........................................      76,185,000
Committee recommendation................................      76,185,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Office of Management and Budget [OMB] assists the 
President in the discharge of his budgetary, management, and 
other executive responsibilities.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $76,185,000 
for the Office of Management and Budget which is $24,000 more 
than the fiscal year 2006 enacted level and $7,405,000 above 
the budget request.
    In 2005, the Federal Government failed to meet Executive 
order and statutory energy savings goals for the first time in 
more than a decade. Within 120 days after enactment of this 
act, the Committee directs the Director of the Office of 
Management and Budget, with assistance from appropriate Federal 
agencies, to issue a report to the Committees on Appropriations 
regarding the administration's and OMB's plans to monitor, 
measure, and increase Federal agency performance and 
participation in energy and environmental management. The 
Committee is particularly interested in products and services 
that guarantee energy and taxpayer savings, that measure 
performance, and that involve public/private partnerships. A 
specific focus of the report should include possible statutory 
obstacles.

                 Office of National Drug Control Policy


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2006....................................     $26,639,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................      23,309,000
House allowance.........................................      26,928,000
Committee recommendation................................      11,500,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Office of National Drug Control Policy [ONDCP], 
established by the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988, and 
reauthorized by Public Law 105-277, is charged with developing 
policies, objectives and priorities for the National Drug 
Control Program. In addition, ONDCP administers the Counterdrug 
Technology Assessment Center, the High Intensity Drug 
Trafficking Areas program, the National Youth Anti-Drug Media 
Campaign, the Drug Free Communities Program and several other 
related initiatives.
    This account provides funding for personnel compensation, 
travel, and other basic operations of the Office, and for 
general policy research to support the formulation of the 
National Drug Control Strategy.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $11,500,000 
for ONDCP's salaries and expenses. This amount is $11,809,000 
below the budget request and $15,139,000 below the fiscal year 
2006 enacted level.
    The Committee is extremely displeased with the performance 
of ONDCP staff regarding their communication with the Committee 
and their responsiveness to congressional inquiries. ONDCP's 
lethargy and the inadequate information provided severely 
impacts the ability of the Committee to conduct its oversight 
and make budgetary decisions in a timely manner. This kind of 
unresponsiveness on the part of ONDCP results in an unnecessary 
waste of time and energy; numerous follow up communications are 
required in almost every instance. The Committee is 
particularly concerned that ONDCP has attempted to prevent the 
Committee from meeting with the directors of ONDCP programs. 
Therefore the Committee has reduced the salaries and expenses 
budget to more closely reflect actual performance.
    The principal purpose of the White House Office of National 
Drug Control Policy [ONDCP] is to establish priorities, 
objectives, and policies for the Nation's drug control program. 
The Committee is concerned that the overall organization of 
ONDCP is ineffective and must be improved. In fact, 6 years ago 
an independent review found weaknesses in ONDCP management and 
organization, unfortunately these problems persist today. The 
Committee believes an investigation into funding allocations 
and expenditures, as well as the use of resources is warranted. 
The Committee believes an independent review of the overall 
organization and management of grants and funding systems would 
be beneficial to ONDCP and the Congress. Such an evaluation may 
provide insight into changes and improvements that could make 
ONDCP more effective in the future. Therefore, the Committee 
has allocated funding for a study by the National Academy of 
Public Administration [NAPA] to conduct a review of 
organization and management. In addition, the Committee also 
requests that the Government Accountability Office [GAO] review 
the grant management systems, and other funding systems--
emphasizing the criteria and methodology used to award and 
distribute funds. The Committee is aware and supportive of 
GAO's impending review of the Drug-Free Communities program, 
and recommends that GAO also review the Counterdrug Technology 
Assessment Center and High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas 
Program, among others. The Committee expects NAPA and GAO to 
work together, sharing progress and information during the 
course of their reviews, which should begin within 60 days 
after the enactment of this act.
    The Committee directs the Director to provide to the 
Committees on Appropriations quarterly reports on travel 
expenditures, summarized by office, program, and individual, 
including dates and purpose of travel. The Committee further 
directs the Director to provide to the Committees on 
Appropriations quarterly reports on current staffing levels and 
plans for future hirings. The staffing report shall include 
office, position title, salary, and job classifications of all 
persons employed by ONDCP, including contractors.

                COUNTERDRUG TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT CENTER

Appropriations, 2006....................................     $29,700,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................       9,600,000
House allowance.........................................      19,600,000
Committee recommendation................................      20,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Counterdrug Technology Assessment Center [CTAC] was 
established by the Counter-Narcotics Technology Act of 1990 
(Public Law 101-510) and reauthorized in 1998 (Public Law 105-
277) to serve as the central counterdrug technology research 
and development organization for the United States Government. 
CTAC encompasses two separate functions: (1) the Research and 
Development program [R&D], which supports improvements to 
counterdrug capabilities that transcend the need of any single 
Federal agency; and (2) the Technology Transfer Program [TTP], 
which provides state-of-the-art, affordable, easily integrated 
and maintainable tools to enhance the capabilities of State and 
local law enforcement agencies for counterdrug missions.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $20,000,000 
for the Counterdrug Technology Assessment Center, a decrease of 
$9,700,000 from the fiscal year 2006 enacted level and 
$10,400,000 above the President's request. Included in the 
appropriation is $10,000,000 for demand reduction and 
$10,000,000 for the Technology Transfer Program. The Committee 
continues to support the mandate that CTAC's authority ``shall 
not extend to contracts, management of individual projects, or 
other operational activities,'' and should continue to transfer 
its appropriated funds to Contracting and Technical Agents at 
other Federal and military departments and agencies.
    Demand Reduction R&D.--The Committee fully supports 
continuing the CTAC demand reduction program and reminds ONDCP 
that the fiscal year 2006 conference report directed the 
``completion of existing imaging system instrumentation 
validation effects at qualified academic institutions.''
    The report further directed that: ``a spending plan be 
included in the ONDCP operating plan for fiscal year 2006.'' 
This plan has not been received by the Committee, therefore the 
Committee directs submission of the fiscal year 2006 plan 30 
days after enactment of this act. The plan shall include an 
accounting of the use of the fiscal year 2006 CTAC R&D 
appropriated funds and an accounting of all fiscal year 2006 
funds that are unobligated and unexpended and the rationale for 
inaction.
    For fiscal year 2007, not more than $1,000,000 of the 
funding provided for counternarcotics research and development 
projects is directed toward supply reduction activities. The 
Committee directs submission of a spending plan for fiscal year 
2007 that reinstates the demand instrumentation infrastructure 
development program. The plan must include demand 
instrumentation and infrastructure systems and technology 
development projects that would provide researchers with the 
tools to conduct more advanced NIH, NIDA, SAMHSA, NIMH drug 
addiction and scientific studies. The Committee further directs 
the fiscal year 2007 funds with expenditure project execution 
authority be completed and transferred to other Federal 
departments and agencies within 45 days of enactment of this 
act.
    Technology Transfer Program.--The Committee believes that 
this program demonstrates the best direct assistance the 
Federal Government has to offer to State and local law 
enforcement. The Committee is encouraged by the positive 
reception this program continues to receive by State and local 
law enforcement agencies. Thus prompting the Committee to 
request that the fiscal year 2008 budget request include a 
specific accounting of the total number of TTP applications 
received and the number awarded in the previous year, so that 
the Committee may have a true understanding of CTAC's ability 
to meet demand.

                  Funds Appropriated to the President


                     FEDERAL DRUG CONTROL PROGRAMS

                 HIGH INTENSITY DRUG TRAFFICKING AREAS

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2006....................................    $224,730,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................................
House allowance.........................................     235,000,000
Committee recommendation................................     227,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas [HIDTA] program 
was established by the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988, as amended, 
and the Office of National Drug Control Policy's 
reauthorization (Public Law 105-277) to provide assistance to 
Federal, 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 $2,270,000 over the 
fiscal year 2006 level and $227,000,000 over the budget request 
which proposed to transfer the program to the Department of 
Justice. This program is an important function of ONDCP and 
should not be transferred. The Committee directs that funding 
shall be provided for the existing HIDTAs at no less than the 
fiscal year 2006 initial allocation level, unless the Director 
submits to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations, 
and the Committees approve, a request for reprogramming of the 
funds based on clearly articulated priorities for the HIDTA 
program, as well as published ONDCP performance measures of 
effectiveness. Furthermore, the Committee directs the Director 
to take appropriate steps to ensure that the HIDTA funds are 
transferred to the appropriate drug control agencies 
expeditiously.
    In allocating HIDTA funds, the Committee expects the 
Director of ONDCP to ensure that the entities receiving these 
limited resources make use of them strictly for implementing 
the strategy for each HIDTA, taking into consideration local 
conditions and resource requirements. In this regard, 
methamphetamine is a primary illicit drug threat across the 
country. Its widespread use and resulting addiction, combined 
with the overwhelming availability of high purity, low cost 
methamphetamine is cause for serious concern. Cocaine and 
heroin also represent significant threats and Ecstasy is an 
increasing danger. Marijuana is readily available and widely 
abused across the United States. Canadian-produced marijuana, 
commonly known as BC Bud, and potent marijuana from the 
Appalachian States are two examples that demonstrate the value 
of marijuana eradication programs.
    The HIDTA funds should not be used to supplant existing 
support for ongoing Federal, State, or local drug control 
operations normally funded out of the operating budgets of each 
agency. ONDCP is directed to hold back all HIDTA funds from a 
State until such time as a State or locality has met its 
financial obligation.
    The Committee is disappointed by ONDCP's delay in the award 
of HIDTA funding, and includes provisions in the bill to 
address this issue.
    Allocation of Additional Funds.--The Committee is 
disappointed in the manner that ONDCP chooses to allocate 
funds. While the Committee supports the areas to which the 
additional funding is now directed, the Committee does not 
believe that these programs are being judiciously funded. ONDCP 
continues to disregard the congressional directive that at 
least $2,000,000 should be spent on new counties. The Committee 
believes new counties to be those that have not previously 
received HIDTA funding, and are an expansion of an existing 
HIDTA. The Committee includes provisions in the bill to address 
this issue.

                  OTHER FEDERAL DRUG CONTROL PROGRAMS

Appropriations, 2006....................................    $192,951,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................     212,160,000
House allowance.........................................     194,000,000
Committee recommendation................................     214,500,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988 (Public Law 100-690), as 
amended, and the Office of National Drug Control Policy's 
reauthorization (Public Law 105-277) established the Special 
Forfeiture Fund to be administered by the Director of the 
Office of National Drug Control Policy in support of high 
priority drug control programs. This account includes the 
following programs: National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign, 
Drug Free Communities Support Program, U.S. Anti-Doping Agency, 
National Drug Court Institute, Performance Measures 
Development, and World Anti-Doping Agency [WADA] membership 
dues.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $214,500,000 
for Other Federal Drug Control Programs, which is $2,340,000 
more than the requested amount and $21,549,000 more than the 
fiscal year 2006 enacted level. Within this amount, the 
Committee provides the following funding levels:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign.................    $120,000,000
Drug Free Communities Support Program...................      80,000,000
U.S. Anti-Doping Agency.................................       9,000,000
National Drug Court Institute...........................       1,000,000
National Alliance for Model State Drug Laws.............       1,000,000
Performance Measure Development.........................       2,000,000
World Anti-Doping Agency [WADA].........................       1,500,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign.--The Committee has 
provided consistent monetary support for the National Youth 
Anti-Drug Media Campaign since it was initially funded by 
Congress in fiscal year 1998. The Committee continues to be 
concerned about the direction and efficacy of the Media 
Campaign as it is currently structured, and notes that 
independent reports have concluded that the Media Campaign has 
not had a demonstrable nationwide effect on reducing drug use 
among the Campaign's target population. The Committee provides 
$120,000,000 for the Media Campaign, of which $15,000,000 shall 
be for the continuation of anti-methamphetamine advertising. 
The Committee is concerned with the priorities of the Media 
Campaign and wants to assure that America's meth problem is 
addressed in a responsible manner by the Office of National 
Drug Control Policy. Of these funds, $20,000,000 may not be 
made available for use unless GAO certifies that the program is 
meeting the benchmarks established by OMB.
    The Committee remains concerned with the large proportion 
of Media Campaign resources devoted to administrative costs. 
The bill, therefore, directs that no more than 10 percent of 
the funding provided for the Media Campaign be used for 
administrative costs.
    Drug-Free Communities Support Program.--ONDCP has directed 
the Drug-Free Communities Support Program [DFCSP] in 
partnership with the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency 
Prevention since it was created by the Drug-Free Communities 
Act of 1997 (Public Law 105-20). DFCSP provides matching grants 
of up to 25 percent to local coalitions that mobilize their 
communities to prevent youth alcohol, tobacco, illicit drug, 
and inhalant abuse. Such grants support coalitions of youth; 
parents; media; law enforcement; school officials; faith-based 
organizations; fraternal organizations; State, local, and 
tribal government agencies; healthcare professionals; and other 
community representatives. The DFCSP enables these coalitions 
to strengthen their coordination and prevention efforts, 
encourage citizen participation in substance abuse reduction 
efforts, and disseminate information about effective programs. 
The Committee provides $80,000,000 for the continuation of the 
DFCSP.
    The Committee has also included a provision in the bill 
directing ONDCP to provide $2,000,000 of DFCSP funds as a 
direct grant to the Community Anti-Drug Coalitions of America 
in order to sustain the National Community Anti-Drug Coalition 
Institute.
    The Committee is displeased with the sudden changes made by 
ONDCP to the DFCSP, therefore the Committee has included a 
provision in the accompanying bill to address this issue.
    United States Anti-Doping Agency.--The United States Anti-
Doping Agency [USADA] is the independent anti-doping agency for 
Olympic sports in the United States, and is responsible for 
managing the testing and adjudication process for U.S. Olympic, 
Pan Am and Paralympic athletes. As a nonprofit corporation 
under the leadership of an independent Board of Directors, 
USADA has the authority to set forth guiding principles in 
anti-doping policy and to enforce any doping violations. In 
addition to managing collection and testing procedures, USADA 
is also responsible for enhancing research efforts and 
promoting educational programs to inform athletes of the rules 
governing the use of performance enhancing substances, the 
ethics of doping and its harmful health effects.
    The Committee provides $9,000,000 for USADA, which is 
$500,000 more than the requested amount. USADA's efforts with 
respect to the Bay Area Laboratory Co-operative [BALCO] and the 
new threat of human growth hormone provide examples of the 
challenges facing this agency.
    World Anti-Doping Agency.--ONDCP is a full participant in 
the World Anti-Doping Agency [WADA], which promotes and 
coordinates international activities against doping in all 
forms of sports. The Committee provides $1,500,000 for 
membership dues to the WADA, consistent with the commitment the 
United States has WADA. In providing these funds, the Committee 
directs ONDCP to use its voice and vote as the United States' 
representative in this world body to ensure that all countries' 
athletes are subject to fair and equal standards and treatment. 
Thus establishing and maintaining the objectivity and integrity 
of this fledgling international athletic regulatory 
organization.
    National Drug Court Institute.--The National Drug Court 
Institute facilitates the growth of the drug court movement by 
promoting and disseminating education, research, and 
scholarship concerning drug court programs and providing a 
comprehensive drug court training series for practitioners. 
Drug courts provide an effective means to fight drug-related 
crime through the cooperative efforts of State and local law 
enforcement, the judicial system, and the public health 
treatment network. The Committee provides $1,000,000 for the 
National Drug Court Institute.
    National Alliance For Model State Drug Laws.--The National 
Alliance for Model State Drug Laws [NAMSDL] is a national 
organization that drafts, researches, and analyzes model drug 
and alcohol laws and related State statutes, provides access to 
a national network of drug and alcohol experts, and facilitates 
working relationships among State and community leaders and 
drug and alcohol professionals. In doing so, NAMSDL encourages 
States to adopt and implement laws, policies, and regulations 
to reduce drug trafficking, drug use, and their related 
consequences. The Committee provides $1,000,000 to NAMSDL and 
directs ONDCP to provide the entire amount directly to NAMSDL 
within 30 days after enactment of this act.
    Performance Measures Development.--Performance Measures 
Development [PMD] funding is used to conduct evaluation 
research for assessing the effectiveness of the National Drug 
Control Strategy. For this function, the Committee provides 
$2,000,000, which is the same as the requested amount.
    Projects undertaken with these resources are to entail 
efforts to encourage and work with selected programs to develop 
and improve needed data sources.

                          Unanticipated Needs

Appropriations, 2006....................................        $990,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................      11,789,000
House allowance.........................................       1,000,000
Committee recommendation................................       1,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    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, which is $10,000 more 
than appropriated in fiscal year 2006 and $10,789,000 below the 
budget request.

                  Special Assistance to the President


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2006....................................      $4,410,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................       4,352,000
House allowance.........................................       4,352,000
Committee recommendation................................       4,352,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    This appropriation provides for staff and expenses to 
enable the Vice President to provide assistance to the 
President in connection with the performance of executive 
duties and responsibilities. The Vice President also has a 
staff funded by the Senate to assist him in the performance of 
his legislative duties. These funds also support the official 
activities of the spouse of the Vice President.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,352,000 for 
special assistance to the President. This amount is the same as 
the budget request and $58,000 below than the fiscal year 2006 
enacted level.

                Official Residence of the Vice President


                           OPERATING EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2006....................................        $322,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................         317,000
House allowance.........................................         317,000
Committee recommendation................................         317,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    This account supports the care and operation of the Vice 
President's residence on the grounds of the Naval Observatory. 
These funds specifically support equipment, furnishings, dining 
facilities, and services required to perform and discharge the 
Vice President's official duties, functions and obligations.
    Funds to renovate the residence are provided through the 
Department of the Navy budget. The Committee has had a 
longstanding interest in the condition of the residence and 
expects to be kept fully apprised by the Vice President's 
office of any and all renovations and alterations made to the 
residence by the Navy.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $317,000 for 
the official residence of the Vice President. This amount is 
the same as the budget request and $5,000 less than the fiscal 
year 2006 enacted level.

Administrative Provisions--Executive Office of the President and Funds 
                     Appropriated to the President


                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

    Section 501. The Committee continues a provision that 
provides flexibility in the use of funds in accounts under the 
Executive Office of the President.
    Section 502. The Committee includes a new provision 
requiring a financial plan by the Director of the ONDCP prior 
to the obligation of funds in fiscal year 2007.
    Section 503. The Committee includes a new provision 
allowing for the transfer of up to 3 percent among programs 
within ONDCP.
    Section 504. The Committee includes a new provision 
establishing new reprogramming requirements for ONDCP.
    Section 505. The Committee includes a new provision 
requiring ONDCP to comport with budget estimates except as 
otherwise provided in this act, or through an approved 
reprogramming.

                                TITLE VI

                          INDEPENDENT AGENCIES

       Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board

                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2006....................................      $5,882,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................       5,957,000
House allowance.........................................       5,957,000
Committee recommendation................................       5,957,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance 
Board (Access Board) was established by section 502 of the 
Rehabilitation Act of 1973. 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, the Telecommunication Act and to develop guidelines for 
and technical assistance to individuals and entities with 
rights or duties under titles II and III of the Americans with 
Disabilities Act. The Access Board establishes minimum 
accessibility guidelines and requirements for public 
accommodations and commercial facilities, transit facilities 
and vehicles, State and local government facilities, children's 
environments, and recreational facilities. The Access Board 
also provides technical assistance to Government agencies, 
public and private organizations, individuals, and businesses 
on the removal of accessibility barriers.
    In 2002, the Access Board was given additional 
responsibilities under the Help America Vote Act. The Access 
Board serves on the Board of Advisors and the Technical 
Guidelines Development Committee, which helps Election 
Assistance Commission develop voluntary guidelines and guidance 
for voting systems, including accessibility for people with 
disabilities.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $5,957,000 for the operations of 
the Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board, 
the funding level requested by the administration and $75,000 
over the fiscal year 2006 level.

                   Consumer Product Safety Commission


                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2006....................................     $62,370,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................      62,370,000
House allowance.........................................      62,370,000
Committee recommendation................................      62,370,000

                          program description

    The Commission is an independent regulatory agency that was 
established on May 14, 1973, and is responsible for protecting 
the public against unreasonable risks of injury from consumer 
products; assisting consumers to evaluate the comparative 
safety of consumer products; developing uniform safety 
standards for consumer products and minimizing conflicting 
State and local regulations; and promoting research and 
investigation into the causes and prevention of product-related 
deaths, illnesses, and injuries.
    In carrying out its mandate, the Commission establishes 
mandatory product safety standards, where appropriate, to 
reduce the unreasonable risk of injury to consumers from 
consumer products; helps industry develop voluntary safety 
standards; bans unsafe products if it finds that a safety 
standard is not feasible; monitors recalls of defective 
products; informs and educates consumers about product hazards; 
conducts research and develops test methods; collects and 
publishes injury and hazard data, and promotes uniform product 
regulations by governmental units.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends $62,370,000 for the Consumer 
Product Safety Commission, which is equal to the budget request 
and the same as the fiscal year 2006 enacted level.

                     Election Assistance Commission


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2006....................................     $14,058,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................      16,908,000
House allowance.........................................      16,908,000
Committee recommendation................................      17,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Election Assistance Commission [EAC] was created by the 
Help America Vote Act of 2002 [HAVA]. Under HAVA, the EAC's 
role is to promulgate voluntary State guidelines for election 
systems, develop a national certification program for voting 
equipment, and provide related guidance. The EAC is also 
charged with awarding grants to improve election administration 
and enhancing election equipment.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee provides $17,000,000 for EAC's administrative 
expenses, which is $2,942,000 more than the fiscal year 2006 
level. The accompanying bill provides $4,950,000 of these funds 
for transfer to the National Institute for Standards and 
Technology for technical assistance related to the development 
of voluntary State voting systems guidelines.

