[House Report 112-573]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
Union Calendar No. 413
112th Congress, 2d Session - - - - - - - - - - - - House Report 112-573
(112-87)
SUMMARY ON THE ACTIVITIES OF THE COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND
INFRASTRUCTURE FOR THE 112TH CONGRESS
__________
ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS
second session
January 17, 2012-June 29, 2012
__________
COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
June 29, 2012.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE
JOHN L. MICA, Florida, Chairman
DON YOUNG, Alaska NICK J. RAHALL II, West Virginia
THOMAS E. PETRI, Wisconsin PETER A. DeFAZIO, Oregon
HOWARD COBLE, North Carolina JERRY F. COSTELLO, Illinois
JOHN J. DUNCAN, Jr., Tennessee ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of
FRANK A. LoBIONDO, New Jersey Columbia
GARY G. MILLER, California JERROLD NADLER, New York
TIMOTHY V. JOHNSON, Illinois CORRINE BROWN, Florida
SAM GRAVES, Missouri BOB FILNER, California
BILL SHUSTER, Pennsylvania EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas
SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland
JEAN SCHMIDT, Ohio LEONARD L. BOSWELL, Iowa
CANDICE S. MILLER, Michigan TIM HOLDEN, Pennsylvania
DUNCAN HUNTER, California RICK LARSEN, Washington
ANDY HARRIS, Maryland MICHAEL E. CAPUANO, Massachusetts
ERIC A. ``RICK'' CRAWFORD, Arkansas TIMOTHY H. BISHOP, New York
JAIME HERRERA BEUTLER, Washington MICHAEL H. MICHAUD, Maine
FRANK C. GUINTA, New Hampshire RUSS CARNAHAN, Missouri
RANDY HULTGREN, Illinois GRACE F. NAPOLITANO, California
LOU BARLETTA, Pennsylvania DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois
CHIP CRAVAACK, Minnesota MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii
BLAKE FARENTHOLD, Texas JASON ALTMIRE, Pennsylvania
LARRY BUCSHON, Indiana TIMOTHY J. WALZ, Minnesota
BILLY LONG, Missouri HEATH SHULER, North Carolina
BOB GIBBS, Ohio STEVE COHEN, Tennessee
PATRICK MEEHAN, Pennsylvania LAURA RICHARDSON, California
RICHARD L. HANNA, New York ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey
JEFFREY M. LANDRY, Louisiana DONNA F. EDWARDS, Maryland
STEVE SOUTHERLAND II, Florida
JEFF DENHAM, California
JAMES LANKFORD, Oklahoma
REID J. RIBBLE, Wisconsin
CHARLES J. ``CHUCK'' FLEISCHMANN,
Tennessee
SUBCOMMITTEE ON AVIATION
THOMAS E. PETRI, Wisconsin, Chairman
HOWARD COBLE, North Carolina JERRY F. COSTELLO, Illinois
JOHN J. DUNCAN, Jr., Tennessee RUSS CARNAHAN, Missouri
FRANK A. LoBIONDO, New Jersey DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois
SAM GRAVES, Missouri PETER A. DeFAZIO, Oregon
JEAN SCHMIDT, Ohio BOB FILNER, California
FRANK C. GUINTA, New Hampshire EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas
RANDY HULTGREN, Illinois LEONARD L. BOSWELL, Iowa
CHIP CRAVAACK, Minnesota, Vice TIM HOLDEN, Pennsylvania
Chair MICHAEL E. CAPUANO, Massachusetts
BLAKE FARENTHOLD, Texas MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii
BILLY LONG, Missouri STEVE COHEN, Tennessee
PATRICK MEEHAN, Pennsylvania ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of
STEVE SOUTHERLAND II, Florida Columbia
JAMES LANKFORD, Oklahoma NICK J. RAHALL II, West Virginia
REID J. RIBBLE, Wisconsin (Ex Officio)
CHARLES J. ``CHUCK'' FLEISCHMANN,
Tennessee
JOHN L. MICA, Florida (Ex Officio)
SUBCOMMITTEE ON COAST GUARD AND MARITIME TRANSPORTATION
FRANK A. LoBIONDO, New Jersey, Chairman
DON YOUNG, Alaska RICK LARSEN, Washington
HOWARD COBLE, North Carolina ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland
ANDY HARRIS, Maryland CORRINE BROWN, Florida
FRANK C. GUINTA, New Hampshire TIMOTHY H. BISHOP, New York
CHIP CRAVAACK, Minnesota MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii
BLAKE FARENTHOLD, Texas MICHAEL H. MICHAUD, Maine
JEFFREY M. LANDRY, Louisiana, Vice NICK J. RAHALL II, West Virginia
Chair (Ex Officio)
JOHN L. MICA, Florida (Ex Officio)
SUBCOMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, PUBLIC BUILDINGS, AND EMERGENCY
MANAGEMENT
JEFF DENHAM, California, Chairman
TIMOTHY V. JOHNSON, Illinois ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of
ERIC A. ``RICK'' CRAWFORD, Columbia
Arkansas, HEATH SHULER, North Carolina
Vice Chair MICHAEL H. MICHAUD, Maine
RANDY HULTGREN, Illinois RUSS CARNAHAN, Missouri
LOU BARLETTA, Pennsylvania TIMOTHY J. WALZ, Minnesota
BOB GIBBS, Ohio DONNA F. EDWARDS, Maryland
PATRICK MEEHAN, Pennsylvania BOB FILNER, California
RICHARD L. HANNA, New York NICK J. RAHALL II, West Virginia
CHARLES J. ``CHUCK'' FLEISCHMANN, (Ex Officio)
Tennessee
JOHN L. MICA, Florida (Ex Officio)
SUBCOMMITTEE ON HIGHWAYS AND TRANSIT
JOHN J. DUNCAN, Jr., Tennessee, Chairman
DON YOUNG, Alaska PETER A. DEFAZIO, Oregon
THOMAS E. PETRI, Wisconsin JERROLD NADLER, New York
HOWARD COBLE, North Carolina BOB FILNER, California
FRANK A. LoBIONDO, New Jersey LEONARD L. BOSWELL, Iowa
GARY G. MILLER, California TIM HOLDEN, Pennsylvania
TIMOTHY V. JOHNSON, Illinois MICHAEL E. CAPUANO, Massachusetts
SAM GRAVES, Missouri MICHAEL H. MICHAUD, Maine
BILL SHUSTER, Pennsylvania GRACE F. NAPOLITANO, California
SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii
JEAN SCHMIDT, Ohio JASON ALTMIRE, Pennsylvania
CANDICE S. MILLER, Michigan TIMOTHY J. WALZ, Minnesota
ANDY HARRIS, Maryland HEATH SHULER, North Carolina
ERIC A. ``RICK'' CRAWFORD, Arkansas STEVE COHEN, Tennessee
JAIME HERRERA BEUTLER, Washington LAURA RICHARDSON, California
FRANK C. GUINTA, New Hampshire ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey
LOU BARLETTA, Pennsylvania DONNA F. EDWARDS, Maryland
BLAKE FARENTHOLD, Texas EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas
LARRY BUCSHON, Indiana ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland
BILLY LONG, Missouri NICK J. RAHALL II, West Virginia
BOB GIBBS, Ohio (Ex Officio)
RICHARD L. HANNA, New York, Vice
Chair
STEVE SOUTHERLAND II, Florida
JOHN L. MICA, Florida (Ex Officio)
SUBCOMMITTEE ON RAILROADS, PIPELINES, AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
BILL SHUSTER, Pennsylvania, Chairman
GARY G. MILLER, California CORRINE BROWN, Florida
SAM GRAVES, Missouri JERROLD NADLER, New York
SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia RICK LARSEN, Washington
JEAN SCHMIDT, Ohio TIMOTHY H. BISHOP, New York
CANDICE S. MILLER, Michigan MICHAEL H. MICHAUD, Maine
JAIME HERRERA BEUTLER, Washington GRACE F. NAPOLITANO, California
RANDY HULTGREN, Illinois DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois
LOU BARLETTA, Pennsylvania JASON ALTMIRE, Pennsylvania
LARRY BUCSHON, Indiana TIMOTHY J. WALZ, Minnesota
BILLY LONG, Missouri LAURA RICHARDSON, California
PATRICK MEEHAN, Pennsylvania ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey
RICHARD L. HANNA, New York PETER A. DeFAZIO, Oregon
JEFFREY M. LANDRY, Louisiana JERRY F. COSTELLO, Illinois
JEFF DENHAM, California NICK J. RAHALL II, West Virginia
REID J. RIBBLE, Wisconsin (Ex Officio)
CHARLES J. ``CHUCK'' FLEISCHMANN,
Tennessee
JOHN L. MICA, Florida (Ex Officio)
SUBCOMMITTEE ON WATER RESOURCES AND ENVIRONMENT
BOB GIBBS, Ohio, Chairman
DON YOUNG, Alaska TIMOTHY H. BISHOP, New York
JOHN J. DUNCAN, Jr., Tennessee JERRY F. COSTELLO, Illinois
GARY G. MILLER, California ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of
TIMOTHY V. JOHNSON, Illinois Columbia
BILL SHUSTER, Pennsylvania RUSS CARNAHAN, Missouri
SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia DONNA F. EDWARDS, Maryland
CANDICE S. MILLER, Michigan CORRINE BROWN, Florida
DUNCAN HUNTER, California BOB FILNER, California
ANDY HARRIS, Maryland EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas
ERIC A. ``RICK'' CRAWFORD, Arkansas MICHAEL E. CAPUANO, Massachusetts
JAIME HERRERA BEUTLER, Washington, GRACE F. NAPOLITANO, California
Vice Chair JASON ALTMIRE, Pennsylvania
CHIP CRAVAACK, Minnesota STEVE COHEN, Tennessee
LARRY BUCSHON, Indiana LAURA RICHARDSON, California
JEFFREY M. LANDRY, Louisiana MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii
JEFF DENHAM, California NICK J. RAHALL II, West Virginia
JAMES LANKFORD, Oklahoma (Ex Officio)
REID J. RIBBLE, Wisconsin
JOHN L. MICA, Florida (Ex Officio)
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Jurisdiction of the House Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure................................................. 1
Foreword......................................................... 3
Table of Bills Enacted into Law.................................. 5
Table of Concurrent Resolutions Approved by both Chambers........ 7
Table of Bills and Resolutions Passed by the House but not Acted
on by the Senate............................................... 7
Committee Organizational Meetings and Markups.................... 8
Summary of Activities:
Full Committee............................................... 12
Subcommittee on Aviation..................................... 34
Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation...... 48
Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings, and
Emergency Management....................................... 64
Subcommittee on Highways and Transit......................... 85
Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials 92
Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment.............. 97
Oversight Plan................................................... 108
Summary of Actions Taken and Recommendations Made Regarding
Over-sight Plan............................................ 108
Summary of any Additional Oversight Activities Undertaken by
Committee or Recommendations or Actions.................... 123
Summary of Oversight Hearings Pursuant to Clauses 2(n), (o),
and (p) of Rule XI of the Rules of the House of
Representatives............................................ 124
Oversight or Legislative Activity Conducted as Part of or as a
Result of the Inventory and Review of Existing, Pending, and
Proposed Regulations and Orders................................ 130
Publications..................................................... 133
LETTER OF SUBMITTAL
----------
House of Representatives,
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
Washington, DC, June 29, 2012.
Hon. John A. Boehner,
Speaker, House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Speaker: Pursuant to Clause 1(d) of Rule XI of the
Rules of the House of Representatives, I submit the third
semiannual report on the activities of the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure for the 112th Congress.
The purpose of this report is to provide Members of
Congress, Congressional staff, and the general public with an
overview of the activities of the Committee. This report is
intended as a general reference tool and not as a substitute
for Committee hearing records, reports, and files.
Sincerely,
John L. Mica,
Chairman.
Enclosure.
Union Calendar No. 413
112th Congress Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
2d Session 112-573
======================================================================
SUMMARY ON THE ACTIVITIES OF THE COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND
INFRASTRUCTURE FOR THE 112TH CONGRESS
_______
June 29, 2012.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Mica, from the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
submitted the following
R E P O R T
PROVISIONS OF THE RULES OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES APPLICABLE TO
COMMITTEE ACTIVITIES; JURISDICTION OF THE HOUSE COMMITTEE ON
TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE
``Rule X
``ORGANIZATION OF COMMITTEES
``Committees and their legislative jurisdictions
``1. There shall be in the House the Following standing
committees, each of which shall have the jurisdiction and
related functions assigned by this clause and clauses 2, 3, and
4. All bills, resolutions, and other matters relating to
subjects within the jurisdiction of the standing committees
listed in this clause shall be referred to those committees, in
accordance with clause 2 of rule XII, as follows:
``(r) Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
``(1) Coast Guard, including lifesaving service,
lighthouses, lightships, ocean derelicts, and the Coast Guard
Academy.
``(2) Federal management of emergencies and natural
disasters.
``(3) Flood control and improvement of rivers and harbors.
``(4) Inland waterways.
``(5) Inspection of merchant marine vessels, lights and
signals, lifesaving equipment, and fire protection on such
vessels.
``(6) Navigation and laws relating thereto, including
pilotage.
``(7) Registering and licensing of vessels and small boats.
``(8) Rules and international arrangements to prevent
collisions at sea.
``(9) The Capitol Building and the Senate and House Office
Buildings.
``(10) Construction or maintenance of roads and post roads
(other than appropriations therefor).
``(11) Construction or reconstruction, maintenance, and
care of buildings and grounds of the Botanic Garden, the
Library of Congress, and the Smithsonian Institution.
``(12) Merchant marine (except for national security
aspects thereof).
``(13) Purchase of sites and construction of post offices,
customhouses, Federal courthouses, and Government buildings
within the District of Columbia.
``(14) Oil and other pollution of navigable waters,
including inland, coastal, and ocean waters.
``(15) Marine affairs, including coastal zone management,
as they relate to oil and other pollution of navigable waters.
``(16) Public buildings and occupied or improved grounds of
the United States generally.
``(17) Public works for the benefit of navigation,
including bridges and dams (other than international bridges
and dams).
``(18) Related transportation regulatory agencies (except
the Transportation Security Administration).
``(19) Roads and the safety thereof.
``(20) Transportation, including civil aviation, railroads,
water transportation, transportation safety (except automobile
safety and transportation security functions of the Department
of Homeland Security), transportation infrastructure,
transportation labor, and railroad retirement and unemployment
(except revenue measures related thereto).
``(21) Water power.
FOREWORD
The 112th Congress began as the country was struggling with
high unemployment (9.0 percent in January 2011), high home
foreclosure rates, crumbling infrastructure, and dwindling hope
among Americans. A year and a half later, the country's
unemployment rate (8.2 percent in May 2012) is still too high,
and the country remains concerned about its future. The
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure continues to be
committed to three primary objectives that will help improve
the nation's economy:
1. Creating jobs;
2. Saving the taxpayer money; and
3. Shrinking the size of the Federal government.
Since the beginning of the 112th Congress, the Committee
has held 10 markups, one organizational meeting, 91 hearings,
14 listening sessions, ten roundtables, and one symposium. In
addition, the Committee reported 19 bills, issued three
investigative reports on the Transportation Security
Administration, and approved the Committee Oversight Plan and
the Views and Estimates. A total of 42 bills under the
Committee's jurisdiction have passed the House; 22 of these
bills have been signed into law by the President.
The Committee has made significant progress on its
legislative agenda since submission of the December 2011
Activities Report.
Most notably, on February 14, 2012, the Committee
successfully concluded a five-year effort to reauthorize
federal aviation programs with enactment of the FAA
Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (P.L. 112-95). This Act
facilitates job creation by providing long-term stability for
the aviation industry. It provides responsible funding for FAA
safety programs, air traffic control modernization, and
operations, holding spending at fiscal year (FY) 2011 levels
through FY 2015. It provides for unprecedented reform of the
National Mediation Board; limits efforts to over-regulate the
aviation industry; and reforms the Essential Air Service
program by eliminating the most egregious subsidies and
prohibiting new entrants to the program.
The Surface Transportation Extension Act of 2012 (P.L. 112-
102) extended the expiring surface transportation programs
through June 30, 2012. P.L. 112-102 was a bipartisan, bicameral
agreement that allowed more time to complete the ultimate goal
of a comprehensive, long-term reauthorization of the nation's
highway, transit, highway safety, motor carrier safety, and
rail programs. As of the filing of this report, this process is
nearly complete. On May 8, 2012, the House and Senate convened
a conference on H.R. 4348 to reach an agreement on surface
transportation reauthorization legislation. With the approval
of House and Senate conferees, the conference report to
accompany H.R. 4348 was filed on June 28, 2012. The House
approved the conference report on June 29, 2012, and it is
currently pending consideration by the Senate. By passing a
long-term reauthorization, millions of American jobs will be
created, and the nation's highways, bridges and transit systems
will be rebuilt and strengthened.
The Pipeline Safety, Regulatory Certainty, and Job Creation
Act of 2011 (P.L. 112-90) reauthorized federal pipeline safety
programs through FY 2015. It provides for enhanced safety and
reliability in pipeline transportation, and ensures regulatory
certainty which will help create a positive environment for job
development.
In addition to the enacted legislation discussed above, on
February 7, 2012, the House approved H.R. 1734, the ``Civilian
Property Realignment Act.'' This legislation would establish a
framework through which a board or commission would
independently review Federal properties and make
recommendations for consolidations, co-locations,
redevelopment, selling or other actions to minimize costs and
produce savings for the taxpayer. The Office of Management and
Budget estimates that the proposal could save taxpayers more
than $15 billion.
These bills contained provisions that will reduce waste and
prevent government-imposed burdens and red tape on American
businesses. Such provisions will ensure that the creation of
much-needed U.S. jobs are not stifled or curtailed.
The Committee could not have achieved these accomplishments
without the bipartisan leadership and dedication of each of the
Members of the Committee, particularly Ranking Member Nick J.