                 Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation


                      OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

Appropriations, 2006....................................     $30,690,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................      26,256,000
House allowance.........................................      26,256,000
Committee recommendation................................      26,256,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The FDIC Office of Inspector General conducts audits, 
investigations, and other reviews to assist and augment the 
FDIC's contribution to the stability of, and public confidence 
in, the Nation's financial system. A separate appropriation 
more effectively ensures the OIG's independence consistent with 
the Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended and other 
legislation.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $26,256,000 for the FDIC inspector 
general, the same as the budget request and $4,434,000 less 
than the fiscal year 2006 enacted level. Funds are to be 
derived by transfer from the Deposit Insurance Fund and the 
FSLIC resolution fund.

                      Federal Election Commission


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2006....................................     $54,153,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................      57,138,000
House allowance.........................................      57,138,000
Committee recommendation................................      57,138,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Federal Election Commission [FEC] was created through 
the 1974 Amendments to the Federal Election Campaign Act of 
1971 [FECA]. Consistent with its duty of executing our Nation's 
Federal campaign finance laws, and in pursuit of its mission of 
maintaining public faith in the integrity of the Federal 
campaign finance system, FEC conducts three major regulatory 
programs: (1) providing public disclosure of funds raised and 
spent to influence Federal elections; (2) enforcing compliance 
with restrictions on contributions and expenditures made to 
influence Federal elections; and (3) administering public 
financing of Presidential campaigns.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $57,138,000 for the Federal 
Election Commission, which is the same as the budget request 
and $2,985,000 more than the fiscal year 2006 enacted level.

                   Federal Labor Relations Authority


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2006....................................     $25,213,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................      25,218,000
House allowance.........................................      25,218,000
Committee recommendation................................      25,218,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Federal Labor Relations Authority [FLRA] is an 
independent administrative Federal agency created by title VII 
of the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 with a mission to carry 
out five statutory responsibilities: (1) determining the 
appropriateness of units for Labor organization representation; 
(2) resolving complaints of unfair labor practices; (3) 
adjudicating exceptions to arbitrator's awards; (4) 
adjudicating legal issues relating to duty to bargain; and (5) 
resolving impasses during negotiations.
    The FLRA's authority is divided by law and by delegation 
among a three-member authority and an Office of General 
Counsel, appointed by the President and subject to Senate 
confirmation; and the Federal Service Impasses Panel, which 
consists of seven part-time members appointed by the President.
    In addition, the FLRA is engaged in case-related 
interventions and training and facilitation of labor-management 
partnerships and in resolving disputes. FLRA promotes labor-
management cooperation by providing training and assistance to 
labor organizations and agencies on resolving disputes, 
facilitates the creation of partnerships, and trains the 
parties on rights and responsibilities under the Federal 
Relations Labor Relations Management statute.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $25,218,000 
for the Federal Labor Relations Authority. This amount is the 
same as the President's budget request and $5,000 above the 
fiscal year 2006 enacted level.

                      Federal Maritime Commission


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2006....................................     $20,294,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................      21,474,000
House allowance.........................................      20,294,010
Committee recommendation................................      21,474,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Federal Maritime Commission [FMC] is an independent 
regulatory agency which administers the Shipping Act of 1984 
(Public Law 98-237) as amended by the Ocean Shipping Reform Act 
of 1998 (Public Law 105-258); section 19 of the Merchant Marine 
Act, 1920 (41 Stat. 998); the Foreign Shipping Practices Act of 
1988 (Public Law 100-418); and Public Law 89-777.
    FMC regulates the international waterborne commerce of the 
United States. In addition, the FMC has responsibility for 
licensing and bonding ocean transportation intermediaries and 
assuring that vessel owners or operators establish financial 
responsibility to pay judgments for death or injury to 
passengers, or nonperformance of a cruise, on voyages from U.S. 
ports. Major program areas for 2006 are: carrying out 
investigations of foreign trade practices under the Foreign 
Shipping Practices Act; maintaining equitable trading 
conditions in U.S. ocean commerce; ensuring compliance with 
applicable shipping statutes; pursuing an active enforcement 
program designed to identify and prosecute violators of the 
shipping statutes; and reviewing ocean carrier operational and 
pricing agreements to guard against excessively anticompetitive 
effects.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee includes $21,474,000 for the salaries and 
expenses of the Federal Maritime Commission for fiscal year 
2007. This amount is the same as the budget request and 
$1,180,000 above the fiscal year 2006 enacted level.

                    General Services Administration

    The General Services Administration [GSA] was established 
by the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 
when Congress mandated the consolidation of the Federal 
Government's real property and administrative services. GSA is 
organized into the Public Buildings Service, the Federal Supply 
Service, the Federal Technology Service, the Office of 
Governmentwide Policy, and the Office of Citizen Services and 
Communications.

     FEDERAL BUILDINGS FUND--LIMITATIONS ON AVAILABILITY OF REVENUE

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Limitation of availability of revenue:
    Limitation on availability, 2006....................  $7,752,745,000
    Limitation on availability, 2007....................   8,046,666,000
House allowance.........................................   7,180,886,000
Committee recommendation................................   8,064,737,000

    The Federal Buildings Fund program consists of the 
following activities financed from rent charges:
    Construction and Acquisition of Facilities.--Space is 
acquired through the construction or purchase of facilities and 
prospectus-level extensions to existing buildings. All costs 
directly attributable to site acquisition, construction, and 
the full range of design and construction services, and 
management and inspection of construction projects are funded 
under this activity.
    Repairs and Alterations.--Repairs and alterations of public 
buildings as well as associated design and construction 
services are funded under this activity. Protection of the 
Government's investment, health and safety of building 
occupants, transfer of agencies from leased space, and cost 
effectiveness are the principal criteria used in establishing 
priorities. Primary consideration is given to repairs to 
prevent deterioration and damage to buildings, their support 
systems, and operating equipment. This activity also provides 
for conversion of existing facilities and non-prospectus 
extensions.
    Installment Acquisition Payments.--Payments are made for 
liabilities incurred under purchase contract authority and 
lease purchase arrangements. The periodic payments cover 
principal, interest on the debt incurred for construction of 
Federal buildings.
    Rental of Space.--Space is acquired through the leasing of 
buildings including space occupied by Federal agencies in U.S. 
Postal Service facilities, 174 million rentable square feet in 
fiscal year 2006, and 180 million rentable square feet in 
fiscal year 2007.
    Building Operations.--Services are provided for Government-
owned and leased facilities, including cleaning, utilities and 
fuel, maintenance, miscellaneous services (such as moving, 
evaluation of new materials and equipment, and field 
supervision), and general management and administration of all 
real property related programs including salaries and benefits 
paid from the Federal Buildings Fund.
    Other Programs.--When requested by Federal agencies, the 
Public Buildings Service provides building services, such as 
tenant alterations, cleaning and other operations, and 
protection services which are in excess of those services 
provided under the commercial rental charge. For presentation 
purposes, the balances of the Unconditional Gifts of Real, 
Personal, or Other Property trust fund have been combined with 
the Federal Buildings Fund.

                      CONSTRUCTION AND ACQUISITION

Limitation on availability, 2006........................  ($792,056,000)
Limitation on availability, 2007........................   (690,095,000)
House allowance.........................................    374,095,000 
Committee recommendation................................    708,166,000 

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The construction and acquisition fund shall be available 
for site, design, construction, management, and inspection 
costs for the construction of new Federal facilities.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends a limitation of $708,166,000 for 
the fund.
    The judicial branch has indicated that it is in a funding 
crisis, in part, precipitated by the deficit concerns facing 
the Federal Government and, from its perspective, an onerous 
financial burden caused by GSA rent bills for Federal courtroom 
space.
    The Committee is concerned by continued efforts by the 
Federal judiciary to circumvent paying rents to the Federal 
Buildings Fund [FBF]. In a recent report by the Government 
Accountability Office on the courthouse construction program, 
GAO stated that any rent exemption for the Federal judiciary 
would seriously hinder the FBF's ability to accumulate 
sufficient funds for capital investment for the 68 executive 
and legislative branch customers that it serves. Because GSA's 
customer agencies contribute their fair share to the FBF, the 
FBF is fulfilling its intended role as a source of both 
operating and capital funds for the Federal Government as a 
whole.
    The Federal judiciary should be aware that the FBF has 
financed the judiciary's request for courthouse repair and 
alteration as well as construction. Over the last 20 years, 
almost $1,700,000,000 in major modernizations for courthouses 
were funded by rent paid by executive, legislative, and 
judicial branch agencies. In addition, the Committee would note 
that $3,400,000,000 in new construction for the Federal 
judiciary has been spent on approximately 50 new Government-
owned and 30 lease-constructed courthouses over the past 10 
years.
    The Committee is disappointed that the judicial branch has 
sought to relieve its overall budget problems by challenging 
the requirement to pay rent and cost of its courthouses. In 
pursuing the $3,400,000,000 in new construction of Federal 
courthouses, the Federal judiciary was well aware that there 
were rents associated with the approval of these courthouses by 
Congress. Terms and rents were agreed to by the Federal 
judiciary, GSA, OMB, and ultimately approved by Congress. The 
rules of the game can not be changed at this time.
    The Committee would also note that the Federal judiciary's 
Space and Facilities Committee will shortly be releasing its 
new courthouse management 5-year plan, following a moratorium 
and time out and review of 2 years. The Committee looks forward 
to reviewing the additional space and facility needs and 
increased rent payments that the Federal judiciary will be 
pursuing.
    The Committee notes the rental adjustments made by GSA in 
favor of the judiciary and urges GSA to continue to monitor and 
calculate rental charges carefully so as to avoid erroneous 
billings in the future.

                        REPAIRS AND ALTERATIONS

Limitation on availability, 2006 .......................    $861,376,000
Limitation on availability, 2007........................     866,194,000
House allowance.........................................     435,281,000
Committee recommendation................................     866,194,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    Under this activity, the General Services Administration 
[GSA] executes its responsibility for repairs and alterations 
[R&A] of both Government-owned and leased facilities under the 
control of GSA. The primary goal of this activity is to provide 
commercially equivalent space to tenant agencies. Safety, 
quality, and operating efficiency of facilities are given 
primary consideration in carrying out this responsibility.
    R&A workload requirements originate with scheduled onsite 
inspections of buildings by qualified regional engineers and 
building managers. The work identified through these 
inspections is programmed in order of priority into the 
Inventory Reporting Information System [IRIS] and incorporated 
into a 5-year plan for accomplishment, based upon funding 
availability, urgency, and the volume of R&A work that GSA has 
the capability to execute annually. Since fiscal year 1995, 
design and construction services activities associated with 
repair and alteration projects have been funded in this 
account.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends new obligational authority of 
$866,194,000 for repairs and alterations in fiscal year 2007. 
This amount is the same as the President's request.

                    INSTALLMENT ACQUISITION PAYMENTS

Limitation on availability, 2006........................    $168,180,000
Limitation on availability, 2007........................     163,999,000
House allowance.........................................     163,999,000
Committee recommendation................................     163,999,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Public Buildings Amendments of 1972 enables GSA to 
enter into contractual arrangements for the construction of a 
backlog of approved but unfunded projects. This activity 
provides for the payment of interest to the Federal Financing 
Bank related to facilities acquired pursuant to the Public 
Buildings Amendments of 1972 (40 U.S.C. 592).

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends a limitation of $163,999,000 for 
installment acquisition payments, the same as the budget 
request and $4,181,000 below the fiscal year 2006 funding 
level.

                            RENTAL OF SPACE

Limitation on availability, 2006........................  $4,046,031,000
Limitation on availability, 2007........................   4,322,548,000
House allowance.........................................   4,322,548,000
Committee recommendation................................   4,322,548,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    GSA is responsible for leasing general purpose space and 
land incident thereto for Federal agencies, except cases where 
GSA has delegated its leasing authority. GSA's policy is to 
lease privately owned buildings and land only when: (1) Federal 
space needs cannot be otherwise accommodated satisfactorily in 
existing Government-owned or leased space; (2) leasing proves 
to be more efficient than the construction or alteration of a 
Federal building; (3) construction or alteration is not 
warranted because requirements in the community are 
insufficient or are indefinite in scope or duration; or (4) 
completion of a new Federal building within a reasonable time 
cannot be assured.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends a limitation of $4,322,548,000 for 
rental of space. The Committee recommendation is the same as 
the President's budget request and $276,517,000 above the 
fiscal year 2006 enacted level.

                          BUILDING OPERATIONS

Limitation on availability, 2006........................  $1,885,102,000
Limitation on availability, 2007........................   2,003,830,000
House allowance.........................................   1,885,102,000
Committee recommendation................................   2,003,830,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    This activity provides for the operation of all Government-
owned facilities under the jurisdiction of GSA and building 
services in GSA-leased space where the terms of the lease do 
not require the lessor to furnish such services. Services 
included in building operations are cleaning, protection, 
maintenance, payments for utilities and fuel, grounds 
maintenance, and elevator operations. Other related supporting 
services include various real property management and staff 
support activities such as space acquisition and assignment; 
the moving of Federal agencies as a result of space alterations 
in order to provide better space utilization in existing 
buildings; onsite inspection of building services and 
operations accomplished by private contractors; and various 
highly specialized contract administration support functions.
    The space, operations, and services referred to above are 
furnished by GSA to its tenant agencies in return for payment 
of rent. Due to considerations unique to their operation, GSA 
also provides varying levels of above-standard services in 
agency headquarter facilities, including those occupied by the 
Executive Office of the President, such as the east and west 
wings of the White House.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends a limitation of $2,003,830,000 for 
building operations. This amount is the same as the President's 
budget request and $118,728,000 above the fiscal year 2006 
enacted level.
    The Committee is pleased with the initial actions of GSA to 
promote exercise and good health through the promotion of the 
use of stairs in Federal buildings, and the Committee 
encourages these efforts to be continued.

                         GOVERNMENT-WIDE POLICY

                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2006....................................     $52,796,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................      52,550,000
House allowance.........................................      52,550,000
Committee recommendation................................      52,550,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Office of Government-wide Policy provides for 
Government-wide policy development, support, and evaluation 
functions associated with real and personal property, supplies, 
vehicles, aircraft, information technology, acquisition, 
transportation and travel management. This office also provides 
for the Federal Procurement Data Center, Workplace Initiatives, 
Regulatory Information Service Center, the Catalog of Federal 
Domestic Assistance, and the Committee Management Secretariat. 
The Office of Government-wide Policy, working cooperatively 
with other agencies, provides the leadership needed to develop 
and evaluate the implementation of policies designed to achieve 
the most cost-effective solutions for the delivery of 
administrative services and sound workplace practices, while 
reducing regulations and empowering employees.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $52,550,000 
for Government-wide Policy. This amount is the same as the 
President's budget request and is a reduction of $246,000 below 
the fiscal year 2006 level.
    Environmental Training Program.--The Committee is pleased 
with the significant cost savings recently demonstrated in the 
environmental analysis efforts undertaken by GSA in the 
National Capital Region. The Committee recommends that GSA 
extend this environmental training and analysis program 
currently underway to other GSA regions. The Committee urges 
GSA to work with its existing partner to preserve continuity 
when expanding this program to the eight other GSA regions. The 
Committee also encourages the utilization of leased employees 
to implement these cost savings programs in other GSA regions 
whenever possible.

                           OPERATING EXPENSES

                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2006....................................     $99,890,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................      83,032,000
House allowance.........................................      80,032,000
Committee recommendation................................      83,032,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    Operating Expenses provides funding 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 $83,032,000 
for the Operating Expenses. This amount is the same as the 
administration's request and $16,858,000 below the fiscal year 
2006 enacted level.

                      OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

Appropriations, 2006....................................     $43,410,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................      44,312,000
House allowance.........................................      44,312,000
Committee recommendation................................      44,312,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    This appropriation provides agency-wide audit and 
investigative functions to identify and correct management and 
administrative deficiencies within the General Services 
Administration [GSA], creating conditions for existing or 
potential instances of fraud, waste and mismanagement. This 
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 $44,312,000 
for the Office of Inspector General. This amount is the same as 
the President's budget request and $902,000 above the fiscal 
year 2006 enacted level.

                   ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT [E-GOV] FUND

Appropriations, 2006....................................      $3,000,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................       5,000,000
House allowance.........................................       3,000,000
Committee recommendation................................       5,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    This program supports interagency ``electronic government'' 
or ``e-gov'' initiatives, i.e., projects that use the Internet 
or other electronic methods to provide individuals, businesses, 
and other government agencies with simpler and more timely 
access to Federal information, benefits, services, and business 
opportunities.
    Proposals for funding must meet capital planning guidelines 
and include adequate documentation to demonstrate a sound 
business case, attention to security and privacy, and a way to 
measure performance against planned results. In addition, a 
small portion of the money could be used for awards to those 
project management teams that delivered the best product to 
meet customer needs.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $5,000,000 for 
the Electronic Government Fund. This amount is the same as the 
President's request. The Committee supports the use of funding 
under this account for the continued development of an eTravel 
System, which is designed to centralize a travel system for the 
Federal Government through a self-service electronic system. 
The eTravel system when completed will eliminate the hardcopy 
travel documentation. This program will ultimately automate the 
entire travel process. Nevertheless, the Committee believes 
that the eTravel system should be designed to ensure the 
participation of small business subcontracting and directs GSA 
to establish benchmarks to ensure the participation and growth 
of small business participation. These benchmarks shall be no 
less than 23 percent of all contracted dollars.

           ALLOWANCES AND OFFICE STAFF FOR FORMER PRESIDENTS

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2006....................................      $2,952,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................       3,030,000
House allowance.........................................       3,030,000
Committee recommendation................................       3,030,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    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, a 
pension for the widow of former President Lyndon B. Johnson, 
and postal franking privileges for the widows of former 
Presidents Lyndon B. Johnson and Ronald Reagan. 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 $3,030,000 for allowances and 
office staff for former Presidents.
    Below is listed a detailed analysis of the Committee's 
recommendation for fiscal year 2007 funding:

                    FISCAL YEAR 2007 BUDGET ALLOWANCES AND OFFICE STAFF FOR FORMER PRESIDENTS
                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Ford      Carter      Bush     Clinton     Widows     Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Personnel Compensation........................         96         96         96         96  .........        384
Personnel Benefits............................         24          2         63         64  .........        153
Benefits for Former Presidents................        188        188        188        197         20        781
Travel........................................         46          2         55         64  .........        167
Rental Payments to GSA........................        105        102        175        498  .........        880
Communications, Utilities and Miscellaneous
 charges:
    Telephone.................................         16         10         16         77  .........        119
    Postage...................................          9         15         13         15          8         60
Printing......................................          5          5         14          9  .........         33
Other Services................................         37         82         65        113  .........        297
Supplies and Materials........................         18          5         15         16  .........         54
Equipment.....................................          6          7         48         11  .........         72
                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------
      Total Obligations.......................        550        514        748      1,160         28      3,000
                                               =================================================================
Infrastructure Contingency Planning...........  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........         30
                                               =================================================================
      Total Obligations.......................        550        514        748      1,160         28      3,030
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                FEDERAL CITIZEN INFORMATION CENTER FUND

Appropriations, 2006....................................     $15,000,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................      16,866,000
House allowance.........................................      16,866,000
Committee recommendation................................      16,866,000

                          program description

    The Federal Citizen Information Center [FCIC] brings 
together an array of U.S. Government information and services 
and makes them accessible to the public. This information is 
made available on the web, via e-mail, in print, or over the 
telephone.
    Originally established within the General Services 
Administration [GSA] by Executive order on October 26, 1970, to 
help Federal departments and agencies promote and distribute 
printed consumer information, FCIC has evolved and consolidated 
a variety of complementary functions to augment the original 
print and media channels through which it informed the public.
    On January 28, 2000, the FCIC assumed responsibility for 
the operations of the Federal Information Center [FIC] program. 
The 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 the nationwide toll-free National Contact Center.
    On June 30, 2002, FCIC assumed operational control of the 
FirstGov.gov website, the official portal of the U.S. 
Government, and became a critical part of GSA's newly 
established Office of Citizen Services and Communications. This 
Office brings together all of GSA's citizen-centered programs. 
The new Office serves as a central Federal gateway for 
citizens, businesses, other governments, and the media to 
easily obtain information and services from the Government. On 
March 31, 2003, FCIC began accepting e-mail and fax inquiries 
from the public through the FirstGov.gov website and responds 
to them at its National Contact Center.
    Public Law 98-63, enacted July 30, 1983, established a 
revolving fund for the FCIC. 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 and contact center services, 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 Committee recognizes the need for the General Services 
Administration [GSA] to work with the Federal Protective 
Service [FPS] of the Department of Homeland Security [DHS] to 
implement the newly developed FSRM methodology. Implementing 
the new methodology will facilitate the performance of risk 
assessments to support new construction, major modernizations 
and/or pre-lease projects. The Committee remains concerned that 
a cooperative effort between FPS and GSA is required to fully 
implement Interagency Security Committee [ISC] Security Design 
Criteria and the ISC Security Criteria for Leased Space. The 
GSA will work with DHS to provide engineering expertise to 
support the structural aspects of the project's specific risk 
assessments. Therefore, the GSA Public Building Service [PBS] 
(Office of the Chief Architect and Office of Real Property 
Asset Management) is directed to continue to work with the 
private sector to implement the new Federal Security Risk 
Management methodology to facilitate the application of the 
process and the software throughout the GSA regions and in 
consultation with the Department of Homeland Security's Federal 
Protective Service.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends $16,866,000 for the Federal 
Citizen Information Center, an increase of $1,866,000 above the 
fiscal year 2006 enacted level and equal to 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.

       ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS--GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

    Section 601 authorizes GSA to credit accounts with certain 
funds received from Government corporations.
    Section 602 authorizes GSA to use funds for the hire of 
passenger motor vehicles.
    Section 603 authorizes GSA to transfer funds within the 
Federal buildings fund for meeting program requirements.
    Section 604 limits funding for courthouse construction 
which does not meet certain standards of a capital improvement 
plan.
    Section 605 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 rate.
    Section 606 continues the provision that permits GSA to pay 
small claims (up to $250,000) made against the Government.
    Section 607 prohibits the use of funds by GSA to reorganize 
its organizational structure except through an operating plan 
change.
    Section 608 includes a new provision as proposed by the 
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs to 
merge the General Supply Fund and Information Technology Fund 
into a new Acquisition Services Fund.
    Section 609 includes a new provision naming the future 
Federal courthouse in Nashville, Tennessee.