Rahall, II, and the Chairs and Ranking Members of each of the
Subcommittees. The Subcommittee Chairs have diligently laid the
foundation for the Committee's accomplishments by conducting
hearings and guiding bills and resolutions through each of
their respective Subcommittees.
With great pride in our Committee's work, I hereby submit
the third semiannual Legislative and Oversight Activities of
the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure for the
112th Congress. This summary highlights accomplishments that
will create jobs, save the taxpayer money, and shrink the size
of the federal government all while improving the safety,
security, and efficiency of the country's transportation
systems and infrastructure for years to come.
John L. Mica, Chairman,
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
BILLS ENACTED INTO LAW
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Public Law No. Date Enacted Bill No. Title
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
P.L. 112-2............. February 17, 2011................ S. 188................. A bill to designate the
United States courthouse
under construction at 98
West First Street, Yuma,
Arizona, as the ``John M.
Roll United States
Courthouse''.
P.L. 112-5............. March 4, 2011.................... H.R. 662............... To provide an extension of
Federal-aid highway,
highway safety, motor
carrier safety, transit,
and other programs funded
out of the Highway Trust
Fund pending enactment of
a multiyear law
reauthorizing such
programs.
P.L. 112-7............. March 31, 2011................... H.R. 1079.............. To amend the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 to
extend the funding and
expenditure authority of
the Airport and Airway
Trust Fund, to amend title
49, United States Code, to
extend the airport
improvement program, and
for other purposes.
P.L. 112-11............ April 25, 2011................... S. 307................. A bill to designate the
Federal building and
United States courthouse
located at 217 West King
Street, Martinsburg, West
Virginia, as the ``W.
Craig Broadwater Federal
Building and United States
Courthouse''.
P.L. 112-16............ May 31, 2011..................... H.R. 1893.............. To amend the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 to
extend the funding and
expenditure authority of
the Airport and Airway
Trust Fund, to amend title
49, United States Code, to
extend the airport
improvement program, and
for other purposes.
P.L. 112-21............ June 29, 2011.................... H.R. 2279.............. To amend the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 to
extend the funding and
expenditure authority of
the Airport and Airway
Trust Fund, to amend title
49, United States Code, to
extend the airport
improvement program, and
for other purposes.
P.L. 112-27............ August 5, 2011................... H.R. 2553.............. To amend the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 to
extend the funding and
expenditure authority of
the Airport and Airway
Trust Fund, to amend title
49, United States Code, to
extend the airport
improvement program, and
for other purposes.
P.L. 112-30............ September 16, 2011............... H.R. 2887.............. To provide an extension of
surface and air
transportation programs,
and for other purposes.
P.L. 112-31............ September 23, 2011............... S. 846................. A bill to designate the
United States courthouse
located at 80 Lafayette
Street in Jefferson City,
Missouri, as the
Christopher S. Bond United
States Courthouse.
P.L. 112-61............ November 29, 2011................ H.R. 3321.............. To facilitate the hosting
in the United States of
the 34th America's Cup by
authorizing certain
eligible vessels to
participate in activities
related to the
competition, and for other
purposes.
P.L. 112-78............ December 23, 2011................ H.R. 3765.............. To extend the payroll tax
holiday, unemployment
compensation, Medicare
physician payment, provide
for the consideration of
the Keystone XL pipeline,
and for other purposes.
P.L. 112-85............ January 3, 2012.................. H.R. 1264.............. To designate the property
between the United States
Federal Courthouse and the
Ed Jones Building located
at 109 South Highland
Avenue in Jackson,
Tennessee, as the ``M.D.
Anderson Plaza'' and to
authorize the placement of
a historical/
identification marker on
the grounds recognizing
the achievements and
philanthropy of M.D.
Anderson.
P.L. 112-90............ January 3, 2012.................. H.R. 2845.............. To amend title 49, United
States Code, to provide
for enhanced safety and
environmental protection
in pipeline
transportation, to provide
for enhanced reliability
in the transportation of
the Nation's energy
products by pipeline, and
for other purposes.
P.L. 112-91............ January 31, 2012................. H.R. 3800.............. To amend the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 to
extend the funding and
expenditure authority of
the Airport and Airway
Trust Fund, to amend title
49, United States Code, to
extend authorizations for
the airport improvement
program, and for other
purposes.
P.L. 112-95............ February 14, 2012................ H.R. 658............... To amend title 49, United
States Code, to authorize
appropriations for the
Federal Aviation
Administration for fiscal
years 2011 through 2014,
to streamline programs,
create efficiencies,
reduce waste, and improve
aviation safety and
capacity, to provide
stable funding for the
national aviation system,
and for other purposes.
P.L. 112-96............ February 22, 2012................ H.R. 3630.............. To provide incentives for
the creation of jobs, and
for other purposes.
P.L. 112-100........... March 14, 2012................... S. 2234................ To authorize the St. Croix
River Crossing Project
with appropriate
mitigation measures to
promote river values.
P.L. 112-101........... March 14, 2012................... S. 1710................ A bill to designate the
United States courthouse
located at 222 West 7th
Avenue, Anchorage, Alaska,
as the James M. Fitzgerald
United States Courthouse.
P.L. 112-102........... March 30, 2012................... H.R. 4281.............. To provide an extension of
Federal-aid highway,
highway safety, motor
carrier safety, transit,
and other programs funded
out of the Highway Trust
Fund pending enactment of
a multiyear law
reauthorizing such
programs.
P.L. 112-113........... May 15, 2012..................... H.R. 2668.............. To designate the station of
the United States Border
Patrol located at 2136
South Naco Highway in
Bisbee, Arizona, as the
`Brian A. Terry Border
Patrol Station'.
P.L. 112-119........... May 15, 2012..................... S. 1302................ A bill to authorize the
Administrator of General
Services to convey a
parcel of real property in
Tracy, California, to the
City of Tracy.
P.L. 112-131........... June 8, 2012..................... H.R. 4097.............. To amend the John F.
Kennedy Center Act to
authorize appropriations
for the John F. Kennedy
Center for the Performing
Arts, and for other
purposes.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CONCURRENT RESOLUTIONS APPROVED BY BOTH CHAMBERS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resolution No. Title House Passage Senate Passage
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
H. Con. Res. 16........ Authorizing the use of the Capitol May 11, 2011.......... May 12, 2011
Grounds for the Greater Washington Soap
Box Derby.
H. Con. Res. 46........ Authorizing the use of the Capitol May 11, 2011.......... May 12, 2011
Grounds for the National Peace
Officers' Memorial Service.
H. Con. Res. 67........ Authorizing the use of the Capitol September 7, 2011..... September 8, 2011
Grounds for the District of Columbia
Special Olympics Law Enforcement Torch
Run.
H. Con. Res. 93........ Providing for a correction to the December 14, 2011..... December 15, 2011
enrollment of the bill H.R. 2845.
H. Con. Res. 106....... Authorizing the use of the Capitol May 7, 2012........... May 9, 2012
Grounds for the Greater Washington Soap
Box Derby.
H. Con. Res. 117....... Authorizing the use of the Capitol May 7, 2012........... May 9, 2012
Grounds for the National Peace
Officers' Memorial Service.
H. Con. Res. 118....... Authorizing the use of the Capitol May 7, 2012........... May 9, 2012
Grounds for the District of Columbia
Special Olympics Law Enforcement Torch
Run.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS PASSED BY THE HOUSE BUT NOT ACTED ON BY THE SENATE
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date of House
Bill No. Title Passage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
H.R. 362.............. To redesignate the Federal May 2, 2011
building and United
States Courthouse located
at 200 East Wall Street
in Midland, Texas, as the
``George H. W. Bush and
George W. Bush United
States Courthouse and
George Mahon Federal
Building''.
H.R. 872.............. To amend the Federal March 31, 2011
Insecticide, Fungicide,
and Rodenticide Act and
the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act to
clarify Congressional
intent regarding the
regulation of the use of
pesticides in or near
navigable waters, and for
other purposes.
H.R. 1938............. To direct the President to July 26, 2011
expedite the
consideration and
approval of the
construction and
operation of the Keystone
XL oil pipeline, and for
other purposes.
H.R. 2018............. To amend the Federal Water July 13, 2011
Pollution Control Act to
preserve the authority of
each State to make
determinations relating
to the State's water
quality standards, and
for other purposes.
H.R. 2838............. To authorize November 15, 2011
appropriations for the
Coast Guard for fiscal
years 2012 through 2015,
and for other purposes.
H.R. 2594............. To prohibit operators of October 24, 2011
civil aircraft of the
United States from
participating in the
European Union's
emissions trading scheme,
and for other purposes.
H.R. 2838............. To authorize November 15, 2011
appropriations for the
Coast Guard for fiscal
years 2012 through 2015,
and for other purposes.
H.R. 1791............. To designate the United November 16, 2011
States courthouse under
construction at 101 South
United States Route 1 in
Fort Pierce, Florida, as
the ``Alto Lee Adams,
Sr., United States
Courthouse''.
H.R. 2105............. To provide for the December 14, 2011
application of measures
to foreign persons who
transfer to Iran, North
Korea, and Syria certain
goods, services, or
technology, and for other
purposes.
H.R. 1734............. To decrease the deficit by February 7, 2012
realigning,
consolidating, selling,
disposing, and improving
the efficiency of Federal
buildings and other
civilian real property,
and for other purposes.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE ORGANIZATIONAL MEETINGS AND MARKUPS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date of Organizational Meeting or
Markup Full or Subcommittee Agenda Outcome
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
January 26, 2011..................... Full Committee......... Organizational Meeting
February 16, 2011.................... Full Committee......... The Committee
considered the
following measures:
Committee Approved by voice vote
resolution to reduce
facility costs by
consolidating National
Gallery of Art and
Federal Trade
Commission operations
in the District of
Columbia
H.R. 690, Ordered reported as
Federal Trade amended by voice vote
Commission and
National Gallery of
Art Facility
Consolidation, Savings
and Efficiency Act of
2011
Norton
amendment to H.R. 690
Denham
amendment to H.R. 690
H.R. 362, to Ordered reported by
redesignate the voice vote
Federal building and
United States
Courthouse located at
200 East Wall Street
in Midland, Texas, as
the ``George H. W.
Bush and George W.
Bush United States
Courthouse and George
Mahon Federal
Building''
H.R. 658, the Ordered reported as
FAA Reauthorization amended by recorded
and Reform Act of 2011 vote 34-25
Mica manager's
amendment
Costello
amendment
Shuster
amendment
Hirono
amendment (OSHA)
Hirono
amendment (flight
attendant fatigue)
Michaud
amendment
Lipinski
amendment
H.R. 662, the Ordered reported by
Surface Transportation voice vote
Extension Act of 2011
March 16, 2011....................... Full Committee The Committee .......................
considered the
following measures:
Fiscal Year Approved by voice vote
2012 Budget Views and
Estimates of the
Committee on
Transportation and
Infrastructure
S. 307, A bill Ordered reported by
to designate the voice vote
Federal building and
United States
Courthouse located at
217 West King Street,
Martinsburg, West
Virginia, as the ``W.
Craig Broadwater
Federal Building and
United States
Courthouse''
H.R. 872, Ordered reported by
Reducing Regulatory record vote 46-8
Burdens Act of 2011
Schmidt
manager's amendment
Bishop
amendment, offered and
withdrawn
H.R. 1079, Ordered reported by
Airport and Airway voice vote
Extension Act of 2011
May 25, 2011......................... Subcommittee on The Committee Approved for Full
Economic Development, considered the Committee action
Public Buildings, and following measures:
Emergency Management H.R. 1734, The
Civilian Property
Realignment Act, a
bill to establish a
framework through
which a BRAC-like
commission would
independently review
federal properties and
make recommendations
for consolidations, co-
locations,
redevelopement,
selling or other
actions to minimize
costs.
Rep. Denham .......................
amendment in the
nature of a substitute
June 22, 2011........................ Full Committee The Committee .......................
considered the
following measures:
H.R. 1073, To Ordered reported by
designate the United voice vote
States courthouse to
be constructed in
Jackson, Mississippi,
as the ``R. Jess Brown
United States
Courthouse''
H.R. 1264, To Ordered reported by
designate the property voice vote
between the United
States Federal
Courthouse and the Ed
Jones Building located
at 109 South Highland
Avenue in Jackson,
Tennessee, as the
``M.D. Anderson
Plaza'' and to
authorize the
placement of a
historical/
identification marker
on the grounds
recognizing the
achievements and
philanthropy of M.D.
Anderson
H.R. 1791, To Ordered reported by
designate the United voice vote
States courthouse
under construction at
101 South United
States Route 1 in Fort
Pierce, Florida, as
the ``Alto Lee Adams,
Sr., United States
Courthouse''
H.R. 2018, The Ordered to be Reported
Clean Water (Amended) by the Yeas
Cooperative Federalism and Nays: 35-19
Act of 2011 Summary of
Legislative and
Oversight Activities
Committee Report
September 8, 2011.................... Full Committee The Committee .......................
considered the
following measures:
H.R. 2594, To Ordered reported by
prohibit operators of voice vote
civil aircraft of the
United States from
participating in the
European Union's
emissions trading
scheme, and for other
purposes
H.R. 2838, To Ordered reported as
authorize amended by voice vote
appropriations for the
Coast Guard for fiscal
years 2012 through
2015, and for other
purposes
H.R. 2839, To Ordered reported by
suppress the threat of voice vote
piracy on the high
seas, and for other
purposes
H.R. 2844, To Ordered reported by
authorize the voice vote
Administrator of
General Services to
convey a parcel of
real property in the
District of Columbia
to provide for the
establishment of a
National Women's
History Museum and
direct the
Administrator of
General Services to
transfer
administrative
jurisdiction, custody,
and control of the
building located at
600 Pennsylvania
Avenue, NW., in the
District of Columbia,
to the National
Gallery of Art, and
for other purposes
H.R. 2845, To Ordered reported as
amend title 49, United amended by voice vote
States Code, to
provide for enhanced
safety and
environmental
protection in pipeline
transportation, to
provide for enhanced
reliability in the
transportation of the
Nation's energy
products by pipeline,
and for other purposes
General Approved by voice vote
Services
Administration Capital
Investment and Leasing
Program Resolutions
October 13, 2011..................... Full Committee The Committee .......................
considered the
following measures:
H.R. 1734, To Ordered reported as
decrease the deficit amended by voice vote
by realigning,
consolidating,
selling, disposing,
and improving the
efficiency of Federal
buildings and other
civilian real
property, and for
other purposes
H.R. 2840, To Ordered reported by
amend the Federal voice vote
Water Pollution
Control Act to
regulate discharges
from commercial
vessels, and for other
purposes
H.R. 2919, To Ordered reported as
eliminate the amended by voice vote
reimbursement
requirement for
certain tornado
shelters constructed
with Federal
assistance, and for
other purposes
H.R. 2668, To Ordered reported by
designate the station voice vote
of the United States
Border Patrol located
at 2136 South Naco
Highway in Bisbee,
Arizona, as the
``Brian A. Terry
Border Patrol
Station''
February 2, 2012..................... Full Committee The Full Committee on .......................
Transportation and
Infrastructure
considered the
following measure:
H.R. 7, The Ordered to be Reported
``American Energy and (Amended) by the Yeas
Infrastructure Jobs and Nays: 29-24
Act''
March 1, 2012........................ Subcommittee The Subcommittee .......................
considered the
following measures:
H.R. 2903, the Approved for Full
FEMA Reauthorization Committee action
Act of 2011, approved
by voice vote
Amendment in
the Nature of a
Substitute to H.R.
2903, approved by
voice vote
Barletta
Amendment to the
Amendment in the
Nature of a
Substitute, approved
by voice vote
Carnahan
Amendment to the
Amendment in the
Nature of a
Substitute, offered
and withdrawn
H.R. 3182, a Approved for Full
bill to designate the Committee action
courthouse in
Anchorage as the
``James M. Fitzgerald
United States
Courthouse,'' approved
by voice vote
H.R. 3556, a Approved for Full
bill to designate the Committee action
courthouse in Buffalo
as the ``Robert H.
Jackson United States
Courthouse,'' approved
by voice vote
H.R. 4097, the Approved for Full
John F. Kennedy Center Committee action
Reauthorization Act of
2012, approved by
voice vote
March 8, 2012........................ Full Committee The Committee will .......................
consider the following
measures:
Fiscal Year Approved by voice vote
2013 Budget Views and
Estimates of the
Committee on
Transportation and
Infrastructure,
approved by voice vote
H.R. 2903, the Ordered reported as
FEMA Reauthorization amended by voice vote
Act of 2011 (Committee
Print incorporating
amendments from
Subcommittee markup),
approved by voice vote
Hanna
Amendment #26,
approved by voice vote
Rahall
Amendment #37,
approved by voice vote
Carnahan
Amendment #74,
approved by voice vote
Richardson
Amendment #104,
approved by voice vote
Crawford
Amendment #19, offered
and withdrawn
H.R. 4097, the Ordered reported by
John F. Kennedy Center voice vote
Reauthorization Act of
2012, approved by
voice vote
H.R. 3556, a Ordered reported by
bill to designate the voice vote
courthouse in Buffalo
as the ``Robert H.
Jackson United States
Courthouse,'' approved
by voice vote
GSA Approved by voice vote
Resolutions, approved
en bloc by voice vote
June 7, 2012......................... Full Committee H.R. 4965, A bill to Ordered Reported
preserve existing (Amended) by the Yeas
rights and and Nays: 33-18.
responsibilities with
respect to waters of
the United States, and
for other purposes
Gibbs
Amendment, approved by
voice vote
Norton
Amendment, offered,
non-germane
H.R. 5887, the Ordered reported
Coast Guard and (Amended) by voice
Maritime vote
Transportation
Authorization Act of
2012
Young
Amendment, Landry
Amendment 1 and Landry
Amendment 2, approved
en bloc
Harris
Amendment, approved by
voice vote
Cravaack
Amendment, withdrawn
H.R. 1171, Ordered reported
Marine Debris Act (Amended) by voice
Reauthorization vote
Amendments of 2011.