                     Merit Systems Protection Board


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2006....................................     $35,244,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................      36,531,000
House allowance.........................................      36,531,000
Committee recommendation................................      36,550,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Merit System Protection Board [MSPB] was established by 
the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978. MSPB is an independent 
quasi-judicial agency manifested to protect Federal merits 
systems against partisan political and other prohibited 
personnel practices and to ensure adequate protection for 
employees against abuses by agency management.
    MSPB assists Federal agencies in running a merit-based 
civil service system. This is accomplished on a case-by-case 
basis through hearing and deciding employee appeals, and on a 
systemic basis by reviewing significant actions and regulations 
of the Office of Personnel Management [OPM] and conducting 
studies of the civil service and other merit systems. The 
intended results of MSPB's efforts are to assure that personnel 
actions taken against employees are processed within the law, 
and that actions taken by OPM and other agencies support and 
enhance Federal merit principles.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $36,550,000 
for the Merit Systems Protection Board, this is an increase of 
$1,326,000 above the fiscal year 2006 enacted level and $19,000 
above the President's request. The Committee makes available no 
more than $2,605,000 for adjudicated appeals through an 
appropriation from the trust fund consistent with past 
practice, allowing for appropriate funding for MSPB to continue 
as arbitrator for the additional appeals cases from the 
Department of Defense and the Department of Homeland Security.

 Morris K. Udall Scholarship and Excellence in National Environmental 
                           Policy Foundation


   FEDERAL PAYMENT TO MORRIS K. UDALL SCHOLARSHIP AND EXCELLENCE IN 
                NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY FOUNDATION

Appropriations, 2006....................................      $1,980,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................................
House allowance.........................................       2,000,000
Committee recommendation................................       2,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    Public Law 106-568 authorized the Morris K. Udall 
Foundation to establish training programs for professionals in 
health care policy and public policy, such as the Native 
Nations Institute [NNI]. NNI, based at the University of 
Arizona, will provide Native Americans with leadership and 
management training and analyze policies relevant to tribes.
    The General Fund payment to the Morris K. Udall Fund is 
invested in Treasury securities with maturities suitable to the 
needs of the Fund. Interest earnings from the investments are 
used to carry out the activities of the Morris K. Udall 
Foundation. The Foundation awards scholarships, fellowships and 
grants, and funds activities of the Udall Center.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,000,000 for 
the Morris K. Udall Foundation. The Committee includes language 
to allow up to 60 percent of the appropriation to be used for 
the expenses of the Native Nations Institute. The Committee 
also includes language requiring the Foundation to report to 
the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations on the amount 
of funding, if any, transferred from the Trust Fund for the 
Native Nations Institute and justification for such transfers.

                 ENVIRONMENTAL DISPUTE RESOLUTION FUND

Appropriations, 2006....................................      $1,881,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................         693,000
House allowance.........................................       2,000,000
Committee recommendation................................       2,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The U.S. Institute for Environmental Conflict Resolution is 
a Federal program established by Public Law 105-156 to assist 
parties in resolving environmental, natural resource, and 
public lands conflicts. The Institute is part of the Morris K. 
Udall Foundation, and serves as an impartial, non-partisan 
institution providing professional expertise, services, and 
resources to all parties involved in such disputes. The 
Institute helps parties determine whether collaborative problem 
solving is appropriate for specific environmental conflicts, 
how and when to bring all the parties together for discussion, 
and whether a third-party facilitator or mediator might be 
helpful in assisting the parties in their efforts to each 
consensus or to resolve the conflict. In addition, the 
Institute maintains a roster of qualified facilitators and 
mediators with substantial experience in environmental conflict 
resolution, and can help parties in selecting an appropriate 
neutral.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,000,000 for 
the Morris K. Udall Environmental Dispute Resolution Fund. This 
amount is the fiscal year 2006 enacted level and $1,307,000 
above the administration's request.

              National Archives and Records Administration

    The National Archives and Records Administration [NARA] is 
the national recordkeeper. NARA is an independent agency 
created by statute in 1934 to safeguard the records of all 
three branches of the Federal Government. NARA administers the 
Information Security Oversight Office [ISOO], is the publisher 
of the Federal Register and makes grants for historical 
documentation through the National Historical Publications and 
Records Commission [NHPRC].

                           OPERATING EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2006....................................    $280,215,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................     289,605,000
House allowance.........................................     281,605,000
Committee recommendation................................     285,915,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    This account provides for basic operations dealing with 
management of the Federal Government's archives and records, 
operation of Presidential Libraries, and for the review for 
declassification of classified security information.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $285,915,000 for operating 
expenses of the National Archives and Records Administration 
for fiscal year 2007. This amount is $3,690,000 below the 
budget request and $5,700,000 above the fiscal year 2006 
enacted level.
    The Committee's recommendation includes additional funds to 
maintain current service levels, to support the Public Interest 
Declassification Board, to prepare for the new George W. Bush 
Presidential Library, and to relocate the Southwest and Central 
Plains Regional Archives facilities. The Committee has denied 
additional operating expense funds for the Nixon Presidential 
Library due to other higher priorities and budget constraints.

                      ELECTRONIC RECORDS ARCHIVES

Appropriations, 2006....................................     $37,535,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................      45,455,000
House allowance.........................................      45,455,000
Committee recommendation................................      48,810,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    National Archives and Records Administration [NARA] is 
developing an Electronic Records Archives [ERA] that will 
ensure the preservation of and access to Government electronic 
records. With the rapid changes in technology today, the 
formats in which records are stored become obsolete within a 
few years, making records inaccessible even if they are 
preserved intact with the most modern technology. ERA will 
preserve electronic records generated in a manner that enables 
requesters to access them on computer systems now and in the 
future.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $48,810,000 for the Electronics 
Records Archives project. This amount is an increase of 
$3,355,000 above the budget request and $11,275,000 above the 
fiscal year 2006 enacted level. Bill language is included 
requiring NARA to submit a spend plan for these funds. The 
Committee has included an additional $3,355,000 to support 
NARA's work with the Naval Oceanographic Office at the National 
Center for Critical Information Processing and Storage at the 
Stennis Space Center in Mississippi.
    The Committee strongly supports the Electronic Record 
Archives [ERA] program at the National Archives Records 
Administration. The Committee is concerned that the amount 
requested in the President's budget may not be adequate to meet 
current program requirements for the development of systems to 
interface with agencies, receive all documents, and conduct all 
necessary training programs, and that some of these activities 
may be delayed. The Committee is committed to working next year 
to ensure that this program is adequately funded on an 
expedited basis so ERA can preserve the nation's important 
records at the earliest feasible date.

                        REPAIRS AND RESTORATION

Appropriations, 2006....................................      $9,585,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................      13,020,000
House allowance.........................................      13,020,000
Committee recommendation................................      18,790,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    This account provides for the repair, alteration, and 
improvement of Archives facilities and Presidential Libraries 
nationwide, and provides adequate storage for holdings. It will 
better enable NARA to maintain its facilities in proper 
condition for public visitors, researchers, and NARA employees, 
and also maintain the structural integrity of the buildings.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $18,790,000 for the repairs and 
restoration account. This amount is $9,205,000 above the fiscal 
year 2006 enacted level and $5,770,000 above the budget 
request.
    The Committee recommends funds to be distributed as 
follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Committee
                                                          recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ongoing repairs and restoration.........................      $6,120,000
LBJ Presidential Library................................       3,760,000
Alaska Regional Archives and Records Center.............       2,500,000
JFK Presidential Library................................       6,410,000
                                                         ---------------
      Total.............................................      18,790,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Committee has prioritized funding under this account to 
projects that have already begun construction. The most notable 
project is the Lyndon Baines Johnson [LBJ] Presidential Library 
project that is currently undergoing construction but currently 
needs $3,760,000 to complete the project. Accordingly, the 
Committee has given top priority to the LBJ project by 
providing $3,760,000. Further, the Committee recognizes that 
construction funds have already been provided to the new Alaska 
regional archives and records center. This project has 
completed its planning and design and site selection phases and 
is prepared for construction. Therefore, the Committee also has 
made this a priority and appropriated $2,500,000 for this 
project. Last, since the JFK Presidential Library will complete 
the design phase by the end of fiscal year 2006, the Committee 
also directs NARA to provide $6,410,000 to the JFK Presidential 
Library.

        National Historical Publications and Records Commission


                             GRANTS PROGRAM

Appropriations, 2006....................................      $7,425,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................................
House allowance.........................................       7,500,000
Committee recommendation................................       5,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The National Historical Publications and Records Commission 
[NHPRC] provides grants nationwide to preserve and publish 
records that document American history. Administered within the 
National Archives, which preserves Federal records, 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 $5,000,000 for the National 
Historical Publications and Records Commission [NHPRC]. This 
amount is $2,425,000 below the fiscal year 2006 enacted level 
and $5,000,000 above the budget request.
    The Committee strongly supports the NHPRC program and has 
provided funding to continue this important program. This 
program has played a central role in the preservation and 
dissemination of the Nation's documentary heritage. Further, 
the program has been successful in leveraging private sector 
contributions.

                        ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISION

    The Committee has included a new provision requiring NARA 
to develop a comprehensive capital needs assessment [CNA] for 
its entire infrastructure of Presidential libraries and records 
facilities. The provision requires NARA to submit the CNA as 
part of its fiscal year 2008 budget submission. The Committee 
strongly believes that a rationale approach through a CNA is 
needed for NARA due to the uneven funding priorities submitted 
by the administration. The Committee believes that NARA can 
benefit from this approach, which has been used by other 
Federal agencies such as the Department of Veterans Affairs and 
the National Science Foundation.

                  National Credit Union Administration


                       central liquidity facility


------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Direct loan       Administrative
                                        limitation          expenses
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2006..............   ($1,500,000,000)         ($323,000)
Budget estimate, 2007.............    (1,500,000,000)          (331,000)
House allowance...................    (1,500,000,000)          (331,000)
Committee recommendation..........    (1,500,000,000)          (331,000)
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          program description

    The National Credit Union Administration [NCUA] Central 
Liquidity Facility [CLF] was created by the National Credit 
Union Central Liquidity Facility Act (Public Law 95-630). The 
CLF is a mixed-ownership Government corporation managed by the 
National Credit Union Administration Board and owned by its 
member credit unions.
    The purpose of the CLF is to improve the general financial 
stability of credit unions by meeting their seasonal and 
emergency liquidity needs and thereby encourage savings, 
support consumer and mortgage lending, and provide basic 
financial resources to all segments of the economy. To become 
eligible for CLF services, credit unions invest in the capital 
stock of the CLF, and the facility uses the proceeds of such 
investments and the proceeds of borrowed funds to meet the 
liquidity needs of credit unions. The primary sources of funds 
for the CLF are stock subscriptions from credit unions and 
borrowings.
    The CLF may borrow funds from any source, with the amount 
of borrowing limited to 12 times the amount of subscribed 
capital stock and surplus.
    Loans are available to meet short-term requirements for 
funds attributable to emergency outflows from managerial 
difficulties or local economic downturns. Seasonal credit is 
also provided to accommodate fluctuations caused by cyclical 
changes in such areas as agriculture, education, and retail 
business. Loans can also be made to offset protracted credit 
problems caused by factors such as regional economic decline.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends the budget request of limiting 
administrative expenses for the Central Liquidity Fund [CLF] to 
$331,000 in fiscal year 2007. The Committee recommends a 
limitation of $1,500,000,000 for the principal amount of new 
direct loans to member credit unions. These amounts are the 
same as the budget request.
    The Committee directs the National Credit Union 
Administration [NCUA] to continue to provide reports on the 
lending activities under CLF. This information should be 
provided to the Committee on a quarterly basis through 
September 2007.

               COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REVOLVING LOAN FUND

Appropriations, 2006....................................        $941,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................         941,000
House allowance.........................................         941,000
Committee recommendation................................         941,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    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 5 years, although 
shorter repayment periods may be considered. Technical 
assistance grants [TAGs] are also available to low-income 
credit unions. Until fiscal year 2001, only earnings generated 
from the CDRLF were available to fund TAGs. Grants are 
available for improving operations as well as addressing safety 
and soundness issues. In fiscal year 2004, NCUA designated 
funds for specific programs, including taxpayer assistance, 
financial education, home ownership initiatives, remittance 
services, individual development accounts [IDAs], and training 
assistance.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $941,000 for technical assistance 
grants to community development credit unions. This funding 
level is equal to the budget request and is the same as the 
fiscal year 2006 enacted level. 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 supports NCUA's outreach efforts to 
undeserved rural and urban communities across America through 
technical assistance grants provided within CDRLF. The 
Committee encourages NCUA to continue their efforts in 
providing an alternative to predatory lending services through 
their targeted technical assistance grants and support.

                  National Transportation Safety Board


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2006....................................     $75,933,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................      79,594,000
House allowance.........................................      81,594,000
Committee recommendation................................      79,594,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    Initially established along with the Department of 
Transportation [DOT], the National Transportation Safety Board 
[NTSB] commenced operations on April 1, 1967, as an independent 
Federal agency charged by Congress with investigating every 
civil aviation accident in the United States as well as 
significant accidents in the other modes of transportation--
railroad, highway, marine and pipeline--and issuing safety 
recommendations aimed at preventing future accidents. Although 
it has always operated independently, NTSB relied on DOT for 
funding and administrative support until the Independent Safety 
Board Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-633) severed all ties between 
the two organizations starting in 1975.
    In addition to its investigatory duties, NTSB is 
responsible for maintaining the Government's database of civil 
aviation accidents and also conducts special studies of 
transportation safety issues of national significance. 
Furthermore, in accordance with the provisions of international 
treaties, NTSB supplies investigators to serve as U.S. 
Accredited Representatives for aviation accidents overseas 
involving U.S-registered aircraft, or involving aircraft or 
major components of U.S. manufacture. NTSB also serves as the 
``court of appeals'' for any airman, mechanic or mariner 
whenever certificate action is taken by the Federal Aviation 
Administration [FAA] or the U.S. Coast Guard Commandant, or 
when civil penalties are assessed by FAA.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $79,594,000 for the National 
Transportation Safety Board, which is the same as the budget 
request and is $3,661,000 more than the fiscal year 2006 
enacted level.
    The Committee notes the NTSB's efforts to return its focus 
on the agency's core mission of investigating and identifying 
the probable causes of transportation crashes and incidents. 
The Committee hopes that the NTSB will continue this trend in 
order to improve its performance on completing accident 
investigations and reports in a timely manner. The Committee 
also notes recent steps the NTSB has taken to manage its 
resources more effectively, such as targeting its Academy on 
training the NTSB's own staff and renting out the Academy's 
building when it is not otherwise being used. The Committee, 
however, believes that more can be done to ensure that revenue 
generated by the Academy will cover its costs instead of 
diverting resources from the core mission of the NTSB.

                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

                              (RESCISSION)

Rescission, 2006........................................     -$1,000,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................      -1,664,000
House allowance.........................................      -1,664,000
Committee recommendation................................      -1,664,000

    The fiscal year 2004 Supplemental Appropriations bill 
(Public Law 106-246) provided NTSB with emergency expenses 
associated with its investigation of the Egypt Air Flight 990 
and Alaska Air Flight 261 accidents. These funds were used for 
wreckage location and recovery facilities, technical support, 
testing, and wreckage mock-up. All of these activities have 
been completed and an unobligated balance of $1,664,000 
remains. The Committee recommends the requested rescission of 
this amount.

                 Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation


          PAYMENT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD REINVESTMENT CORPORATION

Appropriations, 2006....................................    $116,820,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................     119,790,000
House allowance.........................................     119,790,000
Committee recommendation................................     119,790,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation was created by 
the Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation Act (title VI of the 
Housing and Community Development Amendments of 1978, Public 
Law 95-557, October 31, 1978). Neighborhood Reinvestment 
Corporation now operates under the trade name ``NeighborWorks 
America.'' NeighborWorks America helps local communities 
establish efficient and effective partnerships between 
residents and representatives of the public and private 
sectors. These partnership-based organizations are independent, 
tax-exempt, nonprofit entities and are frequently known as 
Neighborhood Housing Services [NHS] or mutual housing 
associations.
    Collectively, these organizations are known as the 
NeighborWorks network. Nationally, 235 NeighborWorks 
organizations serve nearly 3,000 urban, suburban and rural 
communities in 49 States, the District of Columbia, and Puerto 
Rico.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $119,790,000 for the Neighborhood 
Reinvestment Corporation for fiscal year 2007. This amount is 
the same as the budget request and $2,970,000 above the fiscal 
year 2006 enacted level.
    The Committee has included a set-aside of $5,000,000 for 
the multifamily rental housing initiative. This program has 
been successful in developing innovative approaches to 
producing mixed-income affordable housing throughout the 
Nation. The Committee strongly supports this initiative and 
commends Neighborhood Reinvestment for their efforts in 
attracting additional private sector investments for this 
initiative. The Committee directs NRC to provide a status 
report on this initiative in its fiscal year 2007 budget 
justifications.
    The Committee continues its support of Neighborhood 
Reinvestment efforts in building capacity in rural areas. The 
Committee urges the Corporation to continue its efforts in 
addressing the needs of rural communities.

                      Office of Government Ethics


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2006....................................     $11,037,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................      11,489,000
House allowance.........................................      11,489,000
Committee recommendation................................      11,489,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Office of Government Ethics [OGE], a separate agency 
within the executive branch, was established by the Ethics of 
Government Act of 1978. OGE is charged by law to provide 
overall direction of executive branch policies designed to 
prevent conflicts of interest and ensure high ethical 
standards. OGE carries out these responsibilities by developing 
regulations pertaining to conflicts of interest, postemployment 
restrictions, standards of conduct, and public and confidential 
financial disclosure in the executive branch; by monitoring 
compliance with financial disclosure requirements by 
recommending appropriate corrective action when necessary; by 
evaluating the effectiveness of applicable laws; and by 
preparing advisor opinions and policy of memoranda interpreting 
requirements regarding conflicts of interest, post employment, 
standards of conduct, and financial disclosure.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $11,489,000 
for salaries and expenses of the Office of Government Ethics in 
fiscal year 2007. This amount is the same as the President's 
budget request and $452,000 above the fiscal year 2006 level.

                     Office of Personnel Management


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2006....................................    $121,296,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................     111,095,000
House allowance.........................................     111,095,000
Committee recommendation................................     111,095,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Office of Personnel Management [OPM] was established by 
Public Law 95-454, the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978, 
enacted on October 13, 1978. In that act, the Office of 
Personnel Management was established in section 1101 of title 
5, United States Code. Subsequent sections of chapter 11 
provide for the principal officials of the agency and the 
functions of the Director, which are really the functions of 
the Agency, as well as providing for the delegation of 
authority for personnel management from the President and, 
subsequently, by the Director.
    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 Governmentwide 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 on issues such as veterans preference. OPM 
oversees examining of applicants for employment, issues 
regulations and policies on hiring, classification and pay, 
training, investigations, 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 $111,095,000 
for the salaries and expenses of the Office of Personnel 
Management, which is the same as the budget request and 
$10,201,000 less than the fiscal year 2006 level. Of the amount 
provided no more than $8,349,000 is to be used for e-Government 
projects. This amount is the same as the President's request.
    The Committee is very concerned with the practices of the 
Office of Personnel Management regarding its approach to human 
resources products and services. Federal agencies need to have 
the flexibility to contract as they see fit, including 
contracting with private companies to provide online employment 
applications and processing services, as well as choice in 
selecting service providers and human resource systems. While 
the Committee understands the need for human resource standards 
in public and private contracts, the Committee expects OPM to 
allow Federal agencies to have choices in such decisions. The 
Committee directs OPM to report to the Committee within 120 
days of enactment of this act on their human resources products 
and services, including actions taken in response to these 
concerns.
    Child Care.--OPM and GSA, with technical assistance from 
GAO, are conducting a survey of the child care needs of 
executive, legislative and judicial branch employees. Within 45 
days of the completion and reporting of this survey, GAO should 
provide relevant recommendations for further action to the 
Committee. The Committee directs OPM to report on progress made 
in implementing any recommendations within 6 months after the 
release of the report mentioned above. OPM should include 
further measures that may be taken to address Federal child 
care needs.
    The Committee directs OPM to continue its efforts to 
provide information and education to agencies and employees on 
promotion of the subsidy for child care expenses for lower 
income employees.
    Retirement Systems Modernization.--The Committee supports 
the Retirement Systems Modernization project [RSM], an effort 
initiated in 1997 to automate and streamline the manual paper-
intensive business processes used to administer the Federal 
employee retirement program. Within 10 years, 60 percent of the 
Federal workforce is eligible for retirement, thus it is 
crucial that an efficient and effective system be in place for 
current and future retirees. Knowing the pitfalls that have 
occurred in other IT projects, the Committee is pleased with 
the personal attention and commitment of the Director to the 
success of this project. The Committee recognizes that the RSM 
has benefited from the involvement and expertise of the 
Government Accountability Office, as have other IT projects. 
The Committee continues to be concerned about difficulties OPM 
has encountered in this modernization effort in the past, and 
requests that GAO comprehensively review the progress, costs, 
and risks of the program. The Committee notes the importance of 
the recommendations made by GAO and urges the Director to 
continue to give them careful consideration and to maintain 
close consultation with GAO in the future.

                               limitation


                       (TRANSFER OF TRUST FUNDS)

Limitation, 2006........................................     $99,017,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................     126,908,000
House allowance.........................................     100,178,000
Committee recommendation................................     126,908,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    These funds will be transferred from the appropriate trust 
funds of the Office of Personnel Management to cover 
administrative expenses for the retirement and insurance 
programs, including the cost of automating the retirement 
recording systems.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends a limitation of $126,908,000 which 
is $28,161,000 more than the fiscal year 2006 level. This 
amount is the same as the President's request and includes 
requested funds for the cost of automating the retirement 
recordkeeping systems.