LoBiondo
amendment in the
nature of a
substitute, approved
by voice vote
Larsen
Amendment, not
approved by voice vote
H.R. 3742, To Ordered reported by
designate the United voice vote
States courthouse
located at 100 North
Church Street in Las
Cruces, New Mexico, as
the ``Edwin L. Mechem
United States
Courthouse''.
H.R. 4347, To
designate the United
States courthouse
located at 709 9th
Street in Juneau,
Alaska, as the
``Robert Boochever
United States
Courthouse''.
Summary of Ordered reported by
Legislative and voice vote
Oversight Activities
Committee Report
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY OF ACTIVITIES
Full Committee
HEARINGS
Title: Developing True High-Speed Rail in the Northeast
Corridor: Stop Sitting on our Federal Assets: Grand Central
Station, Northeast Balcony, New York, New York
Date: January 27, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony regarding the potential and
development of high-speed rail in the Northeast Corridor,
highlighting the importance of economic development,
opportunities and incentives for private sector investment, and
the need for competition and public-private partnerships.
Summary: The Committee heard testimony from the City of New
York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, former Governor of Pennsylvania
Ed Rendell, the regional transportation planning organization
for the New York region, a national high-speed rail advocacy
organization, an infrastructure investment company, and a
representative of rail labor. Discussions centered on the need
to develop improved and increased intercity passenger rail
services in the Northeast Corridor (NEC), including real high-
speed rail, and why the NEC is the premiere corridor in the
U.S. for development of high-speed rail.
The NEC serves the most densely populated region in the
United States, connecting the major cities of Washington, DC,
Philadelphia, New York City and Boston. As one of the most
valuable transportation assets in the United States, providing
the only continuous physical link, along with I-95, between the
largest population centers, the NEC is mostly owned and
controlled by Amtrak, the government-subsidized intercity
passenger rail provider. Of the 437 total miles of the NEC,
Amtrak owns and operates on 363 miles, with states controlling
the remaining track. The Northeast region's population density,
economic productivity, transit connectivity, and crippling
congestion on the roads and in the air make the NEC the best
opportunity for real high-speed rail in the U.S.
However, despite recent capital improvement projects by
Amtrak and the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), the NEC
still fails to meet international standards for high-speed
rail, with the Acela (Amtrak's high-speed service) averaging
only 83 miles per hour between Washington, DC and New York and
65 miles per hour from New York to Boston. Internationally,
high-speed trains can average 150 miles per hour and many
nations are upgrading their trains to reach top speeds of 220
miles per hour.
Title: Improving and Reforming Our Nation's Surface
Transportation Programs: Beckley, West Virginia Field Hearing
Date: February 14, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony on the local transportation
challenges facing the State of West Virginia, and the local
area surrounding Beckley. Pursuant to the belief that the best
ideas come outside of Washington, and that state and local
governments know their needs best, the Committee held multiple
field hearings and listening sessions across the country in
order to gather specific policy proposals for reauthorization
of the Federal surface transportation programs.
Summary: This field hearing was part of the Committee's
effort to gather ideas and policy proposals to prepare for the
reauthorization of the Federal surface transportation programs
under SAFETEA-LU, which expired on September 30, 2009, but was
extended through September 30, 2011. The Committee received
testimony from the West Virginia Secretary of Transportation,
an executive director of a contractors association, an
executive director of an expressway authority, an executive
director of a highway authority, an executive director of a
county redevelopment authority, and a program director of a
transportation institute. The witnesses discussed specific
suggestions and policy proposals to improve and reform the
nation's surface transportation programs.
DOT currently administers over 100 highway, transit, and
highway safety programs, many of which serve duplicative
purposes or are no longer needed. The hearing focused on ways
to consolidate or eliminate these duplicative or unnecessary
programs and study performance management approaches that
increase the accountability and transparency of Federal surface
transportation funds, as well as creative financing solutions
and private sector investment into transportation projects.
With the Highway Trust Fund (HTF) expected to run out of
money in 2013, innovative financing tools and private sector
investment in financing surface transportation projects were
methods the Committee discussed with the witnesses and will
explore to help the Federal government and states find ways to
do more with less and better leverage existing revenue sources.
The hearing also focused on potential reforms to the project
delivery process and explored what improvements could be made
to existing rules and regulations governing project delivery in
order to expedite the delivery process for all projects and
reduce the cost of transportation projects.
Title: Improving and Reforming Our Nation's Surface
Transportation Programs: Columbus, Ohio Field Hearing
Date: February 19, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony on the local transportation
challenges facing the State of Ohio, and the local area
surrounding Columbus. Pursuant to the belief that the best
ideas come outside of Washington, and that state and local
governments know their needs best, the Committee held multiple
field hearings and listening sessions across the country in
order to gather specific policy proposals for reauthorization
of the Federal surface transportation programs.
Summary: This field hearing was part of the Committee's
effort to gather ideas and policy proposals to prepare for the
reauthorization of the Federal surface transportation programs
under SAFETEA-LU, which expired on September 30, 2009, but was
extended through September 30, 2011. The Committee received
testimony from the State Director of the Ohio DOT, a president
of a local construction company, a local county engineer, a
local mayor, a chairman of a railcar company, and several other
witnesses representing different interests within the
transportation community. The witnesses discussed specific
suggestions and policy proposals to improve and reform the
nation's surface transportation programs.
With the HTF expected to run out of money in 2013,
innovative financing tools and private sector investment in
financing surface transportation projects were methods the
Committee discussed with the witnesses and will explore to help
the Federal government and states find ways to do more with
less and better leverage existing revenue sources. The hearing
also focused on potential reforms to the project delivery
process and explored what improvements could be made to
existing rules and regulations governing project delivery in
order to expedite the delivery process for all projects and
reduce the cost of transportation projects.
Title: Improving and Reforming Our Nation's Surface
Transportation Programs to Support Job Creation and the Economy
Date: February 23, 2011
Committee: A joint hearing between the Subcommittee on
Highways and Transit and the U.S. Senate Committee on
Environment and Public Works.
Purpose: Received testimony in a joint hearing in Los
Angeles, California, with the U.S. Senate on the local
transportation challenges facing Southern California and the
State of California. This bi-cameral field hearing was part of
the Committee's effort to gather ideas and policy proposals to
prepare for the reauthorization of the Federal surface
transportation programs under SAFETEA-LU, which expired on
September 30, 2009, but was extended through September 30,
2011.
Summary: Pursuant to the belief that the best ideas come
outside of Washington, and that state and local governments
know their needs best, the Committee held this hearing in
conjunction with the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and
Public Works in an effort to receive testimony from a number of
representatives from different transportation industries. The
Committee received testimony from the Mayor of Los Angeles, the
State Director of the California DOT, a chief executive officer
of a county transportation authority, two different executive
directors of local transportation commissions, and several
other transportation industry representatives. The witnesses
provided the Committee with specific suggestions and policy
proposals to improve and reform the nation's surface
transportation programs.
At the hearing, witnesses testified on the cash balance in
the Highway Account of the HTF. The Highway Account had a
balance of $22.55 billion at the end of FY 2000. The balance
dropped to $13 billion by the expiration of TEA 21--the
previous six-year surface transportation authorization--at the
end of FY 03. In September 2008 the balance in the Highway
Account decreased to a level requiring Congress to transfer $8
billion into the HTF from the General Fund. Subsequent General
Fund transfers to the HTF in 2009 and 2010 totaled $26.5
billion. Current projections show the cash balance in the
Highway Account of the HTF will be depleted sometime in 2013
and the Mass Transit Account will be depleted sometime in 2014.
With the HTF expected to be depleted in 2013, the witnesses
provided ideas for innovative financing tools and private
investment in financing surface transportation projects,
methods the Subcommittee will explore to help the Federal
government and states find ways to do more with less and better
leverage existing revenue sources. The Subcommittee also
gathered ideas on potential reforms to the project delivery
process and explored what improvements could be made to
existing rules and regulations governing project delivery in
order to expedite the delivery process for all projects and
reduce the cost of transportation projects.
DOT currently administers over 100 highway, transit, and
highway safety programs, many of which serve duplicative
purposes or are no longer needed. The Committee discussed with
the witnesses approaches that would consolidate or eliminate
duplicative or unnecessary programs. The Committee will study
performance management approaches that increase the
accountability and transparency of Federal surface
transportation funds moving forward to ensure their
effectiveness.
Title: Improving and Reforming Our Nation's Surface
Transportation Programs: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma Field Hearing
Date: February 24, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony on the local transportation
challenges facing the State of Oklahoma, and the local area
surrounding Oklahoma City. Pursuant to the belief that the best
ideas come outside of Washington, and that state and local
governments know best what they need, the Committee held
multiple field hearings and listening sessions across the
country in order to gather specific policy proposals for
reauthorization of the Federal surface transportation programs.
Summary: This field hearing was part of the Committee's
effort to gather ideas and policy proposals to prepare for the
reauthorization of the Federal surface transportation programs
under SAFETEA-LU, which expired on September 30, 2009, but was
extended through September 30, 2011. The Committee received
testimony from the Governor of Oklahoma, the State Secretary of
the Oklahoma DOT, presidents of local construction groups, a
president of a safety group, and a transportation revenue
group. The witnesses discussed specific ideas, suggestions and
policy proposals to improve and reform the nation's surface
transportation programs.
At the hearing, witnesses testified on the cash balance in
the Highway Account of the HTF. The Highway Account had a
balance of $22.55 billion at the end of FY 2000. The balance
dropped to $13 billion by the expiration of TEA 21--the
previous six-year surface transportation authorization--at the
end of FY 03. In September 2008 the balance in the Highway
Account decreased to a level requiring Congress to transfer $8
billion into the HTF from the General Fund. Subsequent General
Fund transfers to the HTF in 2009 and 2010 totaled $26.5
billion. Current projections show the cash balance in the
Highway Account of the HTF will be depleted sometime in 2013
and the Mass Transit Account will be depleted sometime in 2014.
With the HTF expected to be depleted in 2013, the witnesses
provided ideas for innovative financing tools and private
investment in financing surface transportation projects,
methods the Subcommittee will explore to help the Federal
government and states find ways to do more with less and better
leverage existing revenue sources. The Subcommittee also
gathered ideas on potential reforms to the project delivery
process and explored what improvements could be made to
existing rules and regulations governing project delivery in
order to expedite the delivery process for all projects and
reduce the cost of transportation projects.
DOT currently administers over 100 highway, transit, and
highway safety programs, many of which serve duplicative
purposes or are no longer needed. The Committee discussed with
the witnesses approaches that would consolidate or eliminate
duplicative or unnecessary programs. The Committee will study
performance management approaches that increase the
accountability and transparency of Federal surface
transportation funds moving forward to ensure their
effectiveness.
Title: American Presidential Libraries: Their Mission and
Their Future
Date: February 28, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony in a joint hearing between the
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and the
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform on presidential
libraries.
Summary: The Committees received testimony from the
Archivist of the United States, directors of presidential
libraries, a family member of a former president, and an
historian. With over two million visitors per year, the
presidential libraries are national treasures that serve as
centers for the study of the executive branch and individual
presidents by historians, students, and the general public.
Testimony from witnesses focused on the relationship between
the Federal government and our Nation's public and private
presidential libraries. Witnesses examined the future role of
the government and other cooperative relationships that will
assist these vital institutions. Specific topics of discussion
included the digitalization of presidential materials and the
role of newer technology in the mission of the libraries.
Presidential Library directors also elaborated on how the
enormous volume of presidential correspondence, memoranda, and
other documents are processed by archivists. The cost of
maintaining library facilities throughout the Nation by the
Federal government was also discussed. Relating to this topic,
the benefits and shortfalls of a central repository for
presidential materials located in Washington, DC were debated
by the participants.
Title: Improving and Reforming Our Nation's Surface
Transportation Programs: Maitland, Florida Field Hearing
Date: March 14, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony on the local transportation
challenges facing Florida, and the greater Orlando area.
Pursuant to the belief that the best ideas come outside of
Washington, and that state and local governments know best what
they need, the Committee held multiple field hearings and
listening sessions across the country in order to gather
specific policy proposals for reauthorization of the Federal
surface transportation programs.
Summary: This field hearing was part of the Committee's
effort to gather ideas and policy proposals to prepare for the
reauthorization of the Federal surface transportation programs
under SAFETEA-LU, which expired on September 30, 2009, but was
extended through September 30, 2011. The Committee received
testimony from an engineer from the Florida DOT, a president of
a transportation builders association, a local county chairman,
a local staff director of a metropolitan planning organization,
a president of a high-speed rail company, a representative of
the transportation disadvantaged community, and a partner from
a national law firm. The witnesses discussed specific ideas,
suggestions and policy proposals to improve and reform the
nation's surface transportation programs.
With the HTF expected to run out of money in 2013,
innovative financing tools and private investment in financing
surface transportation projects were discussed to help the
Federal government and states find ways to do more with less
and better leverage existing revenue sources. The witnesses
also testified on potential reforms to the project delivery
process and what improvements could be made to existing rules
and regulations governing project delivery in order to expedite
the delivery process for all projects and reduce the cost of
transportation projects.
DOT currently administers over 100 highway, transit, and
highway safety programs, many of which serve duplicative
purposes or are no longer needed. The Committee discussed with
the witnesses approaches that would consolidate or eliminate
duplicative or unnecessary programs. The Committee will study
performance management approaches that increase the
accountability and transparency of Federal surface
transportation funds moving forward to ensure their
effectiveness.
Title: Biometric IDs for Pilots and Transportation Workers:
Diary of Failures
Date: April 14, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony on the inclusion of biometric
identifiers on identification for airline pilots and other
transportation workers, as well as the state of federal
biometric standards and uses.
Summary: The Committee continued oversight of the Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA) pilot license program. The FAA
has ignored Congressional and Administrative guidance on
issuing biometric credentials to airline pilots. In section
4022 of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of
2004 (P.L. 108-458), Congress mandated that not later than one
year after the date of enactment, the FAA must begin to issue
improved pilot licenses consistent with the requirements of
title 49, United States Code, and title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations. The Act further specified the improved pilot
licenses would be resistant to tampering, alteration, and
counterfeiting, include a photograph of the individual to whom
the license is issued, and be capable of accommodating a
digital photograph, a biometric identifier, or any other unique
identifier that the FAA considered necessary. Six years later,
the FAA still has not included biometric identifiers or
photographs on pilot licenses. Once the photograph mandate is
implemented, a pilot license will be an acceptable
identification card to use at airport checkpoints and,
according to existing Federal standards for personal identity
verification cards, a pilot license may be used to quickly and
electronically verify pilot identification at airport
checkpoints, allowing pilots to bypass physical screening.
The Committee heard testimony from Peggy Gilligan,
Associate Administrator for Aviation Safety at the FAA,
regarding FAA's current pilot license and FAA's progress in
developing a pilot license that includes biometric identifiers.
Ms. Gilligan also testified regarding FAA's desire to cooperate
with the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) in
creating a biometric pilot license and FAA's desire to avoid
duplicating the existing biometric standards promulgated by the
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). The
Committee heard testimony from Cita Furlani, Director of the
Information Technology Laboratory, NIST, regarding federal
standards for biometric identifiers, the types of biometric
identifiers in use, and the implementation and interoperability
of these identifiers. The Committee invited testimony from John
Pistole, Administrator, TSA, and John Schwartz, Transportation
Worker Identification Credential (TWIC) Program Manager, TSA,
but they refused to attend.
The hearing demonstrated the FAA ignored Congressional
mandates regarding the inclusion of biometric identifiers on
federal pilot licenses. The Committee's oversight of this
important issue will increase the security of the country's
aviation system by ensuring that future pilot licenses are
secure, tamper-resistant, and contain biometric identifiers.
Title: Stimulus Status: Two Years and Counting
Date: May 4, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony, pursuant to the Committee-
approved Oversight Plan and House Rule XI, Clause 2(n), to
examine the audit work performed by the Government
Accountability Office (GAO), the Department of Transportation
Inspector General (DOT IG), and the Environmental Protection
Agency Inspector General (EPA IG) on implementation the
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. GAO and the two IGs
performed extensive audit work on the implementation of funded
programs from the Department of Transportation (DOT), including
the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the Federal Transit
Administration (FTA), the Federal Aviation Administration
(FAA), and the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), and the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The audits uncovered
significant lapses in oversight by the implementing agencies,
mismanagement of grants and funds, and lack of transparency.
Summary: The Committee heard testimony from DOT IG, Calvin
L. Scovel, III, EPA IG, Arthur A. Elkins, Jr., and the GAO
directors on transportation and infrastructure projects,
Phillip Herr and David Trimble, on their extensive audit work
regarding the implementation of the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act, particularly areas of grant mismanagement,
poor project selection, and lack of transparency. Roy Kienitz,
Undersecretary for Policy at DOT, also testified.
Title: Opening the Northeast Corridor to Private
Competition for Development of High-Speed Rail
Date: May 26, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony regarding the development of
high-speed rail in the NEC through private competition using a
public-private partnership.
Summary: Witnesses at the hearing were U.S. Senator Frank
R. Lautenberg (D-NJ), a representative from the Reason
Foundation, an infrastructure investor, a national real estate
development and investment representative, a national high-
speed rail advocacy organization, and two rail labor
representatives. Discussions centered on how private sector
rail infrastructure management and passenger rail operations
expertise, as well as private sector financing, can be made
part of the strategy to improve and expand passenger rail
services, including real high-speed rail, on the NEC.
Public-private partnerships share financing, management,
and operational responsibilities for a project between public
entities and private investors or partners. Private sector
financing and participation would allow high-speed rail and
other intercity passenger rail projects on the NEC to be
developed and constructed quickly and more efficiently. Several
international examples of successful and profitable rail
development and operations through private sector partnering
were discussed.
An alternative strategy to Amtrak's expensive and slow
proposal, a ``Vision for High-Speed Rail in the Northeast
Corridor,'' was discussed at the hearing, and would allow
Northeastern States to manage the Northeast Corridor
infrastructure and operations under a public-private
partnership model. This plan would use a request for proposals
solicitation to attract competitive bids to finance, design,
build, operate, and maintain high-speed and enhanced intercity
passenger rail service on the NEC. Federal support for this
project would still be needed, but competition will ensure that
taxpayer dollars are used as efficiently as possible.
Title: How to Best Improve Bus Safety on Our Nation's
Highways
Date: June 13, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony related to improving the
existing laws and regulations governing bus safety. The hearing
was part of the Committee's effort to reauthorize Federal
surface transportation programs under SAFETEA-LU, which expired
on September 30, 2009, but was extended through September 30,
2011.
Summary: As a result of recent high profile bus accidents
in Virginia, New Jersey, and New York, questions regarding the
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration's (FMCSA)
effectiveness in keeping unsafe ``rogue'' bus operators off the
nation's highways were raised. The Committee received testimony
from Anne S. Ferro, the Administrator of the FMCSA, Major David
Palmer of the Texas Department of Public Safety on behalf of
the Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance, Peter Pantuso,
President and Chief Executive Officer of the American Bus
Association, Victor Parra, President and Chief Executive
Officer of the United Motorcoach Association, and Jaqueline S.
Gillan, Vice President of the Advocates for Highway and Auto
Safety. The witnesses offered ideas and specific suggestions
for improving and reforming motorcoach safety and the
effectiveness of DOT in keeping unsafe operators off the
nation's highways.
As part of its Motorcoach Safety Action plan, the FMCSA and
its state and local law enforcement partners conducted more
than 3,000 surprise passenger carrier safety inspections over a
two-week period in May 2011, that resulted in 442 unsafe buses
or drivers being removed from the nation's highways. The strike
force issued out-of-service citations to 127 drivers and 315
vehicles during the unannounced inspections. In addition to the
strike force inspections, the FMCSA and state safety
investigators initiated 38 full safety compliance reviews on
commercial passenger bus companies. According to the FMCSA,
from 2005 to 2010, it doubled the number of unannounced bus
safety inspections and comprehensive safety reviews of the
estimated 4,000 over-the-road bus companies. Roadside safety
inspections of motorcoaches jumped from 12,991 in 2005 to
25,703 in 2010, while compliance reviews rose from 457 in 2005
to 1,042 in 2010.
Realizing that bus transportation is one of safest modes of
travel, the Committee discussed ideas that ensure Federal
safety laws are effectively enforced, particularly to prevent
continued operations by bad actors in the industry. In 2009,
more than 35,000 buses provided 723 million passenger trips and
traveled more than 58 billion passenger miles. The hearing
focused on ways to curb accidents related to driver fatigue and
error, and focused on specific policy provisions for the
Committee's consideration to make highways safer for the
traveling public.
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA)
is charged with improving safety on the national highway system
by reducing the number of accidents and the consequences of
those accidents that do occur. According to NHTSA's 2009
Traffic Safety Facts FARS/GES Annual Report, 0.6 percent of all
traffic crashes involved buses and these crashes resulted in
less than 50 fatalities. Although the agency does not regulate
the operation of motorcoaches, NHTSA is responsible for issuing
and enforcing Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards, which set
performance criteria that every new motorcoach must meet. These
standards include crash avoidance protection measures and
occupant restraint systems. The witnesses discussed the
effectiveness of these safety measures and whether or not the
performance criteria for new motorcoach companies is stringent
enough to prevent future bad actors from operating on the
highways.
Title: Legislative hearing on the Committee print,
``Competition for Intercity Passenger Rail in America''
Date: June 22, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony on managing Amtrak's Northeast
Corridor business unit as a public-private partnership, as
envisioned in the draft legislation, ``Competition for
Intercity Passenger Rail in America'' at the request of Ranking
Member Nick J. Rahall and Subcommittee Ranking Member Corrine
Brown.
Summary: The Committee heard testimony from the President
of Amtrak, Joseph Boardman, an adjunct scholar from the
American Enterprise Institute, the Executive Director of the
Council of Northeast Governors, the Vice President of
Government Affairs & General Counsel of the U.S. High Speed
Rail Association, and the President of the Transportation
Trades Department of the AFL-CIO.
On June 15, 2011, Chairman John L. Mica and Subcommittee on
Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials Chairman Bill
Shuster sponsored a public roll-out and discussion of their
draft bill, ``Competition for Intercity Passenger Rail in
America Act of 2011.'' Shortly after, a legislative hearing was
requested in order to further discuss and fine-tune the
proposal in order to gather commentary and concerns from other
members and affected parties.
The Competition for Intercity Passenger Rail in America
draft bill offers a new plan for high-speed and intercity
passenger rail on the Northeast Corridor (NEC) by leveraging
private sector investment and increasing competition in the
form of public-private partnerships. It would separate the NEC
from Amtrak, transferring titles from Amtrak to the U.S.
Department of Transportation in consideration for all but one
share of the Amtrak's preferred stock and forgiveness of all
Amtrak's mortgages and liens held by the Secretary. The draft
bill would also create a NEC Executive Committee to whom the
Secretary would lease the NEC for 99 years and whose role is to
manage the NEC infrastructure and operations.
After the legislative hearing, the comment and review
period for the draft bill was left open for thirty calendar
days in order to gain more submissions and commentary from the
public.
Title: NextGen: Leveraging Public, Private, and Academic
Resources
Date: November 7, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony on ways the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) can leverage public, private, and academic
resources to deliver the operational efficiency and safety
benefits of the agency's air traffic control modernization
program.
Summary: The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
held a field hearing in Daytona Beach, Florida on air traffic
control modernization or NextGen. The hearing focused on ways
the FAA can leverage public, private, and academic resources to
deliver the operational efficiency and safety benefits of the
agency's air traffic control modernization program, known as
NextGen. The hearing was held on the campus of Embry-Riddle
Aeronautical University where the FAA's Florida NextGen Test
Bed is located in partnership with the University, the Daytona
Beach International Airport, and various aerospace industry
partners. At the hearing, panelists discussed how technologies
and capabilities developed at the Test Bed would be integrated
into the national airspace, and also the benefits of early
industry involvement in NextGen programs. Panelists also
discussed the unique research and development capabilities
available to the FAA through its partnership with Embry-Riddle.
The Committee heard testimony from the FAA Administrator,
J. Randolph ``Randy'' Babbitt, the Government Accountability
Office, and several industry witnesses, some of whom are
participants in the Florida NextGen Test Bed.
Title: The Federal Railroad Administration's High-Speed and
Intercity Passenger Program: Mistakes and Lessons Learned
Date: December 6, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony on the Federal Railroad
Administration's High-Speed and Intercity Passenger Rail
(HSIPR) Program which was funded in the 2009 American Recovery
and Reinvestment Act and in FY 10, but has not received funding
in FY 11 and 12.
Summary: The Committee heard testimony from the Secretary
of Transportation, Ray LaHood, along with four other witnesses:
the Chairman of the Northeast Corridor Infrastructure &
Operations Advisory Commission; the Editor and Publisher of
Innovation News Brief; the American Enterprise Institute; and
the President of the National Association of Railroad
Passengers.
Using that framework set forth in the Passenger Rail
Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (PRIIA), the American
Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) allocated $8 billion in
federal funding used to launch the FRA's HSIPR program in June
2009. The ARRA combined two separate PRIIA grant programs, the
State Capital Grants for Intercity Passenger Rail Service (49
U.S.C. 24402), and the High-Speed Rail Corridor Development
Program (49 U.S.C. 26106), which had different purposes and
criteria. The State Capital Grants were available to expand or
improve intercity passenger rail transportation, regardless of
speed; the High-Speed Rail Corridor program was targeted to
designated high-speed rail corridors only for corridors that
reach speed of at least 110 miles per hour. In FY 10, the two
programs were once again combined under HSIPR, and $2 billion
in funding was appropriated. However, in FY 11 and 2012,
Congress has not funded the HSIPR Program, and the FY 11
Omnibus actually rescinded $400 million of unobligated HSIPR
funds. The hearing examined the status of the program, what
types of passenger rail projects were funded, very few of which
were high-speed projects, why certain states rejected funding.
The commentary from members and some witnesses also
stressed the importance of significant investment in the
Northeast Corridor, specifically for high-speed rail. With its
heavy population, crowded highways and airports, and a record-
setting year for Amtrak riders in the Northeast, this corridor
is the best candidate in the nation for high-speed rail
investment.
Title: Restoring Jobs in the Gulf of Mexico: H.R. 3096, the
Resources and Ecosystems Sustainability, Tourist Opportunities,
and Revived Economies of the Gulf Coast States Act of 2011
Date: December 7, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony from the Gulf Coast region on
H.R. 3096, the Resources and Ecosystems Sustainability, Tourist
Opportunities, and Revived Economies of the Gulf Coast States
Act of 2011. The Subcommittee was also interested in an update
on uncompensated claims from damages occurring as a result of
the BP DEEPWATER HORIZON Oil Spill and how H.R. 3096 might
affect claims made under Section 1012 of the Oil Pollution Act
of 1990.
Summary: The Subcommittee heard testimony from three
separate panels. The first panel was made up of members of the
House of Representatives from Gulf Coast states. Congressmen
Pete Olson (R-TX), Jeff Miller (R-FL), Steve Palazzo (R-MS), Jo
Bonner (R-AL), and Steve Scalise (R-LA) testified on the first
panel. The second panel included Mr. Craig Bennett, Director of
the National Pollution Funds Center at the United States Coast
Guard, and Mr. Tony Penn, Deputy Chief of the Assessment and
Restoration Division in the Office of Response and Restoration
at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The
last panel consisted of the Honorable Garret Graves, Chair of
the Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority of Louisiana;
the Honorable Robert Craft, Mayor of the City of Gulf Shores,
AL; the Honorable Bill Williams, Commissioner on the Gulf
County Board of Commissioners; Mr. Julian MacQueen, Chief
Executive Officer at Innisfree Hotels, Inc; Dr. Robert
Weisberg, Professor at University of South Florida; and Mr.
Mike Voisin of Motivatit Seafoods in Houma, LA.
The RESTORE Act of 2011 was introduced by Representative
Steve Scalise (R-LA) and a bipartisan group of 24 Members
representing Gulf Coast districts. The bill was also
sequentially referred to the Natural Resources Committee and
the Science, Space and Technology Committee. If enacted, the
legislation would establish a Gulf Coast Restoration Trust Fund
in the Treasury and a Gulf Coast Ecosystem Restoration Council.
It would also redirect 80 percent of any Clean Water Act
administrative and civil penalties paid by those responsible
for the DEEPWATER HORIZON oil spill to the five Gulf Coast
states (Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas) to
aid in economic and ecological recovery following the explosion
and sinking of the DEEPWATER HORIZON mobile offshore drilling
unit in April 2010. Witnesses from the Administration fielded a
number of questions regarding their position on H.R. 2096,
while the majority of witnesses on the last panel focused on
the remaining damage from the spill and the benefits this
legislation may provide for their respective communities.
Title: California's High-Speed Rail Plan: Skyrocketing
Costs and Project Concerns
Date: December 15, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony related to the constant
increasing cost of building a high-speed rail system in
California. While the 800-mile statewide project was originally
estimated to be $43 billion in 2008, the total cost estimate
has more than doubled to $98.5 billion and the project
completion date has been extended 13 years.
Summary: The Committee heard testimony from the
Administrator of the Federal Railroad Administration, Joseph
Szabo; the CEO of California High Speed Rail Authority; the
Mayor of Tustin, California; the Mayor of Fresno, California;
the Director of the Kings County Community Development Agency;
the Co-founder of the Californians Advocating Responsible Rail
Design; and the Vice President of Preserve Our Heritage.
The California High-Speed Rail project is the largest
beneficiary of federal funding from the High-Speed Intercity
Passenger Rail (HSIPR) grant program under the American
Recovery and Reinvestment Act (P.L. 111-5) and the FY 10
Consolidated Appropriations Act (P.L. 111-117). In total, the
project has been awarded $3.896 billion ($2.952 billion from
the Recovery Act, and $945 million from the FY 10
Appropriations bill). This represents almost 39 percent of the
total HSIPR grant funding awarded by the FRA. All of the $3.896
billion awarded to the California High-Speed Rail has been
obligated and is under contract. However, only $142 million has
actually been spent, $47 million for environmental studies and
preliminary engineering work and $95 million for Transbay
Terminal train box design and construction. All federal funds
provided through the Recovery Act must be completely spent by
September 30, 2017, under the federal appropriations law
``five-year rule'' (31 U.S.C. Sec. 1552).
During this hearing, members raised concerns about the
project including the projected increased costs and lengthening
timeline, a pending lawsuit against the California High Speed
Rail Authority and eroding citizen support.
Title: TSA Oversight Part III: Effective Security or
Security Theater?
Date: March 26, 2012
Committee: A joint hearing between the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure and the Committee on
Oversight and Government Reform.
Purpose: The Committees received testimony that examined
the successes and challenges associated with Advanced Imaging
Technology (AIT), the Screening of Passengers by Observation
Techniques (SPOT) program, the Transportation Worker
Identification Credential (TWIC), and other security
initiatives administered by the Transportation Security
Administration (TSA).
Summary: The Committee continued oversight of the
effectiveness and reported shortcomings of TSA's security
initiatives. The Committee heard testimony from Christopher L.
McLaughlin, TSA, Assistant Administrator for Security
Operations, Stephen Sadler, TSA, Assistant Administrator for
Intelligence and Analysis, Rear Admiral Paul F. Zukunft, U.S.
Coast Guard, Assistant Commandant for Marine Safety, Security
and Stewardship, and Stephen M. Lord, U.S. Government
Accountability Office, Director, Homeland Security. Discussion
centered on TSA's difficulties in implementing cost-effective
aviation security programs including delays in the
implementation of card readers for the TWIC program.
The Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002 (MTSA)
required TSA to create regulations ``preventing individuals
from having unescorted access to secure areas of MTSA-regulated
facilities and vessels unless they possess a biometric
transportation security card and are authorized to be in such
an area.'' Accordingly, the TWIC program was designed to employ
these biometric requirements.
The commentary from Members and witnesses evaluated the
TSA's difficulties in implementing its major security
initiatives, including the TWIC reader pilot report and the
current status of the rulemaking process required before card
reader procurement. Additionally, Members and witnesses
discussed TSA's plans for future deployment of AIT machines as
well as their difficulties in maximizing the utilization of
AITs currently deployed. The hearing also explored the validity
of the SPOT program for anti-terrorism purposes.
Title: TSA Oversight Part IV: Is TSA Effectively Procuring,
Deploying, and Storing Aviation Security Equipment and
Technology?
Date: May 9, 2012
Committee: A joint hearing between the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure and the Committee on
Oversight and Government Reform.
Purpose: The Committees received testimony that examined
issues associated with the procurement, deployment, and storage
of airport security related equipment.
Summary: The Committee heard testimony from Mr. David R.
Nicholson, Assistant Administrator for Finance and
Administration and Chief Financial Officer, TSA, Mr. Charles K.
Edwards, Acting Inspector General, Department of Homeland
Security, and Mr. Stephen M. Lord, Director, Homeland Security
and Justice Issues, U.S. Government Accountability Office.
Discussion centered on TSA's inefficient management of its
technology procurement programs.
Under the Aviation and Transportation Security Act of 2001,
TSA is required to prescribe standards and regulations
necessary to screen all passengers and property traveling from
and within the U.S. by commercial aircraft. To comply with this
mandate, TSA is constantly acquiring and deploying new
technology to fulfill aviation security needs. Similarly, TSA
has created layers of security, which include the utilization
of technology such as AIT, Explosive Trace Detectors, Explosive
Detection Systems, metal detectors and other security related
equipment. TSA's acquisition of these security related
technologies and equipment represents billions of dollars in
costs to the taxpayer and air traveler.
The commentary from Members and witnesses evaluated TSA's
procurement of excessive quantities of technology and extended
periods of delay prior to deployment, pointed to an inefficient
and poorly managed operation. Additionally, Members and
witnesses discussed TSA's intentional delay of Congressional
oversight of its Transportation Logistics Center warehouses,
including the Agency intentionally providing inaccurate,
incomplete, and misleading information to Congress in order to
conceal its continued mismanagement of warehouse operations. In
the view of Committee investigators, there appeared to be
elements of deception in the site visit, when transparency was
needed.
Title: A Review of the Delays and Problems Associated with
TSA's Transportation Worker Identification Credentials
Date: June 28, 2012
Purpose: The Committee met to review the status of the
Transportation Security Administration's (TSA) Transportation
Worker Identification Credential (TWIC) program.
Summary: The Committee heard testimony from Rear Admiral
Joseph Servidio, U.S. Coast Guard Assistant Commandant for
Preparedness; Ms. Kelli Ann Walther, Acting Deputy Assistant
Secretary for Policy/Screening; Mr. Joseph Lawless, Director of
Maritime Security at the Massachusetts Port Authority
testifying on behalf of the American Association of Port
Authorities; and Mr. Robert McEllrath, President of the
International Longshore and Warehouse Union.
The Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA) of 2002
(P.L. 107-295) (section 70105 of title 46, United States Code)
requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to prescribe
regulations requiring individuals needing unescorted access to
secure areas of certain vessels and maritime facilities to be
issued a biometric identification. Accordingly, the TWIC
program was designed to implement this requirement. The TSA and
the Coast Guard both play a role in the TWIC program. TSA's
responsibilities include enrolling TWIC applicants, conducting
background checks to assess the individual's security threat,
and issuing TWICs. The Coast Guard is responsible for
developing TWIC-related security regulations and ensuring that
MTSA regulated facilities and vessels are in compliance with
these regulations. The TSA began issuing TWICs in October 2007.