                      OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2006....................................      $2,050,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................       1,598,000
House allowance.........................................       1,598,000
Committee recommendation................................       1,598,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Office of Inspector General is charged with 
establishing policies for conducting and coordinating efforts 
which promote economy, efficiency, and integrity in the Office 
of Personnel Management's activities which prevent and detect 
fraud, waste, and mismanagement in the agency's programs. 
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 agency 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. Administrative sanctions 
debar from participation in the health insurance program those 
health care providers whose conduct may pose a threat to the 
financial integrity of the program itself or to the well-being 
of insurance program enrollees.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,598,000 for 
salaries and expenses of the Office of Inspector General in 
fiscal year 2007. This amount is the same as the President's 
request and $452,000 less than the fiscal year 2006 enacted 
level.

               (LIMITATION ON TRANSFER FROM TRUST FUNDS)

Limitation, 2006........................................     $16,166,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................      16,166,000
House allowance.........................................      16,166,000
Committee recommendation................................      16,166,000

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends a limitation on transfers from the 
trust funds in support of the Office of Inspector General 
activities totaling $16,166,000 for fiscal year 2007. This 
amount is $452,000 more than the fiscal year 2006 enacted 
level, and the same as the President's request.

      government payment for annuitants, employees health benefits

Appropriations, 2006....................................  $8,393,000,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................   8,780,260,000
House allowance.........................................   8,780,260,000
Committee recommendation................................   8,780,260,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    This appropriation covers the Government's share of the 
cost of health insurance for annuitants covered by the Federal 
Employees Health Benefits Program and the Retired Federal 
Employees Health Benefits Act of 1960, as well as 
administrative expenses incurred by OPM for these programs.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $8,780,260,000 
for Government payments for annuitants, employees health 
benefits.

       government payment for annuitants, employee life insurance

Appropriations, 2006....................................     $36,000,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................      39,000,000
House allowance.........................................      39,000,000
Committee recommendation................................      39,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    Public Law 96-427, the Federal Employees' Group Life 
Insurance Act of 1980 requires that all employees under the age 
of 65 who separate from the Federal Government for purposes of 
retirement on or after January 1, 1990, continue to make 
contributions toward their basic life insurance coverage after 
retirement until they reach the age of 65. These retirees will 
contribute two-thirds of the cost of the basic life insurance 
premium, identical to the amount contributed by active Federal 
employees for basic life insurance coverage. As with the active 
Federal employees, the Government is required to contribute 
one-third of the cost of the premium for basic coverage. OPM, 
acting as the payroll office on behalf of Federal retirees, has 
requested, and the Committee has provided, the funding 
necessary to make the required Government contribution 
associated with annuitants' postretirement life insurance 
coverage.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $39,000,000 
for the Government payment for annuitants, employee life 
insurance. This amount equals the budget request.

        payment to civil service retirement and disability fund

Appropriations, 2006.................................... $10,072,000,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................  10,532,000,000
House allowance.........................................  10,532,000,000
Committee recommendation................................  10,532,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The civil service retirement and disability fund was 
established in 1920 to administer the financing and payment of 
annuities to retired Federal employees and their survivors. The 
fund covers the operation of the Civil Service Retirement 
System and the Federal Employees' Retirement System.
    This appropriation provides for the Government's share of 
retirement costs, transfers of interest on the unfunded 
liability and annuity disbursements attributable to military 
service, and survivor annuities to eligible former spouses of 
some annuitants who did not elect survivor coverage.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
$10,532,000,000 for payment to the civil service retirement and 
disability fund. The Committee recommendation equals the budget 
estimate.

                       Office of Special Counsel


                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2006....................................     $15,172,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................      15,937,000
House allowance.........................................      15,937,000
Committee recommendation................................      16,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The U.S. Office of Special Counsel [OSC] was first 
established on January 1, 1979. From 1979 until 1989, it 
operated as an autonomous investigative and prosecutorial arm 
of the Merit Systems Protection Board (the Board). In 1989, 
Congress enacted the Whistleblower Protection Act, which made 
OSC an independent agency within the Executive Branch. In 1994, 
the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act 
became law. It defined employment-related rights of persons in 
connection with military service, prohibited discrimination 
against them because of that service, and gave OSC new 
authority to pursue remedies for violations by Federal 
agencies.
    OSC investigates Federal employee allegations of prohibited 
personnel practices and, when appropriate, prosecutes cases 
before the Merit Systems Protection Board and enforces the 
Hatch Act. OSC also provides a channel for whistleblowing by 
Federal employees, and may transmit whistleblowing allegations 
to the agency head concerned and require an agency 
investigation and a report to Congress and the President when 
appropriate.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $16,000,000 
for the Office of Special Counsel. This amount is $63,000 above 
President's budget request and is $828,000 above the fiscal 
year 2006 enacted level.
    In the past, the Committee has been disappointed with the 
level of communication from OSC. The Committee is encouraged, 
however, by the recent level of communication and 
responsiveness from OSC. The Committee directs the Office of 
Special Counsel to submit its fiscal year 2008 budget 
justification on the first Monday in February, concurrent with 
the official submission of the President's budget to Congress. 
The justification should include highly detailed data and 
explanatory statements to support the appropriations requests, 
including tables that detail OSC's programs, activities and 
staffing levels for fiscal years 2007 and 2008. The Committee 
expects that OSC will coordinate with the Committee on 
Appropriations well in advance on its planned budget submission 
in support of the fiscal year 2008 budget request.
    The Committee reiterates the recommendation that the 
Government Accountability Office [GAO] made in its March 2004 
report (GAO-04-36) and directs that OSC submit to Congress a 
comprehensive strategy addressing capital needs and case 
processing in order to prevent any future backlog of cases when 
submitting their fiscal year 2008 budget request. The Committee 
directs OSC to provide quarterly staffing reports from the 
Special Counsel to Congress.
    While the Committee has not included the breakdown of OSC 
funds by field office as contained in the fiscal year 2007 
budget justification, the Committee expects OSC to adhere to 
this structure. The Committee further directs OSC to 
communicate with the Committee 45 days in advance of any 
organizational change, if such a change would cause the 
geographic staffing numbers to vary above or below the 
following levels; Office of Special Counsel headquarters: 70 to 
75 FTEs, the Detroit office: 6 to 8 FTEs, the Dallas office: 9 
to 11 FTEs, the Bay Area office: 8 to 10 FTEs, and the District 
of Columbia field office: 9 to 12 FTEs. Thus the total number 
of FTEs for the Office of Special Counsel should not be below 
102 or above 116.

                        Selective Service System


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2006....................................     $24,750,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................      24,225,000
House allowance.........................................      24,255,000
Committee recommendation................................      24,255,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Selective Service System [SSS] was reestablished 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. 
However, the Selective Service System remains the primary 
vehicle by which personnel will be brought into the military if 
Congress and the President should authorize a return to the 
draft.
    In December 1987, Selective Service was tasked by law 
(Public Law 100-180, sec. 715) to develop plans for a 
postmobilization-health-care-personnel-delivery system capable 
of providing the necessary critically skilled health-care 
personnel to the Armed Forces in time of emergency. An 
automated system capable of handling mass registration and 
inductions is now complete, together with necessary draft 
legislation, a draft Presidential proclamation, prototype forms 
and letters, et cetera. These products will be available should 
the need arise. The development of supplemental standby 
products, such as a compliance system for health care 
personnel, continues using very limited existing resources.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $24,255,000 
for the Selective Service System. This amount is the same as 
the budget request and $495,000 below the fiscal year 2006 
enacted level. The Committee also prohibits the use of any 
funds to support the Corporation for National and Community 
Service.

           United States Interagency Council on Homelessness


                           OPERATING EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2006....................................      $1,782,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................       2,000,000
House allowance.........................................       2,000,000
Committee recommendation................................       2,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The United States Interagency Council on Homelessness is an 
independent agency created by the McKinney-Vento Homeless 
Assistance Act of 1987 to coordinate and direct the multiple 
efforts of Federal agencies and other designated groups. The 
Council was authorized to review Federal programs that assist 
homeless persons and to take necessary actions to reduce 
duplication. The Council can recommend improvements in programs 
and activities conducted by Federal, State and local government 
as well as local volunteer organizations. The Council consists 
of the heads of 18 Federal agencies such as the Departments of 
Housing and Urban Development, Health and Human Services, 
Veterans Affairs, Agriculture, Commerce, Defense, Education, 
Labor, and Transportation; and other entities as deemed 
appropriate.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $2,000,000 for the United States 
Interagency Council on Homelessness [ICH], the same level as 
the budget request and $218,000 more than the fiscal year 2006 
enacted level. These funds are for carrying out the functions 
authorized under section 203 of the McKinney-Vento Homeless 
Assistance Act. Bill language is included that extends the 
reauthorization for the ICH until October 1, 2007.
    The Committee continues to support strongly the mission of 
ICH and its efforts in ending homelessness. The Committee 
continues to believe that a comprehensive and coordinated 
strategy must be made by the Federal, State, and local 
governments to end and prevent homelessness in this Nation. ICH 
has been successful working with State and local officials in 
developing 10-year plans to end homelessness, however, it is 
unclear whether all Federal agencies are fully participating in 
this effort. Accordingly, the Committee directs the ICH to 
submit a report to the House and Senate Committees on 
Appropriations on the efforts of every Federal agency member of 
the ICH in ending and preventing homelessness. This report 
should be submitted by no later than 90 days after the date of 
enactment of this act.
    The Committee commends the Council's efforts in engaging 
communities on the issue of homelessness. These efforts have 
led to the establishment of 10-year plans to end homelessness 
throughout the Nation. While the Committee understands that 
engaging local and State communities are a critical part of 
ending homelessness, coordination and commitment among the 
relevant Federal agencies must be made. As required under the 
McKinney-Vento Homelessness Act, the ICH convenes workshops on 
various aspects of homelessness. One of those areas of interest 
to the Committee is homelessness among children, youth, and 
families. Accordingly, the Committee directs the ICH to convene 
one of its workshops on this issue. This workshop should 
include representatives from those Federal agencies and 
programs serving homeless children, youth, and families. The 
workshop should focus on: (1) identifying how such agencies and 
programs may improve coordination; (2) developing promising 
practices in service delivery, program development, and 
leveraging resources in urban, suburban, and rural areas; and 
(3) collecting information on the nature, extent, and impact of 
homelessness on children, youth, and families, and the Federal 
efforts to serve and meet their needs. The Council is further 
directed to report to the Committee on a quarterly basis on 
steps being taken by the agencies and the Council as a result 
of the workshop.

                      United States Postal Service


                   PAYMENT TO THE POSTAL SERVICE FUND

Appropriations, 2006....................................    $115,917,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................      79,915,000
House allowance.........................................     108,915,000
Committee recommendation................................     108,915,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Post Office dates back to 1775. It became the Postal 
Service in 1971 as an independent establishment of the 
executive branch of the United States Government. The Postal 
Service basic function and obligation is to provide postal 
services to bind the Nation together through the personal, 
educational, literary, and business correspondence of the 
people. It shall provide prompt, reliable and efficient 
services to patrons in all areas and shall render postal 
services to all communities.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends a total of $108,915,000 in fiscal 
year 2007 funding and advanced appropriations for payments to 
the Postal Service Fund. The increase of $29,000,000 above the 
President's request is to provide funds for overseas voting for 
prior years' liability under the Revenue Forgone Reform Act of 
1993.
    This amount includes: $60,725,000 requested for free mail 
for the blind and overseas voting; $19,190,000 as a 
reconciliation adjustment for 2004 actual mail volume of free 
mail for the blind and overseas voting; and $29,000,000 for 
prior years' liability under the Revenue Forgone Reform Act of 
1993. In addition to these funds, $73,000,000 (an advance 
appropriation from 2005 for the 2005 costs and the 2002 
reconciliation adjustment for free mail for the blind and 
overseas voting) will become available to the U.S. Postal 
Service in fiscal year 2006.
    Revenue forgone on free and reduced-rate mail enables 
postage rates to be set at levels below the unsubsidized rates 
for certain categories of mail as authorized by subsections (c) 
and (d) of section 2401 of title 39, United States Code. Free 
mail for the blind and overseas voters will continue to be 
provided at the funding level recommended by the Committee.
    The Committee includes provisions in the bill that would 
assure that mail for overseas voting and mail for the blind 
shall continue to be free; that 6-day delivery and rural 
delivery of mail shall continue without reduction; and that 
none of the funds provided be used to consolidate or close 
small rural and other small post offices in fiscal year 2007. 
These are services that must be maintained in fiscal year 2007 
and beyond.
    The Committee believes that 6-day mail delivery is one of 
the most important services provided by the Federal Government 
to its citizens. Especially in rural and small town America, 
this critical postal service is the linchpin that serves to 
bind the Nation together.
    Emergency Preparedness.--The Committee remains interested 
and concerned about the progress of the Postal Service's 
biohazardous detection system, particularly the ability to 
detect more than one agent. The Postal Service shall continue 
to update the Committee on the progress of this effort as well 
as the effort to construct the Washington, DC mail irradiation 
facility.
    Consolidation of Mail Processing Facilities.--The Postal 
Service is developing and implementing a major realignment of 
its postal facilities and streamlining its transportation 
networks to achieve greater efficiencies, reduce redundancies, 
and achieve cost savings. To date, the Service has announced 
that it is studying the feasibility of consolidating about 50 
of its over 400 mail processing facilities. The Service expects 
to continue its consolidation feasibility study and review 
processes through 2007 and beyond. Many questions remain about 
how the Service plans to realign its postal networks and 
workforce. These include how many facilities will be needed, 
which facilities will be closed, and what roles various 
facilities will serve. Additionally, it is uncertain how the 
postal workforce, mailers, and communities will be impacted by 
the Service's realignment decisions. Finally, it is unknown how 
long it will take to complete the realignment. These questions 
should be answered prior to the continuation of these efforts.
    In April 2005, GAO issued a report entitled, U.S. Postal 
Service: The Service's Strategy for Realigning Its Mail 
Processing Infrastructure Lacks Clarity, Criteria, and 
Accountability (GAO-05-261). The report concluded that the 
Service's realignment strategy lacked sufficient transparency 
and accountability as well as criteria to ensure that the 
decisions made are clear, consistent, and fair. The decisions 
also excluded stakeholder input and lacked performance measures 
to evaluate the results and provide accountability for 
realignment decisions. GAO's report recommended that the 
Service take actions to address these deficiencies by 
establishing a set of criteria to be used for making 
realignment decisions, developing a mechanism for communicating 
with stakeholders regarding realignment proposals and 
decisions. The report further suggested the development of a 
process for measuring and evaluating the results in areas such 
as cost savings, achieved efficiency, and impact on postal 
services. GAO has received several congressional requests to 
follow up on its recommendations, determining what progress the 
Service has made. A review in this area has recently been 
initiated.
    The Committee directs that consolidation decisions 
pertaining to Sioux City, Iowa, Aberdeen, South Dakota, and 
Yakima, Washington, will not be implemented until the Postal 
Service receives the GAO's follow-up report to its April 2005 
study, which is underway. The Postal Service shall establish 
detailed criteria for the decisionmaking process prior to the 
implementation of any contested consolidations. The Postal 
Service shall keep the Committee informed of its consolidation 
plans and further directs GAO to continue the monitoring these 
efforts.
    Forever Stamp.--The Committee commends the Postal Service 
on its plan to create a ``Forever Stamp,'' which would remain 
valid for letter postage even after future rate changes. This 
innovation would make postal rate changes far easier for 
household mailers, who are the main users of adhesive postage 
stamps. Consumers would avoid both the inconvenience of 
obsolete, leftover stamps and the need for last-minute trips to 
the post office to buy makeup stamps. The Committee commends 
the Postal Service for its efforts to develop innovative 
proposals such as the ``Forever Stamp,'' and trusts that the 
Postal Service will continue to find new ways to make the mail 
a more attractive and user-friendly communications medium for 
the American household.

                        United States Tax Court


                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2006....................................     $47,518,000
Budget estimate, 2007...................................      47,110,000
House allowance.........................................      47,110,000
Committee recommendation................................      47,110,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The U.S. Tax Court is an independent judicial body in the 
legislative branch established under article I of the 
Constitution of the United States. The court is composed of a 
chief judge and 18 judges. Decisions by the court are 
reviewable by the U.S. Courts of Appeals and, if certiorari is 
granted, by the Supreme Court.
    In their judicial duties the judges are assisted by senior 
judges, who participate in the adjudication of regular cases, 
and by special trial judges, who hear small tax cases and 
certain regular cases assigned to them by the chief judge.
    The court conducts trial sessions throughout the United 
States, including Hawaii and Alaska. The matters over which the 
Court has jurisdiction are set forth in various sections of 
title 26 of the United States Code.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $47,110,000 
for the U.S. Tax Court.

                STATEMENT CONCERNING GENERAL PROVISIONS

    The Transportation, Treasury, the Judiciary, Housing and 
Urban Development, and Related Agencies appropriation bill 
includes general provisions which govern both the activities of 
the agencies covered by the bill, and, in some cases, 
activities of agencies, programs, and general government 
activities that are not covered by the bill. General provisions 
that are governmentwide in scope are contained in title VIII of 
this bill.
    The bill contains a number of general provisions that have 
been carried in this bill for years and which are routine in 
nature and scope. General provisions in the bill are explained 
under this section of the report. Those general provisions that 
deal with a single agency only are shown immediately following 
that particular agency's or department's appropriation accounts 
in the bill. Those provisions that address activities or 
directives affecting all of the agencies covered in this bill 
are contained in title VII.

                               TITLE VII

                      GENERAL PROVISIONS THIS ACT

    Section 701 requires pay raises to be absorbed within 
appropriated levels in this act or previous appropriations 
acts.
    Section 702 prohibits pay and other expenses for non-
Federal parties in regulatory or adjudicatory proceedings 
funded in this act.
    Section 703 prohibits obligations beyond the current fiscal 
year and prohibits transfers of funds unless expressly so 
provided herein.
    Section 704 limits expenditures for consulting service 
through procurement contracts where such expenditures are a 
matter of public record and available for public inspection.
    Section 705 prohibits funds in this act to be transferred 
without express authority.
    Section 706 prohibits the use of funds to engage in 
activities that would prohibit the enforcement of section 307 
of the 1930 Tariff Act (46 Stat. 590).
    Section 707 protects employment rights of Federal employees 
who return to their civilian jobs after assignment with the 
Armed Forces.
    Section 708 prohibits the use of funds in compliance with 
the Buy American Act.
    Section 709 prohibits funding for any person or entity 
convicted of violating the Buy American Act.
    Section 710 authorizes the reprogramming of funds and 
specifies the reprogramming procedures for agencies funded by 
this act.
    Section 711 ensures that 50 percent of unobligated balances 
may remain available for certain purposes.
    Section 712 restricts the use of funds for the White House 
to request official background reports without the written 
consent of the individual who is the subject of the report.
    Section 713 ensures that the cost accounting standard shall 
not apply with respect to a contract under the Federal 
Employees Health Benefits Program.
    Section 714 references non-foreign area cost of living 
allowances.
    Section 715 waives restrictions on the purchase of non-
domestic articles, materials, and supplies in the case of 
acquisition by the Federal Government of information 
technology.
    Section 716 prohibits the use of funds for a proposed rule 
related to the determination that real estate brokerage 
activities are financial activities.
    Section 717 requires departments and agencies under this 
act to disclose information regarding all sole source 
contracts.
    Section 718 continues the provision prohibiting the use of 
funds for eminent domain unless such taking is employed for 
public use but does not repeat the requirement for a study by 
the Government Accountability Office.
    Sectio 719 provides flexibility to the Inspector Generals 
who are required to conduct an independent, third-party review 
of each agency's implementation of section 522 and allows the 
Inspector Generals to conduct the review either in-house or by 
contract.