Credentials have been issued to over 2.1 million workers
required to have access to secure areas of MTSA regulated
facilities and to all U.S. mariners.
Despite having over 10 years to implement the program, TWIC
remains rife with problems. Until Congress passed the Coast
Guard Authorization Act of 2010, merchant mariners not needing
unescorted access to secure areas were still required by the
Coast Guard to enroll in the TWIC program, thereby requiring
mariners to go through a burdensome and costly process for
unnecessary identification. Since Congress eliminated the need
for all credentialed mariners to carry a TWIC, a number of
other issues still plague the program, including a cumbersome
requirement for TWIC applicants to appear twice in person at a
TWIC enrollment center, the absence of TWIC readers at port
facilities and aboard vessels, and an overall lack of
effectiveness in implementing the program, as reported by the
Government Accountability Office (GAO) in 2011. Committee
members sought an update from the Coast Guard and DHS on the
status of the program and what actions were being taken to
correct the various problems discovered by GAO. Additionally,
the Committee desired feedback from the private sector on the
effects of the program and suggestions for improving its
implementation.
ACTIVITIES AND INVESTIGATIONS
Report Title: TSA Ignores More Cost-Effective Screening
Model
Date: June 3, 2011
Purpose: Majority staff investigated the basis and
rationale for the January 28, 2011, decision by John Pistole,
Administrator, TSA, to halt the expansion of the Screening
Partnership Program (SPP), the comparative efficiencies of SPP
and non-SPP screening, and the various screening models used in
the international community.
Summary: After the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks,
Congress passed the Aviation and Transportation Security Act of
2001 (ATSA) (P.L. 107-71), creating the TSA to regulate
aviation security standards, among other purposes. ATSA also
created the SPP to allow TSA-certified contractors, under
federal supervision and regulation, to conduct passenger and
baggage screening at airports. The law provided airport
authorities the option to ``opt-out'' of the federal screening
model. Since the creation of the SPP, a total of sixteen
airports have chosen to opt-out of the federal screening model
and use private contractors for passenger and baggage
screening.
On January 28, 2011, TSA Administrator John Pistole
announced that he would not expand the SPP and denied pending
SPP applications from five airports. Administrator Pistole's
announcement marked the first time in the program's ten-year
history that an airport had been refused participation in the
statutorily-mandated program. Covert testing, anecdotal
information, and independent evaluation have shown that
utilizing private screening professionals under federal
regulation and oversight is the better and more cost-effective
security option.
The Committee conducted an investigation into the basis and
rationale for Administrator Pistole's decision, the comparative
efficiencies of SPP and non-SPP screening, and the various
screening models used in the international community. As a
result of this investigation, the Committee Majority Staff made
several key findings:
1. Taxpayers would save $1 billion over five years if the
Nation's top 35 airports operated as efficiently as San
Francisco International Airport does under the SPP model.
2. SPP screeners are 65 percent more efficient than their
federal counterparts.
3. Taxpayers would save more than $38.6 million a year if
Los Angeles International Airport joined the SPP.
4. TSA concealed significant cost factors unique to the
federal screening model.
5. TSA has hired 137,100 staff since the agency's creation
and spent more than $2 billion on recruiting and training
costs.
6. ``Clear and substantial advantage'' for approving five
airport applications existed and were ignored by TSA when TSA
denied their application to the SPP.
7. TSA's SPP application and evaluation process is flawed.
8. TSA does not have specific criteria to determine if a
``clear or substantial advantage'' exists to order to evaluate
SPP applications.
9. There is evidence that TSA officials erroneously claimed
no communication with union representatives about the SPP.
10. TSA officials recommended abolishing the SPP.
11. Most of the rest of the world utilizes a SPP-like
screening model at airports.
The Administration has often used cost as a justification
for not promoting the SPP. In 2007, TSA claimed that SPP
airports cost 17.4 percent more to operate than airports under
the federal security model. Committee Chairman John L. Mica
requested that the GAO examine TSA's claim. As a result, GAO
found that TSA's methodology for the cost assessment was flawed
and identified multiple cost elements the agency had excluded
when performing the analysis. TSA then revised its cost
assessment in January 2011 to reflect a three percent higher
operating cost at SPP airports than airports using federal
screeners. However, TSA's 2011 cost analysis has not been
independently verified.
Majority Committee Staff conducted their own cost analysis
using three cost metrics that have been dismissed in previous
cost comparisons conducted by TSA: screener productivity,
screener turnover, and use of the National Deployment Force
(NDF). Assuming that all other costs related to screening
operations at the SPP and non-SPP airport are equal, the
Committee found that SPP screeners are 65 percent more
efficient than non-SPP screeners, and additional costs
associated with ineffective workforce management were 42
percent higher than similar costs under the SPP model. Majority
Committee Staff produced its finding in a report released on
June 3, 2011.
To see the report, please visit: http://
republicans.transportation.house.gov/Media/file/112th/Aviation/
2011-06-03-TSA_SPP_Report.pdf
Report Title: A Decade Later: A Call for TSA Reform
Date: November 16, 2011
Purpose: Investigate TSA's operations ten years after its
creation and provide recommendations to improve TSA operational
efficiency.
Summary: In the wake of September 11, 2001, President
George W. Bush signed into law the Aviation and Transportation
Security Act (ATSA; P.L. 107-71). Most notably, ATSA created
the Transportation Security Administration (TSA). TSA has a
vital and important mission and is critical to the security of
the traveling public. To fulfill its mission, TSA employs many
hard-working, dedicated personnel. It is the government's
responsibility, however, to direct the agency's mission and
prevent a cumbersome bureaucracy from inhibiting TSA's ability
to address and adapt to changing security needs. Almost all
western countries have evolved their airport screening systems
to meet current aviation threats through federal oversight of
private contract screeners. The U.S. must also evolve to
provide the most effective transportation security system at
the most reasonable cost to the taxpayer.
This report is an examination and critical analysis of the
development, evolution, and current status and performance of
TSA ten years after its creation. Since its inception, TSA has
lost its focus on transportation security. Instead, it has
grown into an enormous, inflexible and distracted bureaucracy,
more concerned with human resource management and consolidating
power, and acting reactively instead of proactively. TSA must
realign its responsibilities as a federal regulator and focus
on analyzing intelligence, setting screening and security
standards based on risk, auditing passenger and baggage
screening operations, and ensuring compliance with national
screening standards.
As a result of the investigation, the Committee made
several key findings:
1. With 21 other agencies housed within the Department of
Homeland Security (DHS), the status and mission of TSA have
gradually eroded to make the agency a tangential and inert unit
within DHS's massive structure.
2. The turnover of five Administrators in less than a
decade, with periods of long vacancy between appointments, has
obstructed TSA's ability to carry out its mission.
3. With more than 65,000 employees, TSA is larger than the
Departments of Labor, Energy, Education, Housing and Urban
Development, and State, combined. TSA is a top-heavy
bureaucracy with 3,986 headquarters personnel and 9,656
administrative staff in the field.
4. Since 2001, TSA staff has grown from 16,500 to over
65,000, a near-400 percent increase. In the same amount of
time, total passenger enplanements in the U.S. have increased
less than 12 percent.
5. Since 2002, TSA procured six contracts to hire and train
more than 137,000 staff, for a total of more than $2.4 billion,
at a rate of more than $17,500 per hire. More employees have
left TSA than are currently employed at the agency.
6. Over the past ten years, TSA has spent nearly $57
billion to secure the U.S. transportation network, and TSA's
classified performance results do not reflect a good return on
this taxpayer investment.
7. On average, there are 30 TSA administrative personnel--
21 administrative field staff and nine headquarters staff--for
each of the 457 airports where TSA operates.
8. TSA's primary mission, transportation security, has been
neglected due to the agency's constant focus on managing its
enormous and unwieldy bureaucracy.
9. TSA has failed to develop an effective, comprehensive
plan to evolve from a one-size-fits-all operation--treating all
passengers as if they pose the same risk--into a highly
intelligent, risk-based operation that has the capacity to
determine a traveler's level of risk and adjust the level of
screening in response.
10. TSA's operations are outdated--the primary threat is no
longer hijacking, but explosives designed to take down an
aircraft.
11. TSA's passenger and checked baggage screening programs
have been tested over the years, and while the test results are
classified, their performance outcomes have changed very little
since the creation of TSA.
12. As recently reported by the Committee on Oversight and
Government Reform, more than 25,000 security breaches have
occurred at U.S. airports in the last decade, despite a massive
TSA presence.
13. Even though most of the serious terrorist attempts
against the U.S. in the last decade have originated overseas,
the number of TSA personnel that oversee key international
departure points with direct flights into the United States is
limited.
14. TSA's behavior detection program, Screening of
Passengers by Observation Techniques (SPOT), costs a quarter of
a billion dollars to operate annually, employing almost 3,000
behavior detection officer full-time equivalents (FTEs). In
spite of this costly program, the Government Accountability
Office (GAO) found that 17 known terrorists traveled on 24
different occasions through security at eight airports where
TSA operated this program.
15. TSA has tested numerous pilot programs for trusted
travelers, including its current PreCheck program, but has
failed to develop an expedited screening program that utilizes
biometrics to positively identify participants.
16. TSA has failed to follow congressional directives to
establish biometric credentialing standards and biometric card
reader standards. These standards are necessary for the Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA) to implement a congressionally-
directed requirement for biometric pilot licenses.
17. GAO found that TSA's implementation of the
Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC), which
has cost over half-a-billion dollars, has been crippled by
latent programmatic weaknesses. TSA still has not deployed TWIC
card-readers to many of the Nation's ports.
18. On January 28, 2011, TSA Administrator Pistole halted
the expansion of the Screening Partnership Program (SPP),
despite the following evidence:
a. An independent consultant found that ``private
screeners performed at a level that was equal to or
greater than that of federal TSOs [Transportation
Security Officers].''
b. GAO found that TSA analytics ignored critical data
relating to costs.
c. USA Today uncovered covert TSA test results in
2007 that showed significantly higher screener
detection capabilities at an SPP airport than at an
airport where screening was provided by TSA.
19. The Nation's 35 largest airports account for nearly 75
percent of passenger traffic. TSA has failed to prioritize the
deployment of in-line explosive detection systems (EDS) at
these locations which would ensure the best baggage screening
operations for a large portion of air travelers. Less than half
of these 35 airports have complete in-line EDS, with some
systems only configured to detect at TSA's 1998 explosive
detection standards. Additionally, TSA has failed to reimburse
airports for design costs incurred in the installation of in-
line EDS.
20. TSA wasted $39 million to procure 207 Explosive Trace
Detection Portals, but deployed only 101 because the machines
could not consistently detect explosives in an operational
environment. After lengthy and costly storage, TSA recently
paid the Department of Defense $600 per unit to dispose of the
useless machines.
21. TSA deployed 500 Advanced Imaging Technology (AIT)
devices in a haphazard and easily-thwarted manner at a total
cost of more than $122 million. By 2013, TSA estimates that the
total cost to taxpayers for AIT deployment will reach almost
half-a-billion dollars. In 2010, GAO examined the AIT devices
and found that ``it remains unclear whether the AIT would have
detected the weapon used in the December 2009 [Underwear
Bomber] incident.'' While TSA continues to use AIT machines,
the effectiveness of these devices in detecting explosives is
still under review and remains questionable.
22. TSA warehouses are nearly at capacity, containing
almost 2,800 pieces of screening equipment, including 650
state-of-the-art AT-2 carry-on baggage screening machines
costing approximately $97 million. TSA's failure to deploy this
cutting-edge technology in a timely manner is yet another
example of the agency's flawed procurement and deployment
program.
The Committee makes the following recommendations in the
report:
1. TSA must act with greater independence from the DHS
bureaucracy. Terrorists constantly evolve their methods, and
TSA must have similar flexibility to respond quickly and
appropriately to any intelligence it receives. Without this
ability, TSA will continue to be a solely reactive and
ineffective agency that cannot ensure the security of U.S.
travelers.
2. The TSA Administrator's stature must be elevated. The
constant turnover and long vacancy of this vital position has
caused great disruption at TSA. With each new Administrator,
there have been repeated changes in vision and direction of the
agency. In order for TSA to be an effective and successful
agency, it must have stable leadership that can make both
short- and long-term plans for improving the agency and
providing effective and cost efficient aviation and
transportation security. The TSA Administrator must be a
priority appointment for the President, along with other agency
heads and Cabinet-level Secretaries, and the length of the term
of the TSA Administrator's appointment and compensation should
be reexamined.
3. TSA must function as a federal regulator, analyzing
intelligence, setting screening and security standards and
protocols based on risk, auditing passenger and baggage
screening operations, and enforcing national screening
standards. TSA needs to focus on analyzing and disseminating
intelligence information, developing a regulatory structure to
secure the critical interests of the U.S. transportation
sector, and enforcing these regulations to maintain a
standardized set of practices throughout the country.
4. TSA should expand and revise the Screening Partnership
Program so that more airport authorities can transition airport
screening operations to private contractors under federal
supervision.
5. The TSA Administrator must set performance standards for
passenger and baggage screening operations based on risk
analysis and common sense. Detailed, specific, articulated
metrics by which TSA will measure screening performance are
critical to effective airport security operations. Without a
clear list of standards, TSA will not be able to adequately
measure and systematically improve screener performance.
6. The number of TSA administrative personnel must be
dramatically reduced. TSA's massive bureaucracy must be
streamlined so that TSA can focus on analyzing intelligence and
setting risk-based security standards without being bogged down
by managing its bloated administration.
7. The number of TSA personnel stationed abroad and the
number of TSA personnel that oversee key international
departure points with direct flights into the United States and
are engaged with other governments and organizations must be
adjusted in order to effectively respond to the international
threat to the U.S. transportation network.
8. TSA should require that the screening of all passengers
and baggage on in-bound flights is equivalent to U.S. domestic
screening standards. Rescreening passengers after an
international flight lands in the U.S. does not avert the risk
to U.S. citizens, while en route to the U.S.
9. TSA must develop an expedited screening program using
biometric credentials that would allow TSA to positively
identify trusted passengers and crew members so that the agency
can prioritize its screening resources based on risk. TSA will
never be able to function as a truly risk-based organization
until the agency can differentiate between passengers based on
levels of risk.
10. TSA performance results should be made public after 24
months or when deemed appropriate for security purposes, so
that passengers can know the level of security they receive.
Public reporting of performance evaluations provides
transparency and will incentivize TSA to operate at the highest
standards.
11. A qualified outside organization must conduct a
comprehensive, independent study of TSA's management,
operations, and technical capabilities, and make
recommendations to increase TSA's efficacy and its ability to
better analyze intelligence and set risk-based, common sense
security standards. To see the report, please visit: http://
republicans.transportation.house.gov/Media/file/112th/Aviation/
2011-11-16-TSA_Reform_Report.pdf
Report Title: Airport Insecurity: TSA's Failure to Cost-
Effectively Procure, Deploy and Warehouse its Screening
Technologies
Date: May 9, 2012
Purpose: Investigate TSA's management of its procurement,
deployment, and storage of screening technologies
Summary: The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, led
to dramatic reforms in how the Federal government protects the
traveling public and the Nation's transportation sector.
Securing commercial aviation became a top priority for Congress
and resulted in the development and passage of the Aviation and
Transportation Security Act of 2001 (ATSA). ATSA created the
Transportation Security Administration (TSA) and directed the
agency to secure travelers through improved passenger and
baggage screening operations. To successfully carry out its
mission, TSA utilizes many layers of security, including
screening technology.
This report is a critical examination and analysis of TSA's
procurement, deployment, and storage of screening technologies.
During the past ten years, TSA has struggled to cost-
effectively utilize taxpayer funding to procure and deploy
security equipment at the Nation's 463 airports where TSA
provides screening operations. The report makes recommendations
emphasizing TSA's need to more effectively develop its
deployment strategy prior to the procurement of screening
technologies. In addition, TSA must look for ways to reduce
significant shipping costs for the thousands of pieces of
equipment it deploys annually.
As a result of the investigation, the Committee made
several key findings:
1. TSA is wasting hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars
by inefficiently deploying screening equipment and technology
to commercial airports.
2. As of February 15, 2012, TSA stored approximately 5,700
pieces of security equipment in warehouses at TSA's
Transportation Logistics Center (TLC) in Dallas, Texas.
3. As of February 15, 2012, the total value of TSA's
equipment in storage was, according to TSA officials, estimated
at $184 million. However, when questioned by Committee staff,
TSA's warehouse staff and procurement officials were unable to
provide the total value of equipment in storage.
4. TSA's annual costs for leasing and managing the TLC are
more than $3.5 million.
5. Committee staff discovered that 85% of the approximately
5,700 major transportation security equipment currently
warehoused at the TLC had been stored for longer than six
months; 35% of the equipment had been stored for more than one
year. One piece of equipment had been in storage more than six
years--60% of its useful life.
6. Committee staff discovered that TSA had 472 Advanced
Technology 2 (AT2) carry-on baggage screening machines at the
TLC and that more than 99% have remained in storage for more
than nine months; 34% of AT2s have been stored for longer than
one year.
7. Committee staff estimate that the delayed deployment of
TSA's state-of-the-art screening technologies has resulted in a
massive depreciated loss of equipment utility at an estimated
cost to taxpayers of nearly $23 million.
8. TSA warehouse staff was unable to provide the total
annual cost for disposition of equipment.
9. The limited use of direct shipping from manufacturer to
deployment location has resulted in the overutilization of the
TLC and excessive annual deployment costs of between $50-$100
million.
10. TSA is failing to effectively procure screening
technology and equipment for use at commercial airports.
11. TSA knowingly purchased more ETDs than were necessary
in order to receive a bulk discount under an incorrect and
baseless assumption that demand would increase. TSA management
stated: ``[w]e purchased more than we needed in order to get a
discount.''