                               TITLE VIII

    GENERAL PROVISIONS GOVERNMENT-WIDE, DEPARTMENTS, AGENCIES, AND 
                              CORPORATIONS

    Section 801 authorizes agencies to pay travel costs of the 
families of Federal employees on foreign duty to return to the 
United States in the event of death or a life threatening 
illness of an employee.
    Section 802 requires agencies to administer a policy 
designed to ensure that all of its workplaces are free from the 
illegal use of controlled substances.
    Section 803 continues the provision regarding price 
limitations on vehicles purchased by the Federal Government.
    Section 804 allows funds made available to agencies for 
travel to also be used for quarters allowances and cost-of-
living allowances.
    Section 805 prohibits the Government, with certain 
specified exceptions, from employing non-U.S. citizens whose 
posts of duty would be in the continental United States.
    Section 806 ensures that agencies will have authority to 
pay the General Services Administration bills for space 
renovation and other services.
    Section 807 allows agencies to finance the costs of 
recycling and waste prevention programs with proceeds from the 
sale of materials recovered through such programs.
    Section 808 provides that funds may be used to pay rent and 
other service costs in the District of Columbia.
    Section 809 prohibits the use of appropriated funds to pay 
the salary of any nominee after the Senate voted not to approve 
the nomination.
    Section 810 precludes interagency financing of groups 
absent prior statutory approval.
    Section 811 authorizes the Postal Service to employ guards.
    Section 812 prohibits the use of appropriated funds for 
enforcing regulations disapproved in accordance with the 
applicable law of the United States.
    Section 813 limits the pay increases of certain prevailing 
rate employees.
    Section 814 limits the amount that can be used for 
redecoration of offices under certain circumstances.
    Section 815 permits interagency funding of national 
security and emergency preparedness telecommunications 
initiatives, which benefit multiple Federal departments, 
agencies, and entities.
    Section 816 requires agencies to certify that a schedule C 
appointment was not created solely or primarily to detail the 
employee to the White House.
    Section 817 requires agencies to administer a policy 
designed to ensure that all of its workplaces are free from 
discrimination and sexual harassment.
    Section 818 prohibits the use of funds to prevent Federal 
employees from communicating with Congress or to take 
disciplinary or personnel actions against employees for such 
communication.
    Section 819 prohibits training not directly related to the 
performance of official duties.
    Section 820 prohibits the expenditure of funds for the 
implementation of agreements in certain nondisclosure policies 
unless certain provisions are included in the policies.
    Section 821 prohibits use of appropriated funds for 
publicity or propaganda designed to support or defeat 
legislation pending before Congress.
    Section 822 prohibits use of appropriated funds by an 
agency to provide Federal employees home address to labor 
organizations.
    Section 823 prohibits the use of appropriated funds to 
provide nonpublic information such as mailing or telephone 
lists to any person or organization outside of the Government.
    Section 824 prohibits the use of appropriated funds for 
publicity or propaganda purposes within the United States not 
authorized by Congress.
    Section 825 directs agencies employees to use official time 
in an honest effort to perform official duties.
    Section 826 authorizes the use of current fiscal year funds 
to finance an appropriate share of the Federal Accounting 
Standards Advisory Board.
    Section 827 authorizes agencies to transfer funds to or 
reimburse the Government-wide Policy account of GSA to finance 
an appropriate share of various government-wide boards and 
councils.
    Section 828 authorizes breastfeeding at any location in a 
Federal building or on Federal property.
    Section 829 permits interagency funding of the National 
Science and Technology Council.
    Section 830 requires identification of the Federal agencies 
providing Federal funds and the amount provided for all 
proposals, solicitations, grant applications, forms, 
notifications, press releases, or other publications related to 
the distribution of funding to a State.
    Section 831 continues a provision which extends the 
authorization for franchise fund pilots for 1 year with 
modification.
    Section 832 continues a provision prohibiting the use of 
funds to monitor personal information relating to the use of 
Federal internet sites.
    Section 833 continues a provision regarding contraceptive 
coverage under the Federal Employees Health Benefits Plan.
    Section 834 recognizes the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency as the 
official anti-doping agency for Olympic, Pan American, and 
Paralympic sports in the United States.
    Section 835 allows departments and agencies to participate 
in the fractional aircraft ownership pilot programs.
    Section 836 places certain limitations on the Coast Guard 
Congressional Fellowship program.
    Section 837 prohibits the expenditure of funds for the 
acquisition of certain additional Federal Law Enforcement 
Training facilities.
    Section 838 provides funding for the Midway Atoll Airfield.
    Section 839 concerns the use of funds for the ``e-Gov'' 
initiative that were not appropriated specifically for that 
purpose.
    Section 840 establishes a set of outsourcing contracting 
requirements that provide an even playing field for the private 
and public sector.
    Section 841 provides for a 2.7 percent increase in the 
basic pay of Federal civilian employees.
    Section 842 provides requirements for prepackaged news 
stories that are prepared or funded by that executive branch 
agency.
    Section 843 continues the provision prohibiting funds used 
in contravention of section 552a of title 5, United States Code 
or section 522.224 of title 48 of the Code of Federal 
Regulations.
    Section 844 requires each Department and Agency to evaluate 
the creditworthiness of an individual before issuing the 
individual a government purchase charge card or travel card.
    Section 845 requires Federal agencies to report to Congress 
on the amount of acquisitions they make from entities that 
manufacture articles, materials, or supplies outside of the 
United States in that fiscal year.
    Section 846 prohibits the use of funds to enforce a 
provision of the Cuban Assets Control Regulations that impedes 
sales to Cuba.

                                TITLE IX

               AIR TRANSPORTATION TO AND FROM LOVE FIELD

    Section 901. This section provides modifications to allow 
air carriers to offer for sale and provide through service and 
ticketing to or from Love Field, Texas through any point within 
Texas, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Kansas, Arkansas, Louisiana, 
Mississippi, Missouri, and Alabama.
    Section 902. This section prohibits air transportation 
between Love Field and any point or points outside the United 
States on a non-stop basis.
    Section 903. This section limits the use of charter 
flights, among other things, to within the 50 States.
    Section 904. This section sets a number of requirements for 
any changes to this legislation.
    Section 905. This section provides initial jurisdiction to 
the District Court of the United States for the Northern 
District of Texas for any claims arising under this title.
    Section 906. This section limits the provisions of this 
title to actions taken at Love Field, Texas with the FAA 
provided authority to determine within 30 days as to whether 
this agreement can be accommodated in compliance with FAA 
safety standards.

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

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

                      DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

    Office of the Secretary of Transportation: Payments to air 
carriers
    Federal Railroad Administration:
    Safety and operations
    Alaska railroad rehabilitation
    Grants to the National Railroad Passenger Corporation
    Surface Transportation Board

                       DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

    Departmental Offices:
    Salaries and expenses
    Department-wide Systems and Capital Investments Program
    Air Transportation Stabilization Program
    Treasury Building and annex, repair and restoration

              DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

    Rural Housing and Economic Development

                   EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

    The White House Office, salaries and expenses
    Executive Residence at the White House, operating expenses
    Special Assistance to the President, salaries and expenses
    Council of Economic Advisers
    National Security Council
    Office of Administration
    Office of Management and Budget
    Office of National Drug Control Policy:
    Salaries and expenses
    Counterdrug Technology Assessment Center
    High-intensity drug trafficking areas
    Other Federal Drug Control (except Drug-Free Communities)

                          INDEPENDENT AGENCIES

    General Services Administration:
    Federal buildings fund
    Repairs and Alterations Construction and Acquisition of 
            Facilities
    National Transportation Safety Board
    Office of Government Ethics, salaries and expenses
    Office of Personnel Management, Human Capital Performance 
Fund

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

    Pursuant to paragraph 7(c) of rule XXVI, on July 20, 2006, 
the Committee ordered reported, en bloc: H.R. 5631, making 
appropriations for the Department of Defense for the fiscal 
year ending September 30, 2007, and for other purposes, with an 
amendment in the nature of a substitute; S. 3708, an original 
bill making appropriations for the Departments of Labor, Health 
and Human Services, and Education, and related agencies for the 
fiscal year ending September 30, 2007, and for other purposes; 
H.R. 5576, 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, 2007, and for other 
purposes, with an amendment in the nature of a substitute; and 
H.R. 5385, making appropriations for Military Construction and 
Veterans Affairs, and related agencies for the fiscal year 
ending September 30, 2007, and for other purposes, with an 
amendment in the nature of a substitute and an amendment to the 
title; with each bill subject to further amendment and each 
subject to the budget allocation, by a recorded vote of 28-0, a 
quorum being present. The vote was as follows:
        Yeas                          Nays
Chairman Cochran
Mr. Stevens
Mr. Specter
Mr. Domenici
Mr. Bond
Mr. McConnell
Mr. Burns
Mr. Shelby
Mr. Gregg
Mr. Bennett
Mr. Craig
Mrs. Hutchison
Mr. DeWine
Mr. Brownback
Mr. Allard
Mr. Byrd
Mr. Inouye
Mr. Leahy
Mr. Harkin
Ms. Mikulski
Mr. Reid
Mr. Kohl
Mrs. Murray
Mr. Dorgan
Mrs. Feinstein
Mr. Durbin
Mr. Johnson
Ms. Landrieu

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

    Paragraph 12 of rule XXVI requires that Committee reports 
on a bill or joint resolution repealing or amending any statute 
or part of any statute include ``(a) the text of the statute or 
part thereof which is proposed to be repealed; and (b) a 
comparative print of that part of the bill or joint resolution 
making the amendment and of the statute or part thereof 
proposed to be amended, showing by stricken-through type and 
italics, parallel columns, or other appropriate typographical 
devices the omissions and insertions which would be made by the 
bill or joint resolution if enacted in the form recommended by 
the committee.''
    In compliance with this rule, the following changes in 
existing law proposed to be made by the bill are shown as 
follows: existing law to be omitted is enclosed in black 
brackets; new matter is printed in italic; and existing law in 
which no change is proposed is shown in roman.
    With respect to this bill, it is the opinion of the 
Committee that it is necessary to dispense with these 
requirements in order to expedite the business of the 
Senate. deg.

TITLE 40--PUBLIC BUILDINGS, PROPERTY, AND WORKS

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



                SUBTITLE II--PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND WORKS


PART A--GENERAL

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



CHAPTER 33--ACQUISITION, CONSTRUCTION, AND ALTERATION

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



Sec. 3313. Delegation

    (a) When Allowed.--Except for the authority contained in 
section 3305(b) of this title, the carrying out of the duties 
and powers of the Administrator of General Services under this 
chapter, in accordance with standards the Administrator 
prescribes--
            (1) shall be delegated on request to the 
        appropriate [executive] federal agency when the 
        estimated cost of the project does not exceed $100,000; 
        and
            (2) may be delegated to the appropriate [executive] 
        federal agency when the Administrator determines that 
        delegation will promote efficiency and economy.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


TITLE 42--THE PUBLIC HEALTH AND WELFARE

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



CHAPTER 8--LOW-INCOME HOUSING

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



SUBCHAPTER I--GENERAL PROGRAM OF ASSISTED HOUSING

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



Sec. 1437f. Low-income housing assistance

(a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

(o) Voucher program

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

    (13) PHA project-based assistance

            (A) In general

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

            (H) Rent calculation
                    A housing assistance payment contract 
                pursuant to this paragraph shall establish 
                rents for each unit assisted in an amount that 
                does not exceed 110 percent of the applicable 
                fair market rental (or any exception payment 
                standard approved by the Secretary pursuant to 
                paragraph (1)(D)), except that if a contract 
                covers a dwelling unit that has been allocated 
                low-income housing tax credits pursuant to 
                section 42 of title 26 and is not located in a 
                qualified census tract (as such term is defined 
                in subsection (d) of such section 42), the rent 
                for such unit may be established at any level 
                that does not exceed the rent charged for 
                comparable units in the building that also 
                receive the low-income housing tax credit but 
                do not have additional rental assistance, 
                except that in the case of a contract unit that 
                has been allocated low-income housing tax 
                credits and for which the rent limitation 
                pursuant to such section 42 is less than the 
                amount that would otherwise be permitted under 
                this subparagraph, the rent for such unit may, 
                in the sole discretion of a public housing 
                agency, be established at the higher section 8 
                rent, subject only to paragraph (10)(A). The 
                rents established by housing assistance payment 
                contracts pursuant to this paragraph may vary 
                from the payment standards established by the 
                public housing agency pursuant to paragraph 
                (1)(B), but shall be subject to paragraph 
                (10)(A).

            (I) Rent adjustments

                    A housing assistance payments contract 
                pursuant to this paragraph shall provide for 
                rent adjustments, except that--
                            (i) the adjusted rent for any unit 
                        assisted shall be reasonable in 
                        comparison with rents charged for 
                        comparable dwelling units in the 
                        private, unassisted, local market and 
                        may not exceed the maximum rent 
                        permitted under subparagraph (H), 
                        except that the contract may provide 
                        that the maximum rent permitted for a 
                        dwelling unit shall not be less than 
                        the initial rent for the dwelling unit 
                        under the initial housing assistance 
                        payments contract covering the unit; 
                        and

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


TITLE 49, UNITED STATES CODE

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



SUBTITLE IV--INTERSTATE TRANSPORTATION

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


PART B--MOTOR CARRIERS, WATER CARRIERS, BROKERS, AND FREIGHT

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                    CHAPTER 131--GENERAL PROVISIONS


Sec. 13102. Definitions

    In this part, the following definitions shall apply:
            (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

            (6) Foreign motor carrier.--The term ``foreign 
        motor carrier'' means a person (including a motor 
        carrier of property but excluding a motor private 
        carrier)--
                    (A)(i) that is domiciled in a contiguous 
                foreign country; or
                    (ii) that is owned or controlled by persons 
                of a contiguous foreign country; and
                    (B) in the case of a person that is not a 
                motor carrier of property, that provides 
                interstate transportation of property by 
                [commercial motor vehicle (as defined in 
                section 31132)] motor vehicle under an 
                agreement or contract entered into with a motor 
                carrier of property (other than a motor private 
                carrier or a motor carrier of property 
                described in subparagraph (A)).
            (7) Foreign motor private carrier.--The term 
        ``foreign motor private carrier'' means a person 
        (including a motor private carrier but excluding a 
        motor carrier of property)--
                    (A)(i) that is domiciled in a contiguous 
                foreign country; or
                    (ii) that is owned or controlled by persons 
                of a contiguous foreign country; and
                    (B) in the case of a person that is not a 
                motor private carrier, that provides interstate 
                transportation of property by [commercial motor 
                vehicle (as defined in section 31132)] motor 
                vehicle under an agreement or contract entered 
                into with a person (other than a motor carrier 
                of property or a motor private carrier 
                described in subparagraph (A)).

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

            (14) Motor carrier.--The term ``motor carrier'' 
        means a person providing [commercial motor vehicle (as 
        defined in section 31132)] motor vehicle transportation 
        for compensation.
            (15) Motor private carrier.--The term ``motor 
        private carrier'' means a person, other than a motor 
        carrier, transporting property by [commercial motor 
        vehicle (as defined in section 31132)] motor vehicle 
        when--

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


CHAPTER 139--REGISTRATION

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



Sec. 13903. Registration of freight forwarders

    [(a) In General.--]
    (a) In General.--The Secretary shall register a person to 
provide service subject to jurisdiction under subchapter III of 
chapter 135 as a freight forwarder if the Secretary finds that 
the person is fit, willing, and able to provide the service and 
to comply with this part and applicable regulations of the 
Secretary and the Board.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 13904. Registration of brokers

    [(a) In General.--]
    (a) In General.--The Secretary shall register, subject to 
section 13906(b), a person to be a broker for transportation of 
property subject to jurisdiction under subchapter I of chapter 
135, if the Secretary finds that the person is fit, willing, 
and able to be a broker for transportation and to comply with 
this part and applicable regulations of the Secretary.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


       CHAPTER 147--ENFORCEMENT; INVESTIGATIONS; RIGHTS; REMEDIES


Sec. 14710. Enforcement of Federal laws and regulations with respect to 
                    transportation of household goods

    (a) Enforcement by States.--Notwithstanding any other 
provision of this title, [a State authority may] a State 
authority other than the attorney general of the state may, as 
parens patriae, enforce the consumer protection provisions of 
this title that apply to individual shippers, as determined by 
the Secretary, and are related to the delivery and 
transportation of household goods in interstate commerce. Any 
civil action for injunctive relief to enjoin such delivery or 
transportation or to compel a person to pay a fine or penalty 
assessed under chapter 149 shall be brought in an appropriate 
district court of the United States. Any fine or penalty 
imposed on a carrier in a proceeding under this subsection 
shall be paid, notwithstanding any other provision of law, to 
and retained by the State.
    [Notice.--The State shall serve written notice to the 
Secretary or the Board, as the case may be, of any civil action 
under subsection (a) prior to initiating such civil action. The 
notice shall include a copy of the complaint to be filed to 
initiate such civil action, except that if it is not feasible 
for the State to provide such prior notice, the State shall 
provide the notice immediately upon instituting such civil 
action.]
    (b) Exercise of Enforcement Authority.--The authority of 
this section shall be exercised subject to the requirements of 
sections 14711(b)-(f) of this title.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 14711. Enforcement by State attorneys general

    (a) * * *
    (b) Notice and Consent.--
            (1) In general.--The State shall serve written 
        notice to the Secretary or the Board, as the case may 
        be, of any civil action under subsection (a) prior to 
        initiating such civil action. The notice shall include 
        a copy of the complaint to be filed to initiate such 
        civil action. The State may initiate a civil action 
        under subsection (a) if it is reviewable under 
        subsection (b)(2).

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

            (4) 60-day deadline.--The Secretary or the Board 
        shall be considered to have consented to any civil 
        action of a State under this section that is subject to 
        review under subsection (b)(2) if the Secretary or the 
        Board has taken no action with respect to the notice 
        within 60 calendar days after the date on which the 
        Secretary or the Board received notice under paragraph 
        (1).

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SUBTITLE VI--MOTOR VEHICLE AND DRIVER PROGRAMS

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



PART B--COMMERCIAL

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



CHAPTER 311--COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



SUBCHAPTER III--SAFETY REGULATION

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



Sec. 31138. Minimum financial responsibility for transporting 
                    passengers

    (a) General Requirement.--The Secretary of Transportation 
shall prescribe regulations to require minimum levels of 
financial responsibility sufficient to satisfy liability 
amounts established by the Secretary covering public liability 
and property damage for the motor vehicle transportation of 
passengers for compensation [by commercial motor vehicle] by a 
for-hire motor carrier or private motor carrier (as such terms 
are defined in section 390.5 of title 49, Code of Federal 
Regulations, as in effect on the date of enactment of this 
parenthetical phrase) in the United States between a place in a 
State and--

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 31139. Minimum financial responsibility for transporting property

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


    (b) General Requirement and Minimum Amount.--(1) The 
Secretary of Transportation shall prescribe regulations to 
require minimum levels of financial responsibility sufficient 
to satisfy liability amounts established by the Secretary 
covering public liability, property damage, and environmental 
restoration for the motor vehicle transportation of property 
for compensation [by commercial motor vehicle] by a for-hire 
motor carrier or private motor carrier (as such terms are 
defined in section 390.5 of title 49, Code of Federal 
Regulations, as in effect on the date of enactment of this 
parenthetical phrase)in the United States between a place in a 
State and--

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SUBTITLE VII--AVIATION PROGRAMS

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



PART A--AIR COMMERCE AND SAFETY

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



SUBPART III--SAFETY

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



CHAPTER 443--INSURANCE

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



Sec. 44302. General authority

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (f) Extension of Policies.--
          (1) In general.--The Secretary shall extend through 
        August 31, [2006,] 2007, and may extend through 
        December 31, [2006,] 2007, 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, [2006,] 2007, 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.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                          NATIONAL HOUSING ACT




           *       *       *       *       *       *       *
                      TITLE II--MORTGAGE INSURANCE

          * * * * * * *
  insurance of home equity conversion mortgages for elderly homeowners
    Sec. 255. (a) * * *
          * * * * * * *
  (g) Limitation on Insurance Authority.--[The aggregate number 
of mortgages insured under this section may not exceed 
250,000.] In no case may the benefits of insurance under this 
section exceed the maximum dollar amount established under 
section 203(b)(2) for 1-family residences in the area in which 
the dwelling subject to the mortgage under this section is 
located. To minimize the risk to the General Insurance Fund, 
prior to insuring a mortgage under this section, the Secretary 
shall consider the number of mortgages already insured under 
this section in that geographic region.
          * * * * * * *

                 McKINNEY-VENTO HOMELESS ASSISTANCE ACT

          * * * * * * *

             TITLE II--INTERAGENCY COUNCIL ON THE HOMELESS

          * * * * * * *

SEC. 209. TERMINATION.

    The Council shall cease to exist, and the requirements of 
this title shall terminate, on October 1, [2006] 2007.
          * * * * * * *

                   UNITED STATES HOUSING ACT OF 1937

          * * * * * * *

SEC. 24. * * *

          * * * * * * *
    (a) * * *
          * * * * * * *
    (m) Funding.--
            (1) Authorization of appropriations.--There are 
        authorized to be appropriated for grants under this 
        section $600,000,000 for fiscal year 1999 and such sums 
        as may be necessary for each of fiscal years 2000 
        [through 2006] 2007.
          * * * * * * *
    (n) Sunset.--No assistance may be provided under this 
section after [September 30, 2006] September 30, 2007.
          * * * * * * *

 INTERNATIONAL AIR TRANSPORTATION COMPETITION ACT OF 1979, PUBLIC LAW 
                                 96-192

          * * * * * * *
    Sec. 29. (a) * * *
          * * * * * * *
    (c) Subsections (a) and (b) shall not apply with respect 
to, and it is found consistent with the public convenience and 
necessity to authorize, transportation of individuals, by air, 
on a flight between Love Field, Texas, and one or more points 
within the States of Louisiana, Arkansas, Oklahoma, New Mexico, 
and Texas by an air [carrier, if (1) such air carrier does not 
offer or provide any through service or ticketing with another 
air carrier or foreign air carrier, and (2) such air carrier 
does not offer for sale transportation to or from, and the 
flight or aircraft does not serve, any point which is outside 
any such State. Nothing in this subsection shall be construed 
to give authority not otherwise provided by law to the 
Secretary of Transportation, the Civil Aeronautics Board, any 
other officer or employee of the United States, or any other 
person.] carrier. Air carriers and, with regard to foreign air 
transportation, foreign air carriers, may offer for sale and 
provide through service and ticketing to or from Love Field, 
Texas, and any domestic or foreign destination through any 
point within Texas, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Kansas, Arkansas, 
Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, and Alabama.
          * * * * * * *

      GOVERNMENT MANAGEMENT REFORM ACT OF 1994, PUBLIC LAW 103-356

          * * * * * * *

                     TITLE IV--FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT

          * * * * * * *

SEC. 403. FRANCHISE FUND PILOT PROGRAMS.

  (a) * * *
          * * * * * * *
  (f) Termination.--The provisions of this section shall expire 
on [October 1, 2006] October 1, 2007.
          * * * * * * *

DEPARTMENTS OF VETERANS AFFAIRS AND HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND 
    INDEPENDENT AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 1998, PUBLIC LAW 105-65

          * * * * * * *

                TITLE V--HUD MULTIFAMILY HOUSING REFORM

          * * * * * * *

SEC. 579. TERMINATION.

    ``(a) Repeals.--
            ``(1) Mark-to-market program.--Subtitle A (except 
        for section 524) is repealed effective [October 1, 
        2006] October 1, 2011.
            ``(2) OMHAR.--Subtitle D (except for this section) 
        is repealed effective October 1, 2004.
    ``(b) Exception.--Notwithstanding the repeal under 
subsection (a), the provisions of subtitle A (as in effect 
immediately before such repeal) shall apply with respect to 
projects and programs for which binding commitments have been 
entered into under this Act before [October 1, 2006] October 1, 
2011.
          * * * * * * *

DEPARTMENTS OF COMMERCE, JUSTICE, AND STATE, THE JUICIARY, 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 [8 years] 9 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.
          * * * * * * *

       CONSOLIDATED APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2005, PUBLIC LAW 108-447

          * * * * * * *

DIVISION H--TRANSPORTATION, TREASURY, INDEPENDENT AGENCIES, AND GENERAL 
                  GOVERNMENT APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2005

          * * * * * * *

                      TITLE V--GENERAL PROVISIONS

          * * * * * * *
    Sec. 522. (a) * * *
          * * * * * * *
    [(d) Independent, Third-Party Review.--
            [(1) In general.--At least every 2 years, each 
        agency shall have performed an independent, third party 
        review of the use of information in identifiable form 
        as the privacy and data protection procedures of the 
        agency to--
                    [(A) determine the accuracy of the 
                description of the use of information in 
                identifiable form;
                    [(B) determine the effectiveness of the 
                privacy and data protection procedures;
                    [(C) ensure compliance with the stated 
                privacy and data protection policies of the 
                agency and applicable laws and regulations; and
                    [(D) ensure that all technologies used to 
                collect, use, store, and disclose information 
                in identifiable form allow for continuous 
                auditing of compliance with stated privacy 
                policies and practices governing the 
                collection, use and distribution of information 
                in the operation of the program.
            [(2) Purposes.--The purposes of reviews under this 
        subsection are to--
                    [(A) ensure the agency's description of the 
                use of information in an identifiable form is 
                accurate and accounts for the agency's current 
                technology and its processing of information in 
                an identifiable form;
                    [(B) measure actual privacy and data 
                protection practices against the agency's 
                recorded privacy and data protection 
                procedures;
                    [(C) ensure compliance and consistency with 
                both online and offline stated privacy and data 
                protection policies; and
                    [(D) provide agencies with ongoing 
                awareness and recommendations regarding privacy 
                and data protection procedures.
            [(3) Requirements of review.--The Inspector General 
        of each agency shall contract with an independent, 
        third party that is a recognized leader in privacy 
        consulting, privacy technology, data collection and 
        data use management, and global privacy issues, to--
                    [(A) evaluate the agency's use of 
                information in identifiable form;
                    [(B) evaluate the privacy and data 
                protection procedures of the agency; and
                    [(C) recommend strategies and specific 
                steps to improve privacy and data protection 
                management.
            [(4) Content.--Each review under this subsection 
        shall include--
                    [(A) a review of the agency's technology, 
                practices and procedures with regard to the 
                collection, use, sharing, disclosure, transfer 
                and storage of information in identifiable 
                form;
                    [(B) a review of the agency's stated 
                privacy and data protection procedures with 
                regard to the collection, use, sharing, 
                disclosure, transfer, and security of personal 
                information in identifiable form relating to 
                agency employees and the public;
                    [(C) a detailed analysis of agency 
                intranet, network and Websites for privacy 
                vulnerabilities, including--
                            [(i) noncompliance with stated 
                        practices, procedures and policies; and
                            [(ii) risks for inadvertent release 
                        of information in an identifiable form 
                        from the website of the agency; and
                    [(D) a review of agency compliance with 
                this Act.]
    (d) Inspector General Review.--The Inspector General of 
each agency shall periodically conduct a review of the agency's 
implementation of this section and shall report the results of 
its review to the Committees on Appropriations of the House of 
Representatives and the Senate, the House Committee on 
Government Reform, and the Senate Committee on Homeland 
Security and Governmental Affairs. The report required by this 
review may be incorporated into a related report to Congress 
otherwise required by law including, but not limited to, 44 
U.S.C. Sec. 3545, the Federal Information Security Management 
Act of 2002. The Inspector General may contract with an 
independent, third party organization to conduct the review.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


  SAFE, ACCOUNTABLE, FLEXIBLE, EFFICIENT TRANSPORTATION EQUITY ACT: A 
LEGACY FOR USERS, PUBLIC LAW 109-59

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



TITLE IV--MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



          Subtitle C--Unified Carrier Registration Act of 2005


SEC. 4301. * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 4305. REGISTRATION OF MOTOR CARRIERS BY STATES.

    (a) Termination of Registration Provisions.--
            (1) Section 14504, and the item relating to such 
        section in the analysis for chapter 145, of title 49, 
        United States Code, are repealed effective on the first 
        January 1st occurring more than [12] 24 months after 
        the date of enactment of this Act.
            (2) The Department of Transportation and the board 
        of directors for the unified carrier registration plan 
        shall conclude and complete any and all rulemakings, 
        final rules, and administrative procedures to 
        constitute final agency actions and implementation of 
        all Federal obligations and requirements for the 
        Uniform Carrier Registration system plan and agreement 
        under this Act on the first April 1 occurring more than 
        12 months after the date of enactment of this Act.
            (3) The Government Accountability Office shall 
        provide quarterly reports to the Congress on the 
        progress being made to meet the statutory requirements 
        of this section.

                                            BUDGETARY IMPACT OF BILL
  PREPARED IN CONSULTATION WITH THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE PURSUANT TO SEC. 308(a), PUBLIC LAW 93-344, AS
                                                     AMENDED
                                            [In millions of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  Budget authority               Outlays
                                                             ---------------------------------------------------
                                                               Committee    Amount of    Committee    Amount of
                                                               allocation      bill      allocation      bill
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comparison of amounts in the bill with Committee allocations
 to its subcommittees of budget totals for 2007:
 Subcommittee on Transportation, Treasury, the Judiciary,
 Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies:
    Discretionary...........................................       69,000       69,000           NA  \1\ 130,172
    Mandatory...............................................       19,927       19,927           NA   \1\ 19,922
Projection of outlays associated with the recommendation:
    2007....................................................  ...........  ...........  ...........   \2\ 74,199
    2008....................................................  ...........  ...........  ...........       35,623
    2009....................................................  ...........  ...........  ...........       14,082
    2010....................................................  ...........  ...........  ...........        6,413
    2011 and future years...................................  ...........  ...........  ...........        6,887
Financial assistance to State and local governments for                NA       27,264           NA       24,522
 2007.......................................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Includes outlays from prior-year budget authority.
\2\ Excludes outlays from prior-year budget authority.

NA: Not applicable.


                 COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2006 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR FISCAL YEAR 2007
                                                                                    [In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                                            Senate Committee recommendation compared with (+ or
                                                                                                                                                                      )
                               Item                                       2006         Budget estimate   House allowance      Committee    -----------------------------------------------------
                                                                      appropriation                                        recommendation         2006
                                                                                                                                              appropriation    Budget estimate   House allowance
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               TITLE I--DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

                      Office of the Secretary

Salaries and expenses.............................................           84,052            92,742            65,973            92,742            +8,690   ................          +26,769
    Immediate Office of the Secretary.............................           (2,176)  ................           (2,176)           (2,255)             (+79)          (+2,255)             (+79)
    Immediate Office of the Deputy Secretary......................             (691)  ................             (691)             (717)             (+26)            (+717)             (+26)
    Office of the General Counsel.................................          (15,031)  ................          (15,031)          (15,681)            (+650)         (+15,681)            (+650)
    Office of the Under Secretary of Transportation for Policy....          (11,534)  ................          (11,534)          (11,934)            (+400)         (+11,934)            (+400)
    Office of the Assistant Secretary for Budget and Programs.....           (8,400)  ................           (8,400)          (10,002)          (+1,602)         (+10,002)          (+1,602)
    Office of the Assistant Secretary for Governmental Affairs....           (2,270)  ................  ................           (2,319)             (+49)          (+2,319)          (+2,319)
    Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration..........          (21,811)  ................          (19,111)          (25,108)          (+3,297)         (+25,108)          (+5,997)
    Office of Public Affairs......................................           (1,891)  ................  ................           (1,932)             (+41)          (+1,932)          (+1,932)
    Executive Secretariat.........................................           (1,428)  ................  ................           (1,478)             (+50)          (+1,478)          (+1,478)
    Board of Contract Appeals.....................................             (690)  ................             (707)             (707)             (+17)            (+707)  ................
    Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization........           (1,252)  ................           (1,286)           (1,286)             (+34)          (+1,286)  ................
    Office of Intelligence and Security...........................           (2,013)  ................           (2,722)  ................          (-2,013)  ................          (-2,722)
    Office of the Chief Information Officer.......................          (11,776)  ................  ................          (12,281)            (+505)         (+12,281)         (+12,281)
    Office of emergency transportation............................           (3,089)  ................           (4,386)  ................          (-3,089)  ................          (-4,386)
    Office of Intelligence Security and Emergency Response........  ................  ................           (7,041)           (7,042)          (+7,042)          (+7,042)              (+1)
    User fees.....................................................          (-2,500)  ................  ................          (-2,500)  ................          (-2,500)          (-2,500)
    Spending of user fees.........................................           (2,500)  ................  ................           (2,500)  ................          (+2,500)          (+2,500)
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal....................................................          (84,052)          (92,742)          (65,973)          (92,742)          (+8,690)  ................         (+26,769)

Office of Civil Rights............................................            8,465             8,821             8,821             8,821              +356   ................  ................
Rescission of excess compensation for air carriers................  ................          -50,000           -50,000           -50,000           -50,000   ................  ................
Transportation planning, research, and development................           14,850             8,910             4,910             9,334            -5,516              +424            +4,424
Working capital fund..............................................         (118,014)  ................         (120,000)         (123,418)          (+5,404)        (+123,418)          (+3,418)
Minority business resource center program.........................              891               891               891             1,287              +396              +396              +396
    (Limitation on guaranteed loans)..............................          (18,367)          (18,367)          (18,367)          (18,367)  ................  ................  ................
Minority business outreach........................................            2,970             2,970             2,970             2,970   ................  ................  ................
New headquarters building.........................................           49,500            59,400   ................           59,400            +9,900   ................          +59,400
Payments to air carriers (Airport & Airway Trust Fund)............           59,400   ................           67,000            67,000            +7,600           +67,000   ................
General Aviation and Fixed Based Operator Reimbursement (sec.                16,830   ................  ................  ................          -16,830   ................  ................
 186).............................................................
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Office of the Secretary..............................          236,958           173,734           150,565           241,554            +4,596           +67,820           +90,989
                                                                   =============================================================================================================================
                  Federal Aviation Administration

Operations........................................................        8,104,140         8,366,000         8,360,000         8,366,000          +261,860   ................           +6,000
    Air traffic organization......................................       (6,562,700)  ................       (6,698,728)       (6,690,108)        (+127,408)      (+6,690,108)          (-8,620)
    Aviation Safety...............................................         (948,957)  ................         (997,718)         (997,718)         (+48,761)        (+997,718)  ................
    Commercial Space Transportation...............................          (11,641)  ................          (11,985)          (11,722)             (+81)         (+11,722)            (-263)
    Financial Services............................................          (50,473)  ................          (92,227)          (93,620)         (+43,147)         (+93,620)          (+1,393)
    Human Resource Management.....................................          (69,244)  ................          (87,850)          (87,850)         (+18,606)         (+87,850)  ................
    Region and Center Operations..................................         (149,237)  ................         (272,821)         (272,821)        (+123,584)        (+272,821)  ................
    Staff Offices.................................................         (140,580)  ................         (175,392)         (175,655)         (+35,075)        (+175,655)            (+263)
    Information Services..........................................          (35,751)  ................          (36,779)          (36,506)            (+755)         (+36,506)            (-273)
    Flight Service Stations A-76 transition.......................         (148,500)  ................  ................  ................        (-148,500)  ................  ................
    Undistributed reduction.......................................  ................  ................         (-13,500)  ................  ................  ................         (+13,500)
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal....................................................        8,104,140         8,366,000         8,360,000         8,366,000          +261,860   ................           +6,000

Facilities & equipment (Airport & Airway Trust Fund)..............        2,514,600         2,503,000         3,110,000         2,549,510           +34,910           +46,510          -560,490
    Emergency appropriations (Public Law 109-148).................           40,600   ................  ................  ................          -40,600   ................  ................
Research, engineering, and development (Airport and Airway Trust            136,620           130,000           134,000           135,500            -1,120            +5,500            +1,500
 Fund)............................................................

Grants-in-aid for airports (Airport and Airway Trust Fund)               (3,399,000)       (4,000,000)       (4,171,000)       (4,000,000)        (+601,000)  ................        (-171,000)
 (Liquidation of contract authorization)..........................
    (Limitation on obligations)...................................       (3,514,500)       (2,750,000)       (3,700,000)       (3,520,000)          (+5,500)        (+770,000)        (-180,000)
    Small community air service development program...............           (9,900)  ................          (10,000)          (10,000)            (+100)         (+10,000)  ................
    Airport Cooperative Research Program..........................           (9,900)  ................          (10,000)          (10,000)            (+100)         (+10,000)  ................
    2007 F&E Pop-up contract authority............................          513,000           607,000   ................          560,490           +47,490           -46,510          +560,490
    Rescission of contract authority (2006 F&E Pop-up)............         -513,000          -607,000   ................         -560,490           -47,490           +46,510          -560,490
    Rescission of contract authority (2006 AIP)...................          -50,000          -950,000   ................         -180,000          -130,000          +770,000          -180,000
    Rescission of contract authority (prior yr Pop-up)............         -469,000           -25,000           -25,000           -25,000          +444,000   ................  ................
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal....................................................       (2,995,500)       (1,775,000)       (3,675,000)       (3,315,000)        (+319,500)      (+1,540,000)        (-360,000)

War risk insurance program extension..............................          -80,000   ................         -125,000          -125,000           -45,000          -125,000   ................
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Federal Aviation Administration......................       11,228,960        11,606,000        11,479,000        11,486,500          +257,540          -119,500            +7,500
      (Limitations on obligations)................................       (3,514,500)       (2,750,000)       (3,700,000)       (3,520,000)          (+5,500)        (+770,000)        (-180,000)
      Rescissions of contract authority...........................       -1,032,000        -1,582,000           -25,000          -765,490          +266,510          +816,510          -740,490
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Total budgetary resources.................................      (13,711,460)      (12,774,000)      (15,154,000)      (14,241,010)        (+529,550)      (+1,467,010)        (-912,990)
                                                                   =============================================================================================================================
                  Federal Highway Administration

Limitation on administrative expenses.............................         (360,992)         (372,504)         (372,504)         (378,504)         (+17,512)          (+6,000)          (+6,000)
Federal-aid highways (Highway Trust Fund):
    (Liquidation of contract authorization).......................      (36,032,344)      (39,086,465)      (39,086,465)      (39,086,465)      (+3,054,121)  ................  ................
        (Limitation on obligations)...............................      (35,672,021)      (39,086,465)      (39,086,465)      (39,086,465)      (+3,414,444)  ................  ................
        (Exempt contract authority)...............................         (739,000)         (739,000)         (739,000)         (739,000)  ................  ................  ................
        (Transfer to NHTSA).......................................        (-121,232)  ................  ................  ................        (+121,232)  ................  ................
Rescission of contract authority (Highway Trust Fund).............  ................  ................          -69,608   ................  ................  ................          +69,608
Appalachian development highway system............................           19,800   ................  ................           20,000              +200           +20,000           +20,000
Delta Regional Authority..........................................  ................  ................  ................           20,000           +20,000           +20,000           +20,000
Emergency relief programs (Highway Trust Fund):
    Emergency appropriations (Public Law 109-148).................        2,750,000   ................  ................  ................       -2,750,000   ................  ................
    Emergency appropriations (Public Law 109-234).................          702,363   ................  ................  ................         -702,363   ................  ................
Rescission of contract authority (Hwy Trust Fund).................       -1,999,999   ................       -2,000,000        -1,500,983          +499,016        -1,500,983          +499,017
Rescission of contract authority (HTF) (Public Law 109-148).......       -1,143,000   ................  ................  ................       +1,143,000   ................  ................
Rescission of contract authority (HTF) (Public Law 109-234).......         -702,363   ................  ................  ................         +702,363   ................  ................
Additional contract authority (sec. 112)..........................          618,000   ................  ................  ................         -618,000   ................  ................
TIFIA (rescission of contract authority) (sec. 125)...............  ................  ................         -100,000   ................  ................  ................         +100,000
Unobligated balances (rescission of contract authority)...........  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
Unobligated balances (rescission).................................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Federal Highway Administration.......................          244,801   ................       -2,169,608        -1,460,983        -1,705,784        -1,460,983          +708,625
      (Limitations on obligations)................................      (35,672,021)      (39,086,465)      (39,086,465)      (39,086,465)      (+3,414,444)  ................  ................
      (Transfer out)..............................................        (-121,232)  ................  ................  ................        (+121,232)  ................  ................
      (Exempt contract authority).................................         (739,000)         (739,000)         (739,000)         (739,000)  ................  ................  ................
      Rescissions.................................................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
      Rescissions of contract authority...........................       -3,845,362   ................       -2,169,608        -1,500,983        +2,344,379        -1,500,983          +668,625
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Total budgetary resources.................................      (32,444,427)      (39,825,465)      (37,655,857)      (38,324,482)      (+5,880,055)      (-1,500,983)        (+668,625)
                                                                   =============================================================================================================================
            Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

Motor carrier safety (limitation on administrative expenses)        ................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
 (liquidation of contract authorization)..........................
    (Limitation on obligations)...................................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
Motor carrier safety operations and programs (Highway Trust Fund)          (213,000)         (223,000)         (223,000)         (223,000)         (+10,000)  ................  ................
 (Liquidation of contract authorization)..........................
    (Limitation on obligations)...................................         (210,870)         (223,000)         (223,000)         (223,000)         (+12,130)  ................  ................
National motor carrier safety program (Highway Trust Fund)          ................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
 (Liquidation of contract authorization)..........................
    Rescission of contract authority (HTF)........................  ................  ................  ................           -3,420            -3,420            -3,420            -3,420
    (Limitation on obligations)...................................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
Motor carrier safety grants (Highway Trust Fund):
    Rescission of contract authority (HTF)........................  ................  ................  ................          -27,123           -27,123           -27,123           -27,123
    (Liquidation of contract authorization).......................         (282,000)         (294,000)         (294,000)         (294,000)         (+12,000)  ................  ................
    (Limitation on obligations)...................................         (279,180)         (294,000)         (294,000)         (294,000)         (+14,820)  ................  ................
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Admin...................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
      (Limitations on obligations)................................         (490,050)         (517,000)         (517,000)         (517,000)         (+26,950)  ................  ................
      Rescissions of contract authority...........................  ................  ................  ................          -30,543           -30,543           -30,543           -30,543
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Total budgetary resources.................................         (490,050)         (517,000)         (517,000)         (517,000)         (+26,950)  ................  ................
                                                                   =============================================================================================================================
          National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Operations and research (General fund)............................  ................  ................          128,700           123,750          +123,750          +123,750            -4,950
Operations and research (Highway trust fund):
    (Liquidation of contract authorization).......................         (110,000)         (227,250)         (107,750)         (107,750)          (-2,250)        (-119,500)  ................
        (Limitation on obligations)...............................         (108,900)         (227,250)         (107,750)         (107,750)          (-1,150)        (-119,500)  ................
        (Transfer from FHWA)......................................         (121,232)  ................  ................  ................        (-121,232)  ................  ................
            Rescission of contract authority......................  ................  ................  ................           -6,773            -6,773            -6,773            -6,773
National Driver Register (Highway trust fund):
    (Liquidation of contract authorization).......................           (4,000)           (4,000)           (4,000)           (4,000)  ................  ................  ................
        (Limitation on obligations)...............................           (3,960)           (4,000)           (4,000)           (4,000)             (+40)  ................  ................
            Rescission of contract authority......................  ................  ................  ................               -8                -8                -8                -8
Highway traffic safety grants (Highway Trust Fund):
    (Liquidation of contract authorization).......................         (578,176)         (583,750)         (587,750)         (583,750)          (+5,574)  ................          (-4,000)
        (Limitation on obligations):
            Highway safety programs (Sec. 402)....................         (214,830)         (220,000)         (220,000)         (220,000)          (+5,170)  ................  ................
            Formula grants (Sec. 402(k))..........................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
            Formula grants (Sec. 402(l))..........................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
            Occupant protection incentive grants (Sec. 405).......          (24,750)          (25,000)          (25,000)          (25,000)            (+250)  ................  ................
            Safety belt performance grants (Sec. 406).............         (123,255)         (124,500)         (124,500)         (124,500)          (+1,245)  ................  ................
            Alcohol-impaired driving countermeasures grants (Sec.          (118,800)         (125,000)         (125,000)         (125,000)          (+6,200)  ................  ................
             410).................................................
            Emergency medical services grants (Sec. 407)..........  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
            State traffic safety information system improvement             (34,155)          (34,500)          (34,500)          (34,500)            (+345)  ................  ................
             grants (Sec. 408)....................................
            High visibility enforcement...........................          (28,710)          (25,000)          (29,000)          (25,000)          (-3,710)  ................          (-4,000)
            Child safety and booster seat grants..................           (5,940)           (6,000)           (6,000)           (6,000)             (+60)  ................  ................
            Motorcyclist safety...................................           (5,940)           (6,000)           (6,000)           (6,000)             (+60)  ................  ................
            Grant administration..................................          (16,014)          (17,750)          (17,750)          (17,750)          (+1,736)  ................  ................
            Rescission of unobligated balances....................  ................  ................  ................           -5,647            -5,647            -5,647            -5,647
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Subtotal............................................         (572,394)         (583,750)         (587,750)         (583,750)         (+11,356)  ................          (-4,000)
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Total, National Highway Traffic Safety Admin........  ................  ................          128,700           111,322          +111,322          +111,322           -17,378
              (Limitations on obligations)........................         (685,254)         (815,000)         (699,500)         (695,500)         (+10,246)        (-119,500)          (-4,000)
              (By transfer).......................................         (121,232)  ................  ................  ................        (-121,232)  ................  ................
              Rescissions.........................................  ................  ................  ................           -5,647            -5,647            -5,647            -5,647
              Rescissions of contract authority...................  ................  ................  ................           -6,781            -6,781            -6,781            -6,781
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Total budgetary resources.........................         (806,486)         (815,000)         (828,200)         (806,822)            (+336)          (-8,178)         (-21,378)
                                                                   =============================================================================================================================
                  Federal Railroad Administration

Safety and operations.............................................          144,490           150,578           150,153           150,578            +6,088   ................             +425
Railroad research and development.................................           54,524            34,650   ................           34,650           -19,874   ................          +34,650
Railroad rehabilitation and improvement program...................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
Next generation high-speed rail...................................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
Alaska Railroad rehabilitation....................................            9,900   ................  ................  ................           -9,900   ................  ................