12. As of February 15, 2012, TSA possessed 1,462 ETDs in
storage in its TLC warehouses. At approximately $30,000 per
ETD, TSA's purchases equate to nearly $44 million dollars in
excessive quantities of ETD machines.
13. 492 of the ETDs had been in storage for longer than one
year.
14. When questioned, TSA officials were incapable of
providing the deployment plan for these Explosive Trace
Detectors.
15. TSA intentionally delayed Congressional oversight of
the TLC and provided inaccurate, incomplete, and potentially
misleading information to Congress in order to conceal the
agency's continued mismanagement of warehouse operations.
16. TSA willfully delayed Congressional oversight of the
agency's TLC twice in a failed attempt to hide the disposal of
approximately 1,300 pieces of screening equipment from its
warehouses in Dallas, Texas, prior to the arrival of
Congressional staff.
17. TSA potentially violated 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1001, by
knowingly providing an inaccurate warehouse inventory report to
Congressional staff that accounted for the disposal of
equipment that was still in storage at the TLC during a site
visit by Congressional staff.
18. TSA provided Congressional staff with a list of
disposed equipment that falsely identified disposal dates and
directly contradicted the inventory of equipment in the
Quarterly Warehouse Inventory Report provided to Committee
staff on February 13, 2012.
The purpose of this report is to offer constructive
recommendations for the improvement of TSA's procurement,
deployment, and storage of screening technologies.
Specifically, the Committee makes the following
recommendations:
1. Halt all equipment procurement unless there is a bona
fide need.
2. Require an extensive review of the TSA's management of
technology procurement, deployment, redeployment of screening
technology.
3. Require an internal review performing a cost-benefit
analysis of procurement and deployment for all screening
technology.
4. Require TSA to formulate a deployment plan prior to
procurement of all screening technology.
5. Require periodic reviews to ensure that TSA is
effectively deploying screening technology.
6. Require that screening technologies must be reviewed and
approved by an independent group of scientists. The independent
group of scientists must be entirely impartial and objective.
7. Halt deployment of any screening technology prior to
validation by an independent scientific community and a cost-
benefit analysis for utilizing the screening technology.
8. Immediately implement--not simply concur with--all
recommendations by the GAO related to the procurement,
deployment, and storage of screening technology.
9. Increase the frequency of direct shipping from the
equipment manufacturer to the deployment location to reduce
excessive shipping costs.
10. Improve the management of technology deployment to
limit excessive storage times and reduce the impact of
technology depreciation.
11. Review and adjust TSA's policies to ensure compliance
with Congressional oversight.
12. Ask the U.S. Department of Homeland of Security
Inspector General to review TSA's compliance with congressional
oversight during the 112th Congress.
13. Mandate a review of TSA's production of inaccurate and
misleading documents (Quarterly Warehouse Inventory Report) to
the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, which is
responsible for oversight of TSA, on February 13, 2012.
To see the report, please visit: http://
republicans.transportation.house.gov/Media/file/112th/Aviation/
2012-05-09-Joint-TSA-Staff-Report.pdf
Subcommittee on Aviation
To date, the Subcommittee on Aviation, chaired by
Representative Thomas Petri, with Representative Jerry Costello
serving as Ranking Member, held eight hearings, seven Member's
roundtables, and a Classified Members' Briefing by the
Government Accountability Office (GAO) on the Transportation
Security Administration's (TSA) airport checkpoint screening.
The Subcommittee developed major legislation, H.R. 658, the
FAA Reauthorization and Reform Act of 2011, to reauthorize and
reform the programs, funding, and organization of the Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA) and to provide $59.7 billion over
four years for FAA programs. H.R. 658 passed the House on April
1, 2011. The Senate had previously passed its FAA
Reauthorization bill, so the Senate and the House held pre-
conference meetings and negotiations in order to reconcile the
differences between their two bills. House conferees were named
and a formal conference meeting was held on January 31, 2012.
On February 14, 2012, H.R. 658, the ``FAA Modernization and
Reform Act of 2012,'' became Public Law 112-95. This law
provides responsible funding for FAA safety programs, air
traffic control modernization (NextGen) efforts, and operations
through 2015, and holds spending at FY 11 levels through FY 15
($63 billion over four years). P.L. 112-95 provides long-term
stability for the aviation industry, and creates the
environment to allow for the creation high-paying and
sustainable jobs. This law also accelerates deployment of
NextGen technologies, and reforms FAA's oversight of NextGen,
ensuring responsibility and setting milestones and metrics.
Finally, it provides for unprecedented reform of the National
Mediation Board; limits efforts by the Administration to over-
regulate industry, including the lithium battery industry;
reforms the Essential Air Service (EAS) program by eliminating
the most egregious subsidies; establishes a balanced inspection
regime for repair stations; establishes a process to address
outdated and obsolete FAA air traffic control facilities; and
enacts airline passenger improvements and protections.
The Subcommittee also developed major legislation, H.R.
2594, the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme Prohibition
Act of 2011 to prohibit U.S. air carriers and other aircraft
operators from participating in the European Union (EU)
Emissions Trading Scheme. On October 24, 2011, the House passed
H.R. 2594. S. 1956, the Senate companion legislation to H.R.
2594, was introduced in the Senate in 2011, and is awaiting
consideration at this time.
HEARINGS
Title: FAA Reauthorization of 2011: FAA Administrator
Date: February 8, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony on the reauthorization of the
FAA. The hearing covered issues of funding and financing the
Airport and Airway Trust Fund, which helps fund the development
of a nationwide airport and airway system. The Trust Fund also
funds FAA investments in air traffic control facilities and
airport grants, thereby creating jobs.
Summary: The Subcommittee heard testimony from
Administrator Randy Babbitt who testified on the importance of
a long term reauthorization act, and offered his viewpoint on
the issues to be addressed in the reauthorization bill. The
hearing discussed the FAA's Facility and Equipment (F&E)
program, which includes development, installation, and
transitional maintenance of navigational and communication
equipment to support aviation operations. The hearing looked at
safety issues, commercial service to small community through
the Essential Air Service (EAS), and the importance of Next
Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) to the future of
aviation. The hearing also explored issues related to FAA
regulation of the aviation industry and the importance of a
long-term FAA bill to ensure a steady source of funding and
create jobs.
Title: FAA Reauthorization of 2011: Stakeholders
Date: February 9, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony on the reauthorization of the
FAA from aviation stakeholders.
Summary: The Subcommittee heard testimony from airport and
airline associations, labor unions, and manufacturers'
associations. The seven witnesses testified on the importance
of a long term reauthorization act and offered their advice on
the issues to be addressed in the reauthorization process. The
hearing covered issues of funding and financing for the EAS
Program and the Airport and Airway Trust Fund. The hearing
discussed the importance of NextGen and the need to continue
its implementation to remain competitive in the global
marketplace and to address looming issues related to congestion
and environmental impacts. The hearing addressed safety
concerns, labor issues, and standardization of regulation
interpretation. The hearing also explored areas where the
industry believed there was excessive or unnecessary regulation
that negatively impacted the ability of industry to grow
economically and create jobs.
Title: Roundtable--A Discussion of Airports and Fixed-Based
Operator Issues
Date: June 15, 2011
Purpose: Discussed various issues regarding the
relationship between airports and fixed-based operators (FBOs),
including competition, the use of both Federal and private
funds, and leases, as well as other issues.
Summary: Earlier this Congress, Representative John Duncan
introduced H.R. 1474, the Freedom from Competition Act of 2011,
which would prohibit any entity receiving federal funding from
using these funds to compete with a private business. This
legislation resulted in debate on legislation's impact on the
relationship between airports and FBOs. The Aviation
Subcommittee invited representatives from associations
representing FBOs and airports to discuss the issues.
Title: GPS Reliability: A Review of Aviation Industry
Performance, Safety Issues, and Avoiding Potential New and
Costly Government Burdens
Date: June 23, 2011
Purpose: A joint hearing on Global Positioning System (GPS)
Reliability by the Subcommittees on Aviation and Coast Guard
and Maritime Transportation to receive testimony on stakeholder
concerns with GPS interference, the implications of that
interference on GPS reliability, NextGen, aviation job
creation, and the potential remedies to GPS interference.
Summary: The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is
considering an application by a company called LightSquared to
build nationwide broadband internet infrastructure.
LightSquared has applied to have high-power internet broadcast
stations across the country on the spectrum neighboring the
low-powered GPS signal. A broad coalition of industry
stakeholders who use GPS, including almost all of the aviation
groups, have expressed concern the high-powered broadband
signal will overpower and disable critical GPS navigation and
timing functions. Initial testing by the Department of Defense
(DoD) and DOT have validated some of these interference
concerns. There are similar concerns related to how GPS
interference might impact maritime safety. The Subcommittees
will hear testimony from DOT, the DoD, the Coast Guard,
LightSquared, the RTCA Inc., and representatives of airlines,
manufacturers, and general aviation.
Title: European Union's Emissions Trading Scheme: Violation
of International Law
Date: July 27, 2011
Purpose: The hearing focused on the unilateral actions of
the European Union (``EU'') in applying their Emissions Trading
Scheme (``ETS'') to all civil aviation operations; the EU's
actions and international law; and the impact of the EU's ETS
on U.S. operators, the competitiveness of the U.S. aviation
industry, and U.S. aviation jobs.
Summary: The EU's ETS began in 2005 with the capping of
emissions of carbon dioxide from more than 10,000 stationary
sources within the EU. Under the ETS, the EU auctions a
specified number of emissions allowances for each multi-year
period, and distributes a certain number of allowances for
free. Starting in January 2012, civil aviation operators
landing in or departing from the EU will be included in the
ETS. This means that all segments of international flights to,
within, and from the EU by U.S. air carriers would be subject
to the ETS, including those portions over the United States,
Canada, and international waters. The United States government
has filed its objection to the implementation of the EU ETS and
believes that ICAO is the appropriate forum to address climate
change. The U.S. is not alone in its opposition, there is
virtually universal international opposition to the
implementation of the ETS. In response to the unilateral and
illegal actions of the EU, the House of Representatives
introduced a bipartisan bill that directs the Secretary of
Transportation to prohibit American air carriers from
participating in the scheme. The Subcommittee received
testimony from the Federal government and industry witnesses
regarding the EU ETS.
Title: Roundtable--European Union's Emissions Trading
Scheme
Date: September 21, 2011
Purpose: As a follow-up to the Subcommittee's Hearing in
July regarding the European Union's Emissions Trading Scheme
(EU ETS), the Subcommittee held a roundtable to be briefed on
and discuss what actions had been taken by the U.S. Government,
and to learn how discussions between the U.S. and the EU had
progressed since the hearing. The Subcommittee invited
representatives from the Department of Transportation, Federal
Aviation Administration, and the Department of State to receive
an update on actions regarding the EU ETS.
Summary: The European Union has proposed the application of
its Emissions Trading Scheme to civil aviation operators
landing in or departing from the EU. This application of the
ETS is a unilateral and illegal action by the EU that would
result in U.S. air carriers having to buy emissions allowances
for all segments of a flight, not just segments of the flight
over EU Member States. In July, the Subcommittee held a hearing
to discuss the EU's actions and international law; and the
impact of the EU's ETS on U.S. operators, the competitiveness
of the U.S. aviation industry, and U.S. aviation jobs. Since
the hearing, actions have been taken by other countries and the
U.S. related to the EU's ETS. The roundtable discussed the
measures that have been taken by the DOT, State Department and
FAA, as well as the ongoing negotiations between the concerned
U.S. federal agencies and the EU. The actions of other
countries in opposition to the EU ETS were also discussed.
Title: Comprehensive Review of FAA's NextGen Program:
Costs, Benefits, Progress, and Management
Date: October 5, 2011
Purpose: An oversight hearing on the Next Generation Air
Traffic Control System (NextGen) by the Subcommittee on
Aviation to receive testimony on benefits, costs, and the
progress of NextGen implementation.
Summary: To meet future demands of air traffic on the
National Airspace System (NAS), the FAA is in the process of
upgrading the current system of air traffic navigation and
control via ground based navigation stations and radar to a
modernized system that utilizes Global Positioning System (GPS)
technology to provide navigation and separation. This project
involves many different stakeholders from both the government
and the private sector, and will provide many benefits from
reduced flight time and congestion to environmental benefits
from reduced emissions.
The Subcommittee received testimony from the FAA, the
Department of Transportation Inspector General's (DOT IG)
office, the Government Accountability Office, the Air Line
Pilots Association, the National Business Aviation Association,
the Air Transport Association, and Deloitte, LLC. While the
benefits from the NextGen project were not disputed, the
problems in the execution of implementing such a large program
were highlighted, primarily by the DOT IG. The project involves
many individual components coming together to form one large
system, and delays to those individual systems prohibit the
benefits from the NextGen project from being realized. Those
delays seem to not be as a result of a lack of funding, but
rather from poor management from the FAA.
The Subcommittee will use the testimony and problems as
highlighted by the witnesses to continue to provide oversight
of the entire NextGen project. The management problem in
implementing NextGen systems is of particular concern to the
Subcommittee, and soon to be enacted legislation will provide
strict deadlines for implementing NextGen systems as well as
help address the management issues that are adversely affecting
implementation of the overall system.
Title: Roundtable--A Discussion of Helicopter Issues: Air
Tours, Safety Concerns and Noise
Date: October 27, 2011
Purpose: The Subcommittee met for a general discussion on
helicopter issues, specifically addressing air tours, safety
concerns, and noise over residential areas. The roundtable
provided an opportunity for Members to learn about important
helicopter issues and progress that has been made over the
years to improve helicopter safety. The Helicopter Association
International, Federal Aviation Administration, and National
Transportation Safety Board all participated in the roundtable.
Additionally, the Subcommittee invited three Members who are
not on the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure to
participate in the discussions given their interest in the
topic.
Summary: Helicopters play a unique and diverse role within
the aviation system, providing a variety of services in a range
of different environments. The unique nature of helicopter
operations means they come with their own set of operational
issues. In 2007, the FAA issued a final rule which set safety
and oversight rules for a broad variety of sightseeing and
commercial air tour flights. In the opinion of both federal
agencies and industry, the rule has greatly improved the safety
of helicopter air tour operations. In addition, the unique
nature of helicopter operations and the variety of services
they provide have brought about a concern of helicopter noise
over residential areas. The roundtable provided an opportunity
for members and industry to discuss concerns regarding
helicopter operations and to allow all interested parties to
continue to work together in the future to address ongoing
helicopter noise issues.
Title: Roundtable--Terminal Area Safety
Date: November 17, 2011
Purpose: The Subcommittee met in an informal setting to
discuss the rise in terminal area air traffic control safety
incidents in which aircraft pass too close to one another.
Summary: Over the last few years, the number of incidents
in which aircraft in terminal area airspace have gotten within
too close proximity to one another as a result of air traffic
controller errors has spiked at an alarming rate. The FAA,
during this same period of time, created two programs that are
designed to better report and record terminal area safety
incidents. Members and aviation safety stakeholders met to
discuss whether the spike in incidents is because of the
implementation of these new programs, or if there had been
serious erosion in air traffic control safety.
The Subcommittee members met with representatives from the
FAA, the Government Accountability Office (GAO), the Department
of Transportation Inspector General (DOT IG), the National Air
Traffic Controllers Association (NATCA), and the FAA Managers
Association. While the FAA and NATCA believe that the rise in
reported incidents is because of the reporting programs the FAA
is implementing, the DOT IG and the GAO have released reports
recently that suggest that the new programs are not the sole
explanation for the increase in reported operational errors.
The Subcommittee members will use the information gained during
the roundtable to take a closer look at terminal area safety
and continue to monitor the implementation of the FAA's
reporting programs.
Title: A Review of Issues Associated with Protecting and
Improving Our Nation's Aviation Satellite-based Global
Positioning System Infrastructure.
Date: February 8, 2012
Purpose: The Subcommittee received testimony on how to best
protect the Global Positioning System (GPS) infrastructure from
disruption by incompatible uses of radio spectrum near the
spectrum used by GPS.
Summary: The Subcommittee heard testimony from government
and industry witnesses on GPS disruption and how to protect
aviation users from the effects of GPS disruption. As the FAA
transitions to the Next Generation Air Traffic Control System
(NextGen), the safety and efficiency of the National Airspace
System will become even more dependent on a reliable GPS
infrastructure. High demand for radio spectrum to be repurposed
for use by broadband internet providers led the Federal
Communications Commission to consider repurposing spectrum
adjacent to GPS. At the hearing, Deputy Secretary of
Transportation John Porcari testified to the damaging
incompatibility of the proposed new use, and testified that the
Department of Transportation would work with the National
Telecommunications and Information Agency to establish radio
spectrum interference standards that broadcasters would be
required to comply with so as to avoid future potential
disruptions to GPS. Industry witnesses concurred with the
Deputy Secretary's assessment of the FCC's proposed new use of
spectrum, and agreed that GPS radio spectrum must be protected.
Title: A Review of Issues Associated with Protecting and
Improving Our Nation's Aviation Satellite-based Global
Positioning System Infrastructure.
Date: February 8, 2012
Purpose: The Subcommittee received testimony on how to best
protect the Global Positioning System (GPS) infrastructure from
disruption by incompatible uses of radio spectrum near the
spectrum used by GPS.
Summary: The Subcommittee heard testimony from government
and industry witnesses on GPS disruption and how to protect
aviation users from the effects of GPS disruption. As the FAA
transitions to the Next Generation Air Traffic Control System
(NextGen), the safety and efficiency of the National Airspace
System will become even more dependent on a reliable GPS
infrastructure. High demand for radio spectrum to be repurposed
for use by broadband internet providers led the Federal
Communications Commission to consider repurposing spectrum
adjacent to GPS. At the hearing, Deputy Secretary of
Transportation John Porcari testified to the damaging
incompatibility of the proposed new use, and testified that the
Department of Transportation would work with the National
Telecommunications and Information Agency to establish radio
spectrum interference standards that broadcasters would be
required to comply with so as to avoid future potential
disruptions to GPS. Industry witnesses concurred with the
Deputy Secretary's assessment of the FCC's proposed new use of
spectrum, and agreed that GPS radio spectrum must be protected.