              National Railroad Passenger Corporation

Operating subsidy grants to the National Railroad Passenger                 490,050   ................  ................  ................         -490,050   ................  ................
 Corporation......................................................
Capital grants to the National Railroad Passenger Corporation.....          772,200           500,000           629,000           750,000           -22,200          +250,000          +121,000
    Rescission (Public Law 109-148)...............................           -8,300   ................  ................  ................           +8,300   ................  ................
Efficiency incentive grants to National Railroad Passenger Corpora-          39,600           400,000           485,000           650,000          +610,400          +250,000          +165,000
   tion...........................................................
Grants to the National Railroad Passenger Corporation.............  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, National Railroad Passenger Corporation..............        1,293,550           900,000         1,114,000         1,400,000          +106,450          +500,000          +286,000
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Federal Railroad Administration......................        1,510,764         1,085,228         1,264,153         1,585,228           +74,464          +500,000          +321,075
                                                                   =============================================================================================================================
                  Federal Transit Administration

Administrative expenses, general fund.............................           79,200            85,000            85,000            85,000            +5,800   ................  ................
Administrative expenses (Highway Trust Fund, Mass Transit           ................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
 Account)(limitation on obligations)..............................
    Office of the Administrator...................................             (916)  ................           (1,063)           (1,063)            (+147)          (+1,063)  ................
    Office of Chief Counsel.......................................           (4,017)  ................           (4,273)           (4,273)            (+256)          (+4,273)  ................
    Office of Civil Rights........................................           (3,121)  ................           (3,272)           (3,272)            (+151)          (+3,272)  ................
    Office of Communications and Congressional Affairs............           (1,345)  ................           (1,394)           (1,394)             (+49)          (+1,394)  ................
    Office of Budget and Policy...................................           (8,646)  ................           (9,259)           (9,259)            (+613)          (+9,259)  ................
    Office of Planning............................................           (4,086)  ................           (4,718)           (4,718)            (+632)          (+4,718)  ................
    Office of Program Management..................................           (7,906)  ................           (8,403)           (8,403)            (+497)          (+8,403)  ................
    Office of Demonstration and Innovation........................           (4,716)  ................           (4,876)           (4,876)            (+160)          (+4,876)  ................
    Office of Administration......................................           (7,252)  ................           (7,654)           (7,654)            (+402)          (+7,654)  ................
    Central Account...............................................          (16,648)  ................          (17,668)          (17,668)          (+1,020)         (+17,668)  ................
    Regional offices..............................................          (20,546)  ................          (22,420)          (22,420)          (+1,874)         (+22,420)  ................
    National Transit database.....................................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal....................................................          (79,200)          (85,000)          (85,000)          (85,000)          (+5,800)  ................  ................

Formula and Bus Grants (Highway Trust Fund, Mass Transit Account)        (6,910,132)       (7,262,775)       (7,262,775)       (7,262,775)        (+352,643)  ................  ................
 (limitation on obligations)......................................
Formula and Bus Grants (rescission)...............................  ................          -28,661           -28,661           -28,661           -28,661   ................  ................
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal....................................................       (6,910,132)       (7,234,114)       (7,234,114)       (7,234,114)        (+323,982)  ................  ................

Research and University Research Centers..........................           74,448            61,000            65,000            61,000           -13,448   ................           -4,000
    Flexible funding..............................................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
Trust fund share of expenses (Mass Transit Account, HTF)                 (6,910,132)       (7,262,775)       (7,262,775)       (7,262,775)        (+352,643)  ................  ................
 (liquidation of contract authorization)..........................
Capital investment grants.........................................        1,440,682         1,466,000         1,566,000         1,466,000           +25,318   ................         -100,000
Small starts......................................................  ................  ................          -17,760   ................  ................  ................          +17,760
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Federal Transit Administration.......................        1,594,330         1,583,339         1,669,579         1,583,339           -10,991   ................          -86,240
      (Limitations on obligations)................................       (6,910,132)       (7,262,775)       (7,262,775)       (7,262,775)        (+352,643)  ................  ................
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Total budgetary resources.................................       (8,504,462)       (8,846,114)       (8,932,354)       (8,846,114)        (+341,652)  ................         (-86,240)
                                                                   =============================================================================================================================
           Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation

Operations and maintenance (Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund)........           16,121             8,000            17,425            17,425            +1,304            +9,425   ................

                      Maritime Administration

Maritime security program.........................................          154,440           154,440           154,440           154,440   ................  ................  ................
Operations and training...........................................          121,027           115,830           116,442           115,830            -5,197   ................             -612
    Emergency appropriations (Public Law 109-148).................            7,500   ................  ................  ................           -7,500   ................  ................
Ship disposal.....................................................           20,790            25,740            25,740            25,740            +4,950   ................  ................
Vessel operations revolving fund..................................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
Maritime Guaranteed Loan (Title XI) Program Account:
    Administrative expenses.......................................            4,085             3,317             3,317             3,317              -768   ................  ................
        Rescission................................................  ................           -2,000            -2,000   ................  ................           +2,000            +2,000
    Guarantee loans subsidy.......................................  ................  ................  ................           30,000           +30,000           +30,000           +30,000
National defense tank vessel program (rescission).................  ................          -74,400           -74,400           -74,400           -74,400   ................  ................
Ship construction (rescission)....................................           -2,071   ................  ................  ................           +2,071   ................  ................
Assistance to Small Shipyards.....................................  ................  ................  ................           15,000           +15,000           +15,000           +15,000
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Maritime Administration..............................          305,771           222,927           223,539           269,927           -35,844           +47,000           +46,388
                                                                   =============================================================================================================================
      Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

Hazardous materials safety........................................           25,877            27,225            27,225            27,225            +1,348   ................  ................
Administrative expenses...........................................           16,070            17,082            17,082            17,082            +1,012   ................  ................
    Pipeline Safety Fund..........................................              639               639               639               639   ................  ................  ................
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal....................................................           16,709            17,721            17,721            17,721            +1,012   ................  ................

Pipeline safety:
    Pipeline Safety Fund..........................................           57,430            56,925            56,925            56,925              -505   ................  ................
    Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund................................           14,850            18,810            18,810            18,810            +3,960   ................  ................
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal....................................................           72,280            75,735            75,735            75,735            +3,455   ................  ................

Emergency preparedness grants:
    Emergency preparedness fund...................................              198               198               198               198   ................  ................  ................
    Limitation on emergency preparedness fund.....................          (14,157)          (28,328)          (28,328)          (28,328)         (+14,171)  ................  ................
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administra-            115,064           120,879           120,879           120,879            +5,815   ................  ................
       tion.......................................................
                                                                   =============================================================================================================================
         Research and Innovative Technology Administration

Research and development..........................................            5,716             8,217             6,367             8,217            +2,501   ................           +1,850
Research and special programs.....................................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
    (By transfer).................................................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................

                    Office of Inspector General

Salaries and expenses.............................................           61,874            64,143            64,143            64,143            +2,269   ................  ................

                   Surface Transportation Board

Salaries and expenses.............................................           26,186            22,925            22,925            26,500              +314            +3,575            +3,575
    Offsetting collections........................................           -1,250            -1,250            -1,250            -1,250   ................  ................  ................
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Surface Transportation Board.........................           24,936            21,675            21,675            25,250              +314            +3,575            +3,575
                                                                   =============================================================================================================================
      Total, title I, Department of Transportation................       14,304,995        13,262,142        12,901,417        13,206,768        -1,098,227           -55,374          +305,351
          Appropriations..........................................      (15,692,265)      (14,999,203)      (15,251,086)      (15,669,273)         (-22,992)        (+670,070)        (+418,187)
          Rescissions.............................................         (-10,371)        (-155,061)        (-155,061)        (-158,708)        (-148,337)          (-3,647)          (-3,647)
          Rescission of contract authority........................      (-4,877,362)      (-1,582,000)      (-2,194,608)      (-2,303,797)      (+2,573,565)        (-721,797)        (-109,189)
          Emergency appropriations................................       (3,500,463)  ................  ................  ................      (-3,500,463)  ................  ................
          Offsetting collections..................................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
      (Limitations on obligations)................................      (47,271,957)      (50,431,240)      (51,265,740)      (51,081,740)      (+3,809,783)        (+650,500)        (-184,000)
      (Exempt contract authority).................................         (739,000)         (739,000)         (739,000)         (739,000)  ................  ................  ................
      (By transfer)...............................................         (121,232)  ................  ................  ................        (-121,232)  ................  ................
      (Transfer out)..............................................        (-121,232)  ................  ................  ................        (+121,232)  ................  ................
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total budgetary resources...................................      (62,315,952)      (64,432,382)      (64,906,157)      (65,027,508)      (+2,711,556)        (+595,126)        (+121,351)
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Transportation discretionary total..........................       14,304,995        13,262,142        12,901,417        13,206,768        -1,098,227           -55,374          +305,351
                                                                   =============================================================================================================================
               TITLE II--DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

                       Departmental Offices

Salaries and expenses.............................................          194,626           223,874           223,786           223,874           +29,248   ................              +88
    Executive direction...........................................           (8,556)          (17,501)           (8,760)           (8,760)            (+204)          (-8,741)  ................
    General Counsel...............................................           (7,773)  ................           (8,741)           (8,741)            (+968)          (+8,741)  ................
    Economic policies and programs................................          (31,691)          (41,947)          (41,947)          (41,947)         (+10,256)  ................  ................
    Financial policies and programs...............................          (26,308)          (25,336)          (27,086)          (25,336)            (-972)  ................          (-1,750)
    Terrorism and Financial Intelligence..........................          (39,540)          (45,401)          (45,401)          (45,701)          (+6,161)            (+300)            (+300)
    Treasury wide management......................................          (16,675)          (20,372)          (18,534)          (20,072)          (+3,397)            (-300)          (+1,538)
    Administration................................................          (63,094)          (73,317)          (73,317)          (73,317)         (+10,223)  ................  ................
    Currency manipulation.........................................             (990)  ................  ................  ................            (-990)  ................  ................
    Undesignated reduction........................................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
    Emergency appropriations (Public Law 109-234).................            1,800   ................  ................  ................           -1,800   ................  ................
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal....................................................         (196,426)         (223,874)         (223,786)         (223,874)         (+27,448)  ................             (+88)

Office of Foreign Assets Control..................................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
Department-wide systems and capital investments programs..........           24,168            34,032            34,032            34,032            +9,864   ................  ................
Office of Inspector General.......................................           16,830            17,352            17,352            18,352            +1,522            +1,000            +1,000
Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration.................          131,953           136,469           136,469           136,469            +4,516   ................  ................
Air transportation stabilization program account..................            2,723   ................  ................  ................           -2,723   ................  ................
Community development financial institutions fund program ac-                54,450             7,821            40,000            55,000               +50           +47,179           +15,000
 count............................................................
Treasury building and annex repair and restoration................            9,900   ................  ................  ................           -9,900   ................  ................
Financial Crimes Enforcement Network..............................           72,894            89,794            84,066            77,321            +4,427           -12,473            -6,745
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Departmental Offices.................................          509,344           509,342           535,705           545,048           +35,704           +35,706            +9,343
                                                                   =============================================================================================================================

Financial Management Service......................................          233,881           233,654           233,654           233,654              -227   ................  ................

Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau:
    Salaries and expenses.........................................           90,215            63,964            92,604            92,604            +2,389           +28,640   ................
    Spending from proposed user fees..............................  ................           28,640   ................  ................  ................          -28,640   ................
    Offsetting collections........................................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal....................................................           90,215            92,604            92,604            92,604            +2,389   ................  ................

Bureau of the Public Debt.........................................          175,154           177,789           177,789           177,789            +2,635   ................  ................
Payment of government losses in shipment..........................            1,000               500               500               500              -500   ................  ................
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Dept. of Treasury, non-IRS...........................        1,009,594         1,013,889         1,040,252         1,049,595           +40,001           +35,706            +9,343
                                                                   =============================================================================================================================
                     Internal Revenue Service

Tax administration and operations.................................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
    Adjusted appropriation........................................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
Processing, assistance, and management............................        4,095,212         4,045,122   ................  ................       -4,095,212        -4,045,122   ................
    Rescission....................................................          -20,000   ................  ................  ................          +20,000   ................  ................
Taxpayer services.................................................  ................  ................        2,059,151         2,110,000        +2,110,000        +2,110,000           +50,849
Tax law enforcement...............................................        4,678,498         4,762,327   ................  ................       -4,678,498        -4,762,327   ................
Enforcement.......................................................  ................  ................        4,757,126         4,797,126        +4,797,126        +4,797,126           +40,000
Information systems...............................................        1,582,977         1,602,232   ................  ................       -1,582,977        -1,602,232   ................
Operations support................................................  ................  ................        3,459,152         3,487,000        +3,487,000        +3,487,000           +27,848
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal....................................................       10,336,687        10,409,681        10,275,429        10,394,126           +57,439           -15,555          +118,697

Business systems modernization....................................          197,010           167,310           197,060           245,000           +47,990           +77,690           +47,940
Health Insurance Tax Credit Administration........................           20,008            14,846            14,846            14,846            -5,162   ................  ................
    Rescission....................................................           -9,000   ................  ................  ................           +9,000   ................  ................
IRS Oversight Board...............................................  ................  ................  ................            2,000            +2,000            +2,000            +2,000
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Internal Revenue Service.............................       10,544,705        10,591,837        10,487,335        10,655,972          +111,267           +64,135          +168,637
                                                                   =============================================================================================================================
      Total, title II, Department of the Treasury.................       11,554,299        11,605,726        11,527,587        11,705,567          +151,268           +99,841          +177,980
          Appropriations..........................................      (11,581,499)      (11,605,726)      (11,527,587)      (11,705,567)        (+124,068)         (+99,841)        (+177,980)
          Rescissions.............................................         (-29,000)  ................  ................  ................         (+29,000)  ................  ................
                                                                   =============================================================================================================================
      TITLE III--DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

                     Public and Indian Housing

Tenant-based Rental Assistance:
    Renewals......................................................       13,948,858        14,436,200        14,506,200        14,436,200          +487,342   ................          -70,000
    Tenant protection vouchers....................................          178,200           149,300           149,300           149,300           -28,900   ................  ................
    Family self-sufficiency coordinators..........................           47,520            47,500            47,500            47,500               -20   ................  ................
    Administrative fees...........................................        1,237,500         1,281,100         1,137,500         1,271,100           +33,600           -10,000          +133,600
    Working capital fund..........................................            5,841             5,900             5,900             5,900               +59   ................  ................
    Family Unification............................................  ................  ................  ................           10,000           +10,000           +10,000           +10,000
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal....................................................       15,417,919        15,920,000        15,846,400        15,920,000          +502,081   ................          +73,600

    Emergency appropriations (Public Law 109-148).................          390,300   ................  ................  ................         -390,300   ................  ................
    Advance appropriations........................................        4,200,000         4,200,000         4,200,000         4,200,000   ................  ................  ................
    Less appropriations from prior year advances..................       -4,200,000        -4,200,000        -4,200,000        -4,200,000   ................  ................  ................
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Tenant-based rental assistance.......................       15,808,219        15,920,000        15,846,400        15,920,000          +111,781   ................          +73,600

Project-based rental assistance:
    Renewals......................................................        4,890,303         5,526,240         5,326,240         5,526,240          +635,937   ................         +200,000
    Contract administrators.......................................          145,728           145,500           145,500           145,500              -228   ................  ................
    Working capital fund..........................................            1,386             3,960             3,960             3,960            +2,574   ................  ................
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Project-based rental assistance......................        5,037,417         5,675,700         5,475,700         5,675,700          +638,283   ................         +200,000

Public Housing Capital Fund.......................................        2,438,964         2,178,000         2,208,000         2,460,000           +21,036          +282,000          +252,000
Public Housing Operating Fund.....................................        3,564,000         3,564,000         3,564,000         3,660,000           +96,000           +96,000           +96,000
Revitalization of severely distressed public housing..............           99,000   ................  ................          100,000            +1,000          +100,000          +100,000
Native American housing block grants..............................          623,700           625,680           625,680           625,680            +1,980   ................  ................
Indian housing loan guarantee fund program account................            3,960             5,940             3,960             5,940            +1,980   ................           +1,980
    (Limitation on guaranteed loans)..............................         (116,276)         (251,000)         (116,276)         (251,000)        (+134,724)  ................        (+134,724)
Native Hawaiian housing block grant...............................            8,727             5,940             8,815             8,815               +88            +2,875   ................
Native Hawaiian loan guarantee fund program account...............              891             1,010             1,010             1,010              +119   ................  ................
    (Limitation on guaranteed loans)..............................          (35,714)          (43,000)          (43,000)          (43,000)          (+7,286)  ................  ................
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Public and Indian Housing............................       27,584,878        27,976,270        27,733,565        28,457,145          +872,267          +480,875          +723,580

                Community Planning and Development

Housing opportunities for persons with AIDS.......................          286,110           300,100           300,100           295,000            +8,890            -5,100            -5,100
Rural housing and economic development............................           16,830   ................  ................           20,000            +3,170           +20,000           +20,000
Community development fund........................................        4,177,800         3,032,000         4,215,000         4,215,000           +37,200        +1,183,000   ................
Community development fund (sec. 424).............................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
    Emergency appropriations (Public Law 109-148).................       11,500,000   ................  ................  ................      -11,500,000   ................  ................
    Emergency appropriations (Public Law 109-234).................        5,200,000   ................  ................  ................       -5,200,000   ................  ................
        Transfer out (emergency) (Public Law 109-234).............         (-27,000)  ................  ................  ................         (+27,000)  ................  ................
Section 108 loan guarantees:
    (Limitation on guaranteed loans)..............................         (137,500)  ................  ................         (137,500)  ................        (+137,500)        (+137,500)
    Credit subsidy................................................            2,970   ................            2,970             3,000               +30            +3,000               +30
    Administrative expenses.......................................              743   ................  ................              750                +7              +750              +750
Brownfields redevelopment.........................................            9,900   ................  ................  ................           -9,900   ................  ................
HOME investment partnerships program..............................        1,757,250         1,916,640         1,916,640         1,941,640          +184,390           +25,000           +25,000
Homeless assistance grants........................................        1,326,600         1,535,990         1,535,990         1,511,190          +184,590           -24,800           -24,800
Self-help homeownership opportunity program.......................           60,390            39,700            60,390            66,000            +5,610           +26,300            +5,610
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Community Planning and Development...................       24,338,593         6,824,430         8,031,090         8,052,580       -16,286,013        +1,228,150           +21,490
                                                                   =============================================================================================================================
                         Housing Programs

Housing for the elderly...........................................          734,580           545,490           746,580           750,000           +15,420          +204,510            +3,420
Housing for persons with disabilities.............................          236,610           118,800           239,610           240,000            +3,390          +121,200              +390
Housing counseling assistance.....................................  ................           44,550   ................  ................  ................          -44,550   ................
Manufactured housing fees trust fund..............................           13,000            16,000            16,000            16,000            +3,000   ................  ................
    Offsetting collections........................................          -13,000           -13,000           -13,000           -16,000            -3,000            -3,000            -3,000
    Offsetting collections (leg proposal).........................  ................           -3,000            -3,000   ................  ................           +3,000            +3,000
Rental housing assistance.........................................           26,136            24,750            24,750            24,750            -1,386   ................  ................
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Housing Programs.....................................          997,326           733,590         1,010,940         1,014,750           +17,424          +281,160            +3,810
                                                                   =============================================================================================================================
                  Federal Housing Administration

FHA--Mutual mortgage insurance program account:
    (Limitation on guaranteed loans)..............................     (185,000,000)     (185,000,000)     (185,000,000)     (185,000,000)  ................  ................  ................
    (Limitation on direct loans)..................................          (50,000)          (50,000)          (50,000)          (50,000)  ................  ................  ................
    Administrative expenses.......................................          351,450           351,450           351,450           351,450   ................  ................  ................
    Offsetting receipts...........................................       -1,309,000          -176,000          -176,000          -176,000        +1,133,000   ................  ................
    Move prog to gen/spec risk (legislative proposal).............  ................         -358,000   ................  ................  ................         +358,000   ................
    Administrative contract expenses..............................           61,974            62,400            52,400            52,400            -9,574           -10,000   ................
    Additional contract expenses..................................            1,000   ................  ................  ................           -1,000   ................  ................
FHA--General and special risk program account:
    (Limitation on guaranteed loans)..............................      (35,000,000)      (35,000,000)      (35,000,000)      (35,000,000)  ................  ................  ................
    (Limitation on direct loans)..................................          (50,000)          (50,000)          (50,000)          (50,000)  ................  ................  ................
    Administrative expenses.......................................          229,086           229,086           229,086           229,086   ................  ................  ................
    Offsetting receipts...........................................         -339,000          -476,000          -476,000          -476,000          -137,000   ................  ................
    Credit subsidy................................................            8,712             8,600             8,600             8,600              -112   ................  ................
    Non-overhead administrative expenses..........................           71,181            78,111            72,778            78,111            +6,930   ................           +5,333
    Additional contract expenses..................................            4,000             4,000   ................            4,000   ................  ................           +4,000
    Move programs from MMI (leg proposal).........................  ................          358,000   ................  ................  ................         -358,000   ................
    FHA program modernization and reform (Sec. 325)...............  ................  ................         -197,000   ................  ................  ................         +197,000
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Federal Housing Administration.......................         -920,597            81,647          -134,686            71,647          +992,244           -10,000          +206,333
                                                                   =============================================================================================================================
          Government National Mortgage Association (GNMA)

Guarantees of mortgage-backed securities loan guarantee program
 account:
    (Limitation on guaranteed loans)..............................     (200,000,000)     (100,000,000)     (100,000,000)     (100,000,000)    (-100,000,000)  ................  ................
    Administrative expenses.......................................           10,700            10,700            10,700            10,700   ................  ................  ................
    Administrative expenses (legislative proposal)................  ................           43,000   ................  ................  ................          -43,000   ................
    Offsetting receipts...........................................         -368,000          -181,000          -181,000          -181,000          +187,000   ................  ................
    Offsetting receipts (legislative proposal)....................  ................          -43,000   ................  ................  ................          +43,000   ................
    Additional contract expenses..................................  ................            7,000   ................  ................  ................           -7,000   ................
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Gov't National Mortgage Association..................         -357,300          -163,300          -170,300          -170,300          +187,000            -7,000   ................
                                                                   =============================================================================================================================
                  Policy Development and Research

Research and technology...........................................           55,787            68,360            55,787            60,000            +4,213            -8,360            +4,213

                Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity

Fair housing activities...........................................           45,540            44,550            44,550            44,550              -990   ................  ................

                   Office of Lead Hazard Control

Lead hazard reduction.............................................          150,480           114,840           149,840           152,000            +1,520           +37,160            +2,160

                   Management and Administration

Salaries and expenses.............................................          573,210           594,000           493,240           594,000           +20,790   ................         +100,760
    Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac fee proposal...........................  ................           -4,000   ................  ................  ................           +4,000   ................
        Transfer from:
            Limitation on FHA corporate funds.....................         (562,400)         (556,776)         (556,776)         (550,776)         (-11,624)          (-6,000)          (-6,000)
            GNMA..................................................          (10,700)          (10,593)          (10,700)          (10,700)  ................            (+107)  ................
            Community Development Loan Guarantees Program.........             (750)  ................  ................             (750)  ................            (+750)            (+750)
            Native American Housing Block Grants..................             (150)             (148)             (149)             (149)              (-1)              (+1)  ................
            Indian Housing Loan Guarantee Fund Program............             (250)             (248)             (248)             (248)              (-2)  ................  ................
            Native Hawaiian Housing Loan Guarantees...............              (35)              (35)              (35)              (35)  ................  ................  ................
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Subtotal............................................       (1,147,495)       (1,157,800)       (1,061,148)       (1,156,658)          (+9,163)          (-1,142)         (+95,510)

    Transfer from CDF (emergency) (Public Law 109-234)............          (12,000)  ................  ................  ................         (-12,000)  ................  ................
Working capital fund..............................................          195,030           219,780   ................          219,780           +24,750   ................         +219,780
    Transfer from CDF(emergency) (Public Law 109-234).............           (6,000)  ................  ................  ................          (-6,000)  ................  ................

Office of Inspector General.......................................           81,180            83,240            83,240            91,420           +10,240            +8,180            +8,180
    (By transfer, limitation on FHA corporate funds)..............          (23,760)          (23,760)          (23,760)          (23,760)  ................  ................  ................
    Transfer from CDF (emergency) (Public Law 109-234)............           (9,000)  ................  ................  ................          (-9,000)  ................  ................
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal....................................................         (113,940)         (107,000)         (107,000)         (115,180)          (+1,240)          (+8,180)          (+8,180)

Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight....................           60,000            62,000            62,000            67,600            +7,600            +5,600            +5,600
    Offsetting receipts...........................................          -60,000           -62,000           -62,000           -67,600            -7,600            -5,600            -5,600
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Management and Administration........................          849,420           893,020           576,480           905,200           +55,780           +12,180          +328,720
                                                                   =============================================================================================================================
Rescissions:
    Housing certificate fund......................................       -2,050,000        -2,000,000        -2,000,000        -2,000,000           +50,000   ................  ................
    Revitalization of severely distressed public housing..........  ................          -99,000   ................  ................  ................          +99,000   ................
    Brownfields Redevelopment.....................................          -10,000   ................  ................  ................          +10,000   ................  ................
    Community Development Fund....................................  ................         -356,400   ................  ................  ................         +356,400   ................
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal....................................................       -2,060,000        -2,455,400        -2,000,000        -2,000,000           +60,000          +455,400   ................
                                                                   =============================================================================================================================
      Total, title III, Department of Housing and Urban Develop-         50,684,127        34,118,007        35,297,266        36,587,572       -14,096,555        +2,469,565        +1,290,306
       ment.......................................................
              Appropriations......................................      (33,542,827)      (33,685,407)      (34,205,266)      (35,304,172)      (+1,761,345)      (+1,618,765)      (+1,098,906)
              Rescissions.........................................      (-2,060,000)      (-2,455,400)      (-2,000,000)      (-2,000,000)         (+60,000)        (+455,400)  ................
              Advance appropriations..............................       (4,200,000)       (4,200,000)       (4,200,000)       (4,200,000)  ................  ................  ................
              Emergency appropriations............................      (17,090,300)  ................  ................  ................     (-17,090,300)  ................  ................
              Offsetting receipts.................................      (-2,016,000)      (-1,234,000)      (-1,030,000)        (-833,000)      (+1,183,000)        (+401,000)        (+197,000)
              Offsetting collections..............................         (-73,000)         (-78,000)         (-78,000)         (-83,600)         (-10,600)          (-5,600)          (-5,600)
              (By transfer).......................................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
          (Limitation on direct loans)............................         (100,000)         (100,000)         (100,000)         (100,000)  ................  ................  ................
          (Limitation on guaranteed loans)........................     (420,289,490)     (320,294,000)     (320,159,276)     (320,431,500)     (-99,857,990)        (+137,500)        (+272,224)
          (Limitation on corporate funds).........................         (598,045)         (591,560)         (591,668)         (586,418)         (-11,627)          (-5,142)          (-5,250)
                                                                   =============================================================================================================================
                      TITLE IV--THE JUDICIARY

                Supreme Court of the United States

Salaries and expenses:
    Salaries of justices..........................................            2,000             2,000             2,000             2,000   ................  ................  ................
    Other salaries and expenses...................................           58,143            61,405            61,405            61,405            +3,262   ................  ................
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal....................................................           60,143            63,405            63,405            63,405            +3,262   ................  ................

Care of the building and grounds..................................            5,568            12,959            12,959            12,959            +7,391   ................  ................
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Supreme Court of the United States...................           65,711            76,364            76,364            76,364           +10,653   ................  ................
                                                                   =============================================================================================================================
      United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Salaries and expenses:
    Salaries of judges............................................            2,000             2,000             2,000             2,000   ................  ................  ................
    Other salaries and expenses...................................           21,780            24,300            24,000            23,273            +1,493            -1,027              -727
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fed Circuit............           23,780            26,300            26,000            25,273            +1,493            -1,027              -727
                                                                   =============================================================================================================================
            United States Court of International Trade

Salaries and expenses:
    Salaries of judges............................................            2,000             2,000             2,000             2,000   ................  ................  ................
    Other salaries and expenses...................................           13,345            14,182            14,182            14,182              +837   ................  ................
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, U.S. Court of International Trade....................           15,345            16,182            16,182            16,182              +837   ................  ................
                                                                   =============================================================================================================================
  Courts of Appeals, District Courts, and Other Judicial Services

Salaries and expenses:
    Salaries of judges and bankruptcy judges......................          305,312           316,000           316,000           316,000           +10,688   ................  ................
    Judges COLA...................................................            4,950             5,000   ................            5,000               +50   ................           +5,000
    Other salaries and expenses...................................        3,998,083         4,366,244         4,240,114         4,262,360          +264,277          -103,884           +22,246
    Emergency appropriations (Public Law 109-148).................           18,000   ................  ................  ................          -18,000   ................  ................
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Salaries and expenses.............................        4,326,345         4,687,244         4,556,114         4,583,360          +257,015          -103,884           +27,246

Vaccine Injury Compensation Trust Fund............................            3,795             3,952             3,952             3,952              +157   ................  ................
Defender services.................................................          709,830           803,879           750,033           761,051           +51,221           -42,828           +11,018
Fees of jurors and commissioners..................................           60,705            63,079            63,079            63,079            +2,374   ................  ................
Court security....................................................          368,280           410,334           400,334           397,737           +29,457           -12,597            -2,597
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Courts of Appeals, District Courts, and Other                5,468,955         5,968,488         5,773,512         5,809,179          +340,224          -159,309           +35,667
       Judicial Services..........................................
                                                                   =============================================================================================================================
         Administrative Office of the United States Courts

Salaries and expenses.............................................           69,559            75,333            73,800            74,333            +4,774            -1,000              +533

                      Federal Judicial Center

Salaries and expenses.............................................           22,127            23,787            23,500            23,390            +1,263              -397              -110

                     Judicial Retirement Funds

Payment to judiciary trust funds..................................           40,600            58,300            58,300            58,300           +17,700   ................  ................

                United States Sentencing Commission

Salaries and expenses.............................................           14,256            15,740            15,500            15,340            +1,084              -400              -160
                                                                   =============================================================================================================================
      Total, title IV, the Judiciary..............................        5,720,333         6,260,494         6,063,158         6,098,361          +378,028          -162,133           +35,203
          Mandatory appropriations................................         (351,912)         (380,300)         (380,300)         (380,300)         (+28,388)  ................  ................
          Discretionary appropriations............................       (5,368,421)       (5,880,194)       (5,682,858)       (5,718,061)        (+349,640)        (-162,133)         (+35,203)
                                                                   =============================================================================================================================
 TITLE V--EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT AND FUNDS APPROPRIATED
                         TO THE PRESIDENT

                          The White House

Salaries and expenses.............................................  ................          184,252   ................  ................  ................         -184,252   ................
Compensation of the President and the White House Office:
    Compensation of the President.................................              450   ................              450               450   ................             +450   ................
    Salaries and expenses.........................................           53,292   ................           51,952            51,952            -1,340           +51,952   ................
Executive Residence at the White House:
    Operating expenses............................................           12,312   ................           12,041            12,041              -271           +12,041   ................
    White House repair and restoration............................            1,683   ................            1,600             1,600               -83            +1,600   ................
Council of Economic Advisers......................................            4,000   ................            4,002             4,002                +2            +4,002   ................
Office of Policy Development......................................            3,465   ................            3,385             3,385               -80            +3,385   ................
National Security Council.........................................            8,618   ................            8,405             8,405              -213            +8,405   ................
Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board.......................  ................  ................  ................            1,500            +1,500            +1,500            +1,500
Office of Administration..........................................           88,429   ................           91,393            91,393            +2,964           +91,393   ................
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, The White House......................................          172,249           184,252           173,228           174,728            +2,479            -9,524            +1,500
                                                                   =============================================================================================================================
Office of Management and Budget...................................           76,161            68,780            76,185            76,185               +24            +7,405   ................

              Office of National Drug Control Policy

Office of National Drug Control Policy............................           26,639            23,309            26,928            11,500           -15,139           -11,809           -15,428
High intensity drug trafficking areas program.....................          224,730   ................          235,000           227,000            +2,270          +227,000            -8,000
Other Federal drug control programs...............................          192,951           212,160           194,000           214,500           +21,549            +2,340           +20,500
Counterdrug Technology Assessment Center..........................           29,700             9,600            19,600            20,000            -9,700           +10,400              +400
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Office of National Drug Control Policy...............          474,020           245,069           475,528           473,000            -1,020          +227,931            -2,528
                                                                   =============================================================================================================================
Unanticipated needs...............................................              990            11,789             1,000             1,000               +10           -10,789   ................
Unanticipated Needs for Natural Disasters (emerg).................  ................          -11,789   ................  ................  ................          +11,789   ................
Special Assistance to the President...............................            4,410             4,352             4,352             4,352               -58   ................  ................
Official Residence of the Vice President: Operating expenses......              322               317               317               317                -5   ................  ................
                                                                   =============================================================================================================================
      Total, title V, Executive Office of the President and Funds           728,152           502,770           730,610           729,582            +1,430          +226,812            -1,028
       Appropriated to the President..............................

                  TITLE VI--INDEPENDENT AGENCIES

Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board........            5,882             5,957             5,957             5,957               +75   ................  ................
Consumer Product Safety Commission................................           62,370            62,370            62,370            62,370   ................  ................  ................
Election Assistance Commission....................................           14,058            16,908            17,158            17,000            +2,942               +92              -158
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation: Office of Inspector General          (30,690)          (26,256)          (26,256)          (26,256)          (-4,434)  ................  ................
 (transfer).......................................................
Federal Election Commission.......................................           54,153            57,138            57,138            57,138            +2,985   ................  ................
Federal Labor Relations Authority.................................           25,213            25,218            25,218            25,218                +5   ................  ................
Federal Maritime Commission.......................................           20,294            21,474            20,294            21,474            +1,180   ................           +1,180

                  General Services Administration

                      Federal Buildings Fund

Appropriations....................................................  ................         (243,025)  ................         (243,025)        (+243,025)  ................        (+243,025)
Limitations on availability of revenue:
    Construction and acquisition of facilities....................          792,056           690,095           212,146           708,166           -83,890           +18,071          +496,020
    Repairs and alterations.......................................          861,376           866,194           478,363           866,194            +4,818   ................         +387,831
    Installment acquisition payments..............................          168,180           163,999           163,999           163,999            -4,181   ................  ................
    Rental of space...............................................        4,046,031         4,322,548         4,322,548         4,322,548          +276,517   ................  ................
    Building operations...........................................        1,885,102         2,003,830         2,003,830         2,003,830          +118,728   ................  ................
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal....................................................        7,752,745         8,046,666         7,180,886         8,064,737          +311,992           +18,071          +883,851

    Repayment of debt.............................................           40,000            41,000            41,000            41,000            +1,000   ................  ................
Emergency appropriations (Public Law 109-148).....................           38,000   ................  ................  ................          -38,000   ................  ................
Emergency appropriations (Public Law 109-234).....................           37,000   ................  ................  ................          -37,000   ................  ................
Rental income to fund.............................................       -7,808,000        -7,844,641        -7,844,641        -7,844,641           -36,641   ................  ................
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Federal Buildings Fund...............................           59,745           243,025          -622,755           261,096          +201,351           +18,071          +883,851

Government-wide policy............................................           52,268            52,550            52,550            52,550              +282   ................  ................
Operating expenses................................................           98,891            83,032            80,032            83,032           -15,859   ................           +3,000
Office of Inspector General.......................................           42,976            44,312            44,312            44,312            +1,336   ................  ................
Electronic Government Fund........................................            2,970             5,000             3,000             5,000            +2,030   ................           +2,000
Allowances and Office Staff for Former Presidents.................            2,922             3,030             3,030             3,030              +108   ................  ................
Federal Citizen Information Center Fund...........................           14,850            16,866            16,866            16,866            +2,016   ................  ................
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, General Services Administration......................          274,622           447,815          -422,965           465,886          +191,264           +18,071          +888,851
                                                                   =============================================================================================================================
                  Merit Systems Protection Board

Salaries and expenses.............................................           35,244            36,531            36,531            36,550            +1,306               +19               +19
Limitation on administrative expenses.............................            2,579             2,579             2,579             2,600               +21               +21               +21
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Merit Systems Protection Board.......................           37,823            39,110            39,110            39,150            +1,327               +40               +40
                                                                   =============================================================================================================================
                    Morris K. Udall Foundation

Morris K. Udall Trust Fund........................................            1,980   ................            2,000             2,000               +20            +2,000   ................
Environmental Dispute Resolution Fund.............................            1,881               693             2,000             2,000              +119            +1,307   ................
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Morris K. Udall Foundation...........................            3,861               693             4,000             4,000              +139            +3,307   ................
                                                                   =============================================================================================================================
           National Archives and Records Administration

Operating expenses................................................          280,215           289,605           281,605           285,915            +5,700            -3,690            +4,310
Electronic records archive........................................           37,535            45,455            45,455            48,810           +11,275            +3,355            +3,355
Reduction of debt.................................................           -8,488           -10,026           -10,026           -10,026            -1,538   ................  ................
Repairs and restoration...........................................            9,585            13,020            13,020            18,790            +9,205            +5,770            +5,770
National Historical Publications and Records Commission: Grants               7,425   ................            7,500             5,000            -2,425            +5,000            -2,500
 program..........................................................
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, National Archives and Records Admin..................          326,272           338,054           337,554           348,489           +22,217           +10,435           +10,935
                                                                   =============================================================================================================================
National Credit Union Administration:
    Central liquidity facility:
        (Limitation on direct loans)..............................       (1,500,000)       (1,500,000)       (1,500,000)       (1,500,000)  ................  ................  ................
        (Limitation on admin expenses, corporate funds)...........             (323)             (331)             (331)             (331)              (+8)  ................  ................
    Community development revolving loan fund.....................              941               941               941               941   ................  ................  ................
National Transportation Safety Board:
    Salaries and expenses.........................................           75,933            79,594            81,594            79,594            +3,661   ................           -2,000
        Rescission of unobligated balances........................           -1,000            -1,664            -1,664            -1,664              -664   ................  ................
    Emergency Fund (rescission)...................................  ................           -1,998   ................  ................  ................           +1,998   ................
Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation.............................          116,820           119,790           119,790           119,790            +2,970   ................  ................
Office of Government Ethics.......................................           11,037            11,489            11,489            11,489              +452   ................  ................

                  Office of Personnel Management

Salaries and expenses.............................................          121,296           111,095           111,095           111,095           -10,201   ................  ................
    Limitation on administrative expenses.........................           99,017           126,908           100,178           126,908           +27,891   ................          +26,730
Office of Inspector General.......................................            2,050             1,598             1,598             1,598              -452   ................  ................
    Limitation on administrative expenses.........................           16,166            16,166            16,166            16,166   ................  ................  ................
Govt Payment for Annuitants, Employees Health Benefits............        8,393,000         8,780,260         8,780,260         8,780,260          +387,260   ................  ................
Govt Payment for Annuitants, Employee Life Insurance..............           36,000            39,000            39,000            39,000            +3,000   ................  ................
Payment to Civil Svc Retirement and Disability Fund...............       10,072,000        10,532,000        10,532,000        10,532,000          +460,000   ................  ................
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Office of Personnel Management.......................       18,739,529        19,607,027        19,580,297        19,607,027          +867,498   ................          +26,730
                                                                   =============================================================================================================================

Office of Special Counsel.........................................           15,172            15,937            15,937            16,000              +828               +63               +63
Selective Service System..........................................           24,750            24,255            24,255            24,255              -495   ................  ................
United States Interagency Council on Homelessness.................            1,782             2,000             2,000             2,000              +218   ................  ................

                   United States Postal Service

Payment to the Postal Service Fund................................           42,917   ................           29,000            29,000           -13,917           +29,000   ................
Appropriations available from prior year advances.................           61,092            73,000            73,000            73,000           +11,908   ................  ................
Advance appropriations............................................           73,000            79,915            79,915            79,915            +6,915   ................  ................
Less appropriations from prior year advances......................          -61,092           -73,000           -73,000           -73,000           -11,908   ................  ................
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, United States Postal Service.........................          115,917            79,915           108,915           108,915            -7,002           +29,000   ................
                                                                   =============================================================================================================================

United States Tax Court...........................................           47,518            47,110            47,110            47,110              -408   ................  ................
                                                                   =============================================================================================================================
      Total, title VII, Independent Agencies......................       19,972,947        20,999,133        20,136,498        21,062,139        +1,089,192           +63,006          +925,641
          Appropriations..........................................      (19,825,947)      (20,922,880)      (20,058,247)      (20,983,888)      (+1,157,941)         (+61,008)        (+925,641)
          Rescissions.............................................          (-1,000)          (-3,662)          (-1,664)          (-1,664)            (-664)          (+1,998)  ................
          Advance appropriations..................................          (73,000)          (79,915)          (79,915)          (79,915)          (+6,915)  ................  ................
          Emergency appropriations................................          (75,000)  ................  ................  ................         (-75,000)  ................  ................
          (By transfer)...........................................          (30,690)          (26,256)          (26,256)          (26,256)          (-4,434)  ................  ................
          (Limitation on direct loans)............................       (1,500,000)       (1,500,000)       (1,500,000)       (1,500,000)  ................  ................  ................
          (Limitation on corporate funds).........................             (323)             (331)             (331)             (331)              (+8)  ................  ................
                                                                   =============================================================================================================================
             Title VIII--General Provisions, This Bill

Scoring adjustment (for 1 percent ATB rescission).................          -10,707   ................  ................  ................          +10,707   ................  ................
    Fed Hwys--addl contract authority (1 percent rescission)......           -6,000   ................  ................  ................           +6,000   ................  ................
                                                                   =============================================================================================================================
      Grand total (net)...........................................      102,948,146        86,748,272        86,656,536        89,389,989       -13,558,157        +2,641,717        +2,733,453
          Appropriations..........................................      (87,073,023)      (87,988,269)      (87,835,954)      (90,490,843)      (+3,417,820)      (+2,502,574)      (+2,654,889)
          Emergency appropriations................................      (20,685,563)         (-11,789)  ................  ................     (-20,685,563)         (+11,789)  ................
          Offsetting collections..................................         (-73,000)         (-78,000)         (-78,000)         (-83,600)         (-10,600)          (-5,600)          (-5,600)
          Rescissions.............................................      (-2,117,078)      (-2,614,123)      (-2,156,725)      (-2,160,372)         (-43,294)        (+453,751)          (-3,647)
          Rescission of contract authority........................      (-4,877,362)      (-1,582,000)      (-2,194,608)      (-2,303,797)      (+2,573,565)        (-721,797)        (-109,189)
          Negative subsidy receipts...............................      (-2,016,000)      (-1,234,000)      (-1,030,000)        (-833,000)      (+1,183,000)        (+401,000)        (+197,000)
          Advance appropriations..................................       (4,273,000)       (4,279,915)       (4,279,915)       (4,279,915)          (+6,915)  ................  ................
          (Limitation on obligations).............................      (47,271,957)      (50,431,240)      (51,265,740)      (51,081,740)      (+3,809,783)        (+650,500)        (-184,000)
          (Exempt contract authority).............................         (739,000)         (739,000)         (739,000)         (739,000)  ................  ................  ................
              (By transfer).......................................         (151,922)          (26,256)          (26,256)          (26,256)        (-125,666)  ................  ................
              (Transfer out)......................................        (-121,232)  ................  ................  ................        (+121,232)  ................  ................
                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total budgetary resources...................................     (150,959,103)     (137,918,512)     (138,661,276)     (141,210,729)      (-9,748,374)      (+3,292,217)      (+2,549,453)
                                                                   =============================================================================================================================
Discretionary total...............................................       84,093,784        67,016,212        66,924,026        69,657,479       -14,436,305        +2,641,267        +2,733,453
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