Title: Roundtable--European Union's Emission Trading Scheme
Date: March 28, 2012
Purpose: The Subcommittee met in an open, but informal
setting to discuss the European Union's (EU) Emissions Trading
Scheme (ETS) and its impact on the U.S. aviation industry,
international law, and global trade.
Summary: The Subcommittee discussed with representatives of
the State Department, Department of Transportation, aviation
industry and labor the impact of and possible steps to be taken
against the implementation of ETS to U.S. air operators.
In 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing and a roundtable
addressing the implementation of the EU's illegal and
unilateral ETS and the steps that the U.S. government and
industry have taken in opposition. Beginning in January 2012,
the EU's ETS began to take effect on all U.S. air carriers.
This roundtable was a discussion on actions taken by the
government and industry since the last roundtable in September
2011. In addition, the participants discussed possible actions
to be taken going forward in response to the implementation of
the ETS.
Title: Roundtable--NextGen Benefits and Coalition Building
Date: April 18, 2012
Purpose: The Subcommittee met in a roundtable forum to
discuss the benefits airports and communities will enjoy with
the FAA's NextGen program. The purpose was to publicize
benefits to incentivize participation in the NextGen program.
With NextGen initiatives in place, the FAA claims improved
airspace efficiency for operators, and reduced costs for the
government.
Summary: The Subcommittee met in an informal setting to
hear from the FAA, the Government Accountability Office, the
Port Authority of New York/New Jersey, JetBlue Airlines, and
Airports Council International regarding the most desirable
NextGen benefits for airports. Because the FAA will redesign
airspace routes under NextGen, stakeholder buy-in will be
critical to the process moving forward. In the past, FAA
efforts to redesign airspace have met opposition. The FAA and
airport officials stated that with the aggregate benefits
associated with NextGen improvements, communities around
airports will see improvements. Participants also discussed the
aggregate economic benefits communities will see with NextGen
as a result of the improved capacity at airports.
Title: Review of Aviation Safety in the United States
Date: April 25, 2012
Purpose: The Subcommittee received testimony on the safety
of the United States aviation system and the FAA's oversight of
the system. The hearing covered a broad spectrum of safety
issues from operational errors, FAA oversight of repair
stations, implementation of the pilot training requirements
from Aviation Safety and Federal Aviation Administration
Extension Act of 2012, and terminal area safety concerns.
Summary: The Subcommittee heard testimony from the FAA,
government, labor, industry, and other stakeholders as part of
its continuing oversight of the safety of the aviation system.
The witnesses emphasized the high level of safety that the
United States aviation system is experiencing; however
witnesses agreed that there is always room for improvement when
it comes to safety. The DOT IG, GAO, and the FAA discussed the
recent rise in operational errors and runway incursions, and
potential causes and remedies of them. The witnesses discussed
the FAA's changed approach to safety oversight, and its
reliance upon a data collection systems and analysis. The
witnesses addressed the progress the FAA has made in
implementing the changes to pilot training that were contained
in the Aviations Safety and Federal Aviation Administration Act
of 2012. The witnesses also addressed the FAA's safety
oversight of the aviation system, and presented areas where
they believed FAA oversight could be improved.
Title: Roundtable--FAA's Airport District Office
Reorganization Plans
Date: April 27, 2012
Purpose: The Subcommittee, in conjunction with
Representative Howard Coble and the North Carolina
Congressional Delegation, met in an informal setting to discuss
the FAA's Airport District Office reorganization plans.
Summary: Early in 2011, the FAA announced a proposal to
reorganize their Airport District Offices (ADOs) in order to
save money and streamline operations. Under the proposed plan,
the State of North Carolina's ADO would change from Atlanta,
Georgia to Memphis, Tennessee. The representatives from North
Carolina raised concerns about this proposal. They cited
increased travel costs and the loss of longstanding
relationships with current Atlanta ADO employees as their
primary objections to the proposal. Also, the North Carolina
representatives were concerned that some of the unique
environmental conditions that exist in North Carolina were best
handled through their longstanding relationship with the
Atlanta ADO. The FAA was on hand and made their case for the
proposed ADO reorganization, explaining how the streamlined
operations would save money through decreased labor costs
without sacrificing customer service. All sides agreed to
continue working together to reach a solution that would allow
the North Carolina airports to continue to voice their concerns
and receive the best service possible while also allowing for
the FAA to realize the cost savings through the ADO
reorganization.
Title: A Review of FAA's efforts to reduce costs and ensure
safety and efficiency through Realignment and Facility
Consolidation
Date: May 31, 2012
Purpose: An oversight hearing on the FAA's facility
consolidation and realignment plans and efforts.
Summary: Given the age and condition of FAA facilities, the
state of the Federal budget and need for cost savings, facility
and infrastructure needs with the implementation of NextGen,
and the planning requirements included in the recently enacted
FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, the FAA must pursue
facility consolidation and realignment plans and efforts. The
FAA is responsible for operations (such as controlling traffic)
at all 542 terminal facilities. FAA uses its own staff at 292
of the facilities and contractors for the 250 contract towers.
FAA is responsible for physically maintaining or replacing 402
of the 542 facilities. The remaining 140 facilities are the
responsibility of someone else--an airport authority, local
government, private company, etc. Of the 402 facilities that
the FAA is responsible for maintaining, the FAA owns 338
facilities and has agreements to maintain 64 facilities that
are staffed by FAA employees.
In 2008, the DOT IG reported that while the average
facility has an expected useful life of approximately 25 to 30
years, 59 percent of FAA facilities were over 30 years old.
During its audit, the DOT IG observed obvious structural
deficiencies and maintenance-related issues at several
locations. These included water leaks, mold, tower cab window
condensation, deterioration due to poor design, and general
disrepair. In addition to age and disrepair, the FAA has
conducted numerous studies indicating the need to realign,
consolidate and co-locate air traffic control facilities as the
air traffic control system is modernized (NextGen). The
recently enacted FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012
includes a provision which requires the Administrator to
develop, in conjunction with the Chief NextGen Officer and
Chief Operating Officer, a National Facilities Realignment and
Consolidation Report within 120 days of enactment.
Despite its understanding of the need to make decisions on
facility requirements and to move ahead with realignments,
collocations, and consolidations, the FAA has been repeatedly
stymied by labor as well as Congressional interference. If the
FAA is to successfully implement NextGen and see the expected
cost savings, cost avoidances, and safety improvements, it must
develop clear facility requirements and move ahead with needed
consolidations.
LEGISLATION
Title: Airport and Airway Extension Act of 2011
Public Law Number: P.L. 112-7 (March 31, 2011)
Bill Number: H.R. 1079
Summary: The most recent long-term FAA reauthorization act,
Vision 100--Century of Aviation Reauthorization Act (P.L. 108-
176), expired September 30, 2007. During the 110th and 111th
Congresses, the House and Senate were unable to reach agreement
on a final, long-term reauthorization. In April 2011, the House
passed H.R. 658, the FAA Reauthorization and Reform Act of
2011. In February 2011, the Senate passed its own comprehensive
FAA reauthorization act. To allow the two chambers time to
negotiate a multi-year FAA reauthorization act, Congress passed
a 60-day extension of the FAA's authority to administer
aviation programs and to receive tax proceeds. The prior
extension expired on March 31, 2011. H.R. 1079 extended that
authority through May 31, 2011. The bill extended the
authorization of appropriations for aviation programs, excise
taxes on aviation fuels and air transportation of persons and
property, and the expenditure authority of the Airport and
Airway Trust Fund. This legislation also extended, various
airport development projects, including: (1) the pilot program
for passenger facility fees at non-hub airports, (2) small
airport grants for airports located in the Marshall Islands,
Micronesia, and Palau, (3) state and local airport land use
compatibility projects, (4) the authority of the Metropolitan
Washington Airports Authority to apply for an airport
development grant and impose a passenger facility fee, (5) the
temporary increase to 95 percent in the government share of
certain Airport Improvement Program (AIP) project costs, and
(6) Midway Island airport development. It also extended AIP
projects and project grant authority.
Title: The Airport and Airway Extension Act of 2011, Part
II
Public Law Number: P.L. 112-16 (May 31, 2011)
Bill Number: H.R. 1893
Summary: The most recent long-term FAA reauthorization act,
Vision 100--Century of Aviation Reauthorization Act (P.L. 108-
176), expired September 30, 2007. During the 110th and 111th
Congresses, the House and Senate were unable to reach agreement
on a final, long-term reauthorization. In April 2011, the House
passed H.R. 658, the FAA Reauthorization and Reform Act of
2011. In February 2011, the Senate passed its own comprehensive
FAA reauthorization act. To allow the two chambers time to
negotiate a multi-year FAA reauthorization act, Congress passed
a 60-day extension of the FAA's authority to administer
aviation programs and to receive tax proceeds. The prior
extension expired on May 31, 2011. H.R. 1893 extended that
authority through June 30, 2011. The bill extends the
authorization of appropriations for aviation programs, excise
taxes on aviation fuels and air transportation of persons and
property, and the expenditure authority of the Airport and
Airway Trust Fund. This legislation also extends, various
airport development projects, including: (1) the pilot program
for passenger facility fees at non-hub airports, (2) small
airport grants for airports located in the Marshall Islands,
Micronesia, and Palau, (3) state and local airport land use
compatibility projects, (4) the authority of the Metropolitan
Washington Airports Authority to apply for an airport
development grant and impose a passenger facility fee, (5) the
temporary increase to 95 percent in the government share of
certain Airport Improvement Program (AIP) project costs, and
(6) Midway Island airport development. It also extends AIP
projects and project grant authority.
Title: The Airport and Airway Extension Act of 2011, Part
III
Public Law Number: P.L. 112-21 (June 29, 2011)
Bill Number: H.R. 2279
Summary: The most recent long-term FAA reauthorization act,
Vision 100--Century of Aviation Reauthorization Act (P.L. 108-
176), expired September 30, 2007. During the 110th and 111th
Congresses, the House and Senate were unable to reach agreement
on a final, long-term reauthorization. In April 2011, the House
passed H.R. 658, the FAA Reauthorization and Reform Act of
2011. In February 2011, the Senate passed its own comprehensive
FAA reauthorization act. To allow the two chambers time to
negotiate a multi-year FAA reauthorization act, Congress passed
a 3-week extension of the FAA's authority to administer
aviation programs and to receive tax proceeds. The prior
extension expired on June 30, 2011. H.R. 2279 extended that
authority through July 22, 2011. The bill extends the
authorization of appropriations for aviation programs, excise
taxes on aviation fuels and air transportation of persons and
property, and the expenditure authority of the Airport and
Airway Trust Fund. This legislation also extends, various
airport development projects, including: (1) the pilot program
for passenger facility fees at non-hub airports, (2) small
airport grants for airports located in the Marshall Islands,
Micronesia, and Palau, (3) state and local airport land use
compatibility projects, (4) the authority of the Metropolitan
Washington Airports Authority to apply for an airport
development grant and impose a passenger facility fee, (5) the
temporary increase to 95 percent in the government share of
certain Airport Improvement Program (AIP) project costs, and
(6) Midway Island airport development. It also extends AIP
projects and project grant authority.
Title: The Airport and Airway Extension Act of 2011, Part
IV
Public Law Number: P.L. 112-27 (August 5, 2011)
Bill Number: H.R. 2553
Summary: The most recent long-term FAA reauthorization act,
Vision 100--Century of Aviation Reauthorization Act (P.L. 108-
176), expired September 30, 2007. During the 110th and 111th
Congresses, the House and Senate were unable to reach agreement
on a final, long-term reauthorization. In April 2011, the House
passed H.R. 658, the FAA Reauthorization and Reform Act of
2011. In February 2011, the Senate passed its own comprehensive
FAA reauthorization act. To allow the two chambers time to
negotiate a multi-year FAA reauthorization act, Congress passed
a 7-week extension of the FAA's authority to administer
aviation programs and to receive tax proceeds. The prior
extension expired on July 22, 2011. H.R. 2553 extended that
authority through September 17, 2011. The bill extends the
authorization of appropriations for aviation programs, excise
taxes on aviation fuels and air transportation of persons and
property, and the expenditure authority of the Airport and
Airway Trust Fund. This legislation also extends, various
airport development projects, including: (1) the pilot program
for passenger facility fees at non-hub airports, (2) small
airport grants for airports located in the Marshall Islands,
Micronesia, and Palau, (3) state and local airport land use
compatibility projects, (4) the authority of the Metropolitan
Washington Airports Authority to apply for an airport
development grant and impose a passenger facility fee, (5) the
temporary increase to 95 percent in the government share of
certain Airport Improvement Program (AIP) project costs, and
(6) Midway Island airport development. It also extends AIP
projects and project grant authority. The bill also includes
reforms to the Essential Air Service (EAS) Program. The first
reform provision was adopted unanimously by the Senate and is
included in its long-term FAA reauthorization bill. Under this
reform, only airports that are 90 miles or more away from a
large or medium hub airport would be eligible to participate in
the EAS program. The second reform caps the subsidy for each
passenger under the EAS Program at $1,000.00.
Title: The Surface and Air Transportation Programs
Extension Act of 2011
Public Law Number: P.L. 112-30 (September 16, 2011)
Bill Number: H.R. 2887
Summary: The most recent long-term FAA reauthorization act,
Vision 100--Century of Aviation Reauthorization Act (P.L. 108-
176), expired September 30, 2007. During the 110th and 111th
Congresses, the House and Senate were unable to reach agreement
on a final, long-term reauthorization. In April 2011, the House
passed H.R. 658, the FAA Reauthorization and Reform Act of
2011. In February 2011, the Senate passed its own comprehensive
FAA reauthorization act. To allow the two chambers time to
negotiate a multi-year FAA reauthorization act, Congress passed
a 4\1/2\ -month extension of the FAA's authority to administer
aviation programs and to receive tax proceeds. The prior
extension expired on September 17, 2011. H.R. 2887 extended
that authority through January 31, 2012. The bill extends the
authorization of appropriations for both surface and air
transportation programs. H.R. 2887 extends the aviation
programs, excise taxes on aviation fuels and air transportation
of persons and property, and the expenditure authority of the
Airport and Airway Trust Fund. This legislation also extends,
various airport development projects, including: (1) the pilot
program for passenger facility fees at non-hub airports, (2)
small airport grants for airports located in the Marshall
Islands, Micronesia, and Palau, (3) state and local airport
land use compatibility projects, (4) the authority of the
Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority to apply for an
airport development grant and impose a passenger facility fee,
(5) the temporary increase to 95 percent in the government
share of certain Airport Improvement Program (AIP) project
costs, and (6) Midway Island airport development. It also
extends AIP projects and project grant authority.
Title: The European Union Emissions Trading Scheme
Prohibition Act of 2011
Bill Number: H.R. 2594 (passed House on October 24, 2011)
Summary: This bipartisan bill prohibits U.S. air carriers
and other aircraft operators from participating in the European
Union (EU) Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS). It also directs the
FAA, the DOT and other U.S. officials to use their authority to
negotiate and take other actions to ensure that U.S. operators
are held harmless from any unilaterally established EU ETS.
On January 1, 2012, all international flights operating to
and from the EU will be included in the EU Emissions Trading
System (ETS), including flights between the U.S. and the EU.
U.S. airlines will be required to pay this European tax for all
segments of the flight, for example from Los Angeles to its EU
destination including portions of the flight over the U.S.,
Canada, and International waters. The Air Transport Association
estimated that this European Tax would cost U.S. airlines and
passengers more than $3.1 billion between 2012 and 2020, which
could be used for more than 39,200 U.S. airline jobs. The
European Tax would be paid directly to EU Member States without
obligation to use them to mitigate aviation emissions impacts.
The Obama Administration testified before the House Committee
on Transportation and Infrastructure that the European Tax is
inconsistent with international aviation law. The EU ETS
violates U.S. sovereignty by applying a tax to U.S. air carrier
operations in the U.S. National Airspace System. In addition to
the United States, other nations have voiced opposition the
EU's scheme, including Argentina, Brazil, Chile, China,
Colombia, Cuba, Egypt, India, Japan, the Republic of Korea,
Malaysia, Mexico, Nigeria, Paraguay, Qatar, the Russian
Federation, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, South Africa, the United
Arab Emirates, and the member States of the Latin American
Civil Aviation Commission (LACAC). Even EU Member States,
including Italy, the Netherlands, France, Belgium, and Spain
are calling for postponement of the EU ETS due to confusion
over its implementation and opposition and potential
retaliation from other nations.
The proper forum to address international civil aviation
emissions based on constructive negotiation and mutual
agreement is the International Civil Aviation Organization
(ICAO). Therefore, Chairmen Mica and Petri, along with Ranking
Members Rahall and Costello, and other Members introduced H.R.
2594 to prohibit U.S. aviation operators from participating in
the EU ETS.
Title: Airport and Airway Extension Act of 2012
Public Law Number: P.L. 112-91 (January 31, 2012)
Bill Number: H.R. 3800
Summary: The most recent long-term FAA reauthorization act,
Vision 100--Century of Aviation Reauthorization Act (P.L. 108-
176), expired September 30, 2007. During the 110th and 111th
Congresses, the House and Senate were unable to reach agreement
on a final, long-term reauthorization. In April 2011, the House
passed H.R. 658, the FAA Reauthorization and Reform Act of
2011. In February 2011, the Senate passed its own comprehensive
FAA reauthorization act. To allow the two chambers time to
negotiate a multi-year FAA reauthorization act, Congress passed
a 17-day extension of the FAA's authority to administer
aviation programs and to receive tax proceeds. The prior
extension expired on January 31, 2012. H.R. 3800 extended that
authority through February 17, 2012. The bill extends the
authorization of appropriations for aviation programs, excise
taxes on aviation fuels and air transportation of persons and
property, and the expenditure authority of the Airport and
Airway Trust Fund. This legislation also extends, various
airport development projects, including: (1) the pilot program
for passenger facility fees at non-hub airports, (2) small
airport grants for airports located in the Marshall Islands,
Micronesia, and Palau, (3) state and local airport land use
compatibility projects, (4) the authority of the Metropolitan
Washington Airports Authority to apply for an airport
development grant and impose a passenger facility fee, (5) the
temporary increase to 95 percent in the government share of
certain Airport Improvement Program (AIP) project costs, and
(6) Midway Island airport development. It also extends AIP
projects and project grant authority.
Title: FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012
Public Law Number: P.L. 112-95 (February 14, 2012)
Bill Number: H.R. 658 (passed House on April 1, 2011)
Summary: The ``FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012''
(FMRA) provides responsible funding for FAA safety programs,
air traffic control modernization (NextGen) efforts, and
operations through 2015, and holds spending at FY 2011 levels
through 2015 ($63 billion over four years). It provides a total
of $13.4 billion over the life of the bill for airport
infrastructure projects, creating much needed jobs. FMRA
provides long-term stability for the aviation industry, and
creates the environment to allow for the creation of high-
paying and sustainable jobs. This law also accelerates
deployment of NextGen technologies, and reforms FAA's oversight
of NextGen, ensuring responsibility and setting milestones and
metrics. It addresses redundancies in positions and policies of
the FAA and eliminates them, and also consolidates and realigns
FAA air traffic control facilities in order to eliminate
unnecessary and obsolete facilities. FMRA provides for
unprecedented reform of the National Mediation Board. It limits
efforts by the Administration to over-regulate the aviation
industry, including the lithium battery industry. This law also
reforms the Essential Air Service (EAS) program by eliminating
the most egregious subsidies; prohibiting new communities from
joining the program; and authorizing the appropriation of
decreased funding levels. It establishes a balanced inspection
regime for repair stations. FMRA also enacts airline passenger
improvements and protections. It requires the Secretary to
develop a plan for the safe integration of commercial unmanned
aircraft systems into the National airspace system in an
expedited fashion, and in coordination with other Federal
agencies. FMRA increases the number of slots exempt from
specified requirements and prohibitions concerning operation of
an aircraft nonstop between Ronald Reagan Washington National
Airport and another airport more than 1,250 statute miles away
(Perimeter Rule limit); revises FAA personnel management system
requirements with respect to the mediation, alternative
resolution, and binding arbitration of disputes between the
Administrator and FAA employees about implementation of
proposed changes to the system. It also extends the moratorium
on FAA regulation of experimental space vehicles. Finally, this
law improves the safe and efficient operation of our Nation's
aviation system.
Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation
To date, the Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime
Transportation, chaired by Representative Frank A. LoBiondo
with Representative Rick Larsen serving as Ranking Member, held
19 hearings (84 witnesses and approximately 38 hours of
testimony) covering a diverse portfolio of issues within the
jurisdiction of the Subcommittee.
HEARINGS
Title: Improving Oil Spill Prevention and Response,
Restoring Jobs, and Ensuring Our Energy Security:
Recommendations from the National Commission on the BP
Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling
Date: February 11, 2011
Purpose: A joint hearing between the Subcommittee on Coast
Guard and Maritime Transportation and Subcommittee on Water
Resources and Environment to receive testimony regarding
improvements that can be made to oil spill prevention and
response plans.
Summary: In the wake of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill,
the National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill
and Offshore Drilling was created to find the root cause of the
accident and issue recommendations on how to prevent such
disasters and improve response in the future. The Commission's
report, issued on January 11, 2011, contains 14 specific
recommendations that fall under the jurisdiction of the
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
The Subcommittees heard testimony from Dr. Donald F. Boesch
and Mr. Terry D. Garcia, members of the National Commission on
the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling, as
well as Coast Guard Admiral Thad Allen (Ret.), who was the
National Incident Commander for the BP Deepwater Horizon oil
spill response. The witnesses' testimonies revolved around the
recommendations from the report, which ranged from creating an
independent agency within the Department of Interior to enforce
regulations on offshore drilling, to raising the liability cap
on oil production facilities, to increasing communication
between Federal agencies and local governments during a Spill
of National Significance.
Title: A Review of the Administration's FY 12 Budget
Requests for the U.S. Coast Guard, Federal Maritime Commission,
and Federal Maritime Administration: Finding Ways to Do More
with Less
Date: March 1, 2011
Purpose: Subcommittee sought input from relevant agencies
regarding the Administration's budget requests for FY 12 for
the Coast Guard, Federal Maritime Commission, and Maritime
Administration.
Summary: The Subcommittee heard testimony from Admiral
Robert J. Papp, Jr., Commandant of the Coast Guard; Master
Chief Michael P. Leavitt, Master Chief Petty Officer of the
Coast Guard; the Honorable Richard A. Lidinsky, Jr., Chairman
of the Federal Maritime Commission; and the Honorable David T.
Matsuda, Administrator of the Maritime Administration.
The President released his annual budget requests for FY 12
in early March. The witnesses testified to the effects the
budget requests would have on their agencies if enacted.
Notable cuts to the Coast Guard's budget request include a 7.4%
decrease in funding for the Acquisition, Construction and
Improvements account from this fiscal year's continuing
resolution, as well as a 20% decrease in the Research,
Development, Test and Evaluation account. In addition, the
Administration requested one High Endurance Cutter be
decommissioned as well as the USCGC POLAR SEA, one of the Coast
Guard's two Class I icebreakers. The Subcommittee and the
witnesses examined the direct and long-term effects on the
Coast Guard's overall mission effectiveness as a result of
these cuts.
Title: Assuring the Freedom of Americans on the High Seas:
The United States' Response to Piracy
Date: March 15, 2011
Purpose: Subcommittee sought recommendations on how to
improve the Federal government's efforts to safeguard American
lives and property on the high seas against acts of piracy,
with specific attention being given towards the high volume of
piratical attacks occurring off the Horn of Africa.
Summary: The Subcommittee heard testimony from Coast Guard
Admiral Kevin Cook, Director of Prevention Policy for Marine
Safety, Security, and Stewardship; William Wechsler, Deputy
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Counternarcotics and Global
Threats; Kurt Amend, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of
State for Political and Military Affairs; and Stephen L.
Caldwell, Director of GAO's Maritime and Coast Guard Issues
Team.
The sailing vessel QUEST with four American citizens
onboard was transiting the Gulf of Aden in early February 2011
and was attacked and the crew taken hostage. During the
negotiations, all four American hostages were killed by the
pirates. This incident, along with an estimated 87 other pirate
attacks against vessels on the high seas this calendar year,
led the Subcommittee to examine all aspects of pirate
operations, from the land-based ``pirate academy'' that now
exists on the coast of Somalia to pirate operations using
larger ``mother ships'' that vastly expand the area in which
they can attack vessels of opportunity. The State Department
also testified in regard to the ransom process and ways in
which the U.S. government can track ransom payments to find
those profiting from acts of piracy on the high seas.
Title: Improving and Streamlining the Coast Guard's
Acquisition Program
Date: April 13, 2011
Purpose: Subcommittee sought an update on the status of the
Coast Guard's acquisition programs, as well as a review of the
policies and procedures the Service uses to determine mission
needs requirements and select the assets based on those
requirements.
Summary: The Subcommittee heard testimony from Coast Guard
Vice Admiral John Currier, Deputy Commandant for Mission
Support, and from Mr. John P. Hutton, Director of Acquisition
and Sourcing Management for the GAO. The hearing focused on the
Coast Guard's acquisition program since transitioning from the
Deepwater program, started in 2002, which was essentially
scrapped and replaced in 2007 with an in-house acquisitions
directorate. The current acquisition program includes
significant process improvements over the Lead System
Integrator processes used under Deepwater. However, nearly all
of the Coast Guard's major acquisitions still face significant
cost overruns and schedule delays. Specifically, the
Subcommittee questioned the Coast Guard on its unreasonable
expectation of future funding. Additionally, the Subcommittee
expressed its concern over the mismanagement of development and
delivery of its National Security Cutters, which was a part of
the original Deepwater program. The Subcommittee looked into
the acquisition process that led to these delays and cost
overruns.
The Subcommittee also examined a report issued by the GAO
on the Coast Guard's acquisition process. In the report, the
GAO made several recommendations to reduce bureaucratic
inefficiencies within the Coast Guard's acquisition directorate
to reduce cost overruns and delays. The Subcommittee questioned
the Coast Guard and the GAO on ways to implement these
recommendations.
Title: Creating U.S. Maritime Industry Jobs by Reducing
Regulatory Burdens
Date: May 24, 2011
Purpose: Subcommittee review of the Coast Guard maritime
rulemaking process. The hearing focused on specific rules and
regulations that are unnecessarily burdensome to the maritime
industry.
Summary: The Subcommittee heard testimony from Coast Guard
Rear Admiral Kevin Cook, Director of Prevention Policy, and
from Mr. Calvin Lederer, Deputy Judge Advocate General of the
Coast Guard. Members of the Subcommittee were particularly
interested in a proposed rule by the Coast Guard that would
expand the Notice and Arrival and Departure and Automatic
Identification System requirements to many smaller commercial
vessels operating in U.S. navigable waters. Members were
concerned the regulation would seriously hinder the ability of
smaller commercial vessels to conduct normal operations in the
coastwise trade. Additionally, members were concerned oil rigs
operating offshore in need of short notice servicing would not
be able to do so under the proposed regulation.
The Subcommittee also looked at ways in which the Coast
Guard can reduce its backlog of rulemaking projects as required
by enacted laws. Despite the expansion of the rulemaking staff
in the Coast Guard in 2009, there remains a significant backlog
of proposed rules that have been required by previous
legislation. This backlog creates uncertainty in the maritime
industry and has a negative effect on domestic trade. The
Subcommittee questioned the witnesses on ways to reduce this
uncertainty that is dampening the creation of U.S. maritime
jobs.
Title: Creating Jobs and Increasing U.S. Exports by
Enhancing the Marine Transportation System
Date: June 14, 2011
Purpose: Subcommittee sought input from U.S. maritime
industry stakeholders and the head of the Maritime
Administration on ways to increase U.S. exports and U.S.
commerce by increasing coastwise and international trade
through the U.S. marine transportation system.
Summary: The Subcommittee heard testimony from the
Honorable David Matsuda, Administrator of the Maritime
Administration; Mr. Joseph J. Cox, President and CEO of the
Chamber of Shipping of America; Mr. Michael Roberts, Chief
Counsel of the Crowley Maritime Corporation testifying on
behalf of the American Maritime Partnership; Mr. Augustin
Tellez, Executive Vice President of the Seafarers International
Union; and Mr. John Mohr, Executive Director of the Port of
Everett, WA.
The witnesses suggested various ways to enhance and expand
the U.S. marine transportation system and create U.S. maritime
jobs without burdening the American taxpayer. The Jones Act was
specifically targeted by both members and witnesses alike as
being a key component in preserving American maritime jobs and
the U.S. shipbuilding industry. Other issues examined included
Cargo Preference Laws that require certain percentage of
government impelled cargo to be carried on U.S. owned, U.S.
flagged, U.S. crewed, and U.S. built vessels.
Title: GPS Reliability: A Review of Aviation Industry
Performance, Safety Issues, and Avoiding Potential New and
Costly Government Burdens
Date: June 23, 2011
Purpose: Joint hearing between the Subcommittee on Coast
Guard and Maritime Transportation and the Subcommittee on
Aviation. Received testimony from eight different witnesses on
the potential impact Lightsquared's new network could have on
GPS technology used by maritime and aviation industries.
Summary: The Subcommittees heard testimony from the
Honorable Roy Kienitz, Undersecretary for Policy at U.S.
Department of Transportation; the Honorable Teri Takai, Acting
Assistant Secretary for Networks and Information Integration at
U.S. Department of Defense; Rear Admiral Robert E. Day, Jr.,
Assistant Commandant for Command, Control, Communications,
Computers & Information; Ms. Margaret Jenny, President of RTCA;
Mr. Phil Straub, Vice President of Aviation Engineering at
Garmin International; Mr. Craig Fuller, President of the
Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association; Mr. Thomas L.
Hendricks, Senior Vice President of Safety, Security, and
Operations at the Air Transport Association; and Mr. Jeffrey J.
Carlisle, Executive Vice President of Regulatory Affairs and
Public Policy at Lightsquared.
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is considering
an application by LightSquared to build nationwide broadband
internet infrastructure. LightSquared has applied to have high-
power internet broadcast stations across the country on the
spectrum neighboring the low-powered GPS signal. A broad
coalition of industry stakeholders who use GPS have expressed
concern the high-powered broadband signal will overpower and
disable critical GPS navigation and timing functions. Initial
testing by the Department of Defense (DoD) and DOT have
validated some of these interference concerns. Witnesses at the
hearing verified that there is insufficient data to demonstrate
that LightSquared's planned nationwide broadband signal would
not interfere with GPS signals, and the details would have to
be thoroughly and independently tested before being safely
implemented.
Title: Reducing Regulatory Burdens, Ensuring the Flow of
Commerce, and Protecting Jobs: A Common Sense Approach to
Ballast Water Regulation
Date: July 13, 2011
Purpose: Joint hearing between the Subcommittee on Coast
Guard and Maritime Transportation and Subcommittee on Water
Resources and Environment to hear testimony from important
industry groups and government agencies on current rules
governing the discharge of ballast water. The Subcommittees
sought input from witnesses on how to best move forward with
efforts to reform current ballast water discharge rules.
Summary: The Subcommittees heard testimony from two
separate panels. The first panel of witnesses included Vice
Admiral Brian Salerno, U.S. Coast Guard Deputy Commandant for
Operations; Mr. James Hanlon, Director of the Office of
Wastewater Management at the Environmental Protection Agency;
Dr. Deborah Swackhamer, Chair of the EPA's Science Advisory
Board; and Dr. James Carlton, Chair of the Committee on Numeric
Limits for Living Organisms in Ballast Water at the National
Research Council. The second panel consisted of Mr. Thomas
Allegretti, President of the American Waterways Operators, and
Mr. Michael Jewell, President of the Marine Engineers'
Beneficial Association.
In order to maintain stability during transit, most ocean
going vessels fill internal tanks with ballast water during the
loading of cargo and then release it during unloading. Ballast
water has long been recognized as one of several pathways by
which invasive species are transported globally and introduced
into coastal waters where they did not live before. Aquatic
nuisance species have been introduced into U.S. waters via
ballast water discharges. Discharges of ballast water are
currently governed differently by the Coast Guard and the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), as well as by numerous
state laws and regulations. As a result, vessels engaged in
international and interstate commerce are required to meet
several different standards for the treatment of ballast water,
some of which are not technologically achievable or verifiable.
Witnesses from private industry emphasized the importance of
developing clear and consistent ballast water standards in
order for the U.S. to continue being a leader in the
international maritime trade. The EPA Science Advisory Board
testified that the ballast water discharge standard established
by the International Maritime Organization (IMO) is the only
standard that is currently technologically achievable and
verifiable. Finally, the EPA and the Coast Guard pledged to
continue working with Congress to develop a more cost effective
and sensible approach to regulating ballast water discharge.
Title: How to Improve Operations and Implement Efficiencies
for the United States Coast Guard
Date: July 26, 2011
Purpose: Subcommittee met to hear testimony on ways to
improve Coast Guard operations and implement efficiencies in
Coast Guard programs. Hearing was held in preparation for
drafting legislation reauthorizing funding for Coast Guard
operations and administration.
Summary: The Subcommittee heard testimony from Congressman
Sam Farr (D-CA); Vice Admiral John Currier, U.S. Coast Guard
Deputy Commandant for Mission Support; Vice Admiral Brian
Salerno, U.S. Coast Guard Deputy Commandant for Operations; and
Dr. Holly Bamford, Deputy Assistant Administrator at the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
The authorization of appropriations for the Coast Guard was
set to expire on September 30, 2011. In preparation for
reauthorization legislation, the Subcommittee held this hearing
to review ways to improve Coast Guard operations and
administration. The Subcommittee examined capability gaps and
delays in Coast Guard acquisitions projects, challenges in
administration of Coast Guard programs, and parity issues
between benefits and authorities available to members of the
Coast Guard and the other armed services. The panel also
focused on the Marine Debris Research, Prevention, and
Reduction Act (Public Law 109-449), which requires the Coast
Guard to conduct outreach programs to boaters to increase
awareness of problems associated with marine debris.
Title: Review and Status of the Multi-Billion Dollar
Department of Homeland Security Relocation Project in
Washington, DC and its Impacts on the U.S. Coast Guard
Date: September 23, 2011
Purpose: Subcommittee convened to review the status of the
Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) headquarters
consolidation project, the proposal to move the Coast Guard's
headquarters to the new location, and the impacts the move
would have on the Service's budget and operations.
Summary: The Subcommittee heard testimony from the
Honorable Donald Bathurst, Chief Administrative Officer at the
Department of Homeland Security; Vice Admiral John Currier,
U.S. Coast Guard Deputy Commandant for Mission Support; and the
Honorable Robert A. Peck, Public Buildings Service Commissioner
at the General Services Administration.
Current facilities housing DHS and its component agencies
are spread among more than 61 buildings in 40 locations in the
Washington, DC area. DHS has prepared a National Capital Region
Housing Master Plan to identify the housing needs of the
Department, and found that a consolidation on a single campus
would be beneficial to the Department. The General Services
Administration (GSA) has determined the West Campus of the St.
Elizabeth's Hospital to be the only federally controlled site
available in the District of Columbia capable of meeting the
needs of DHS. The consolidation is planned to take place over
the course of the next ten years. The first phase of the
project would move the Coast Guard headquarters to the site,
but no funds have been provided thus far to undertake any
additional departmental consolidation.
Chairman LoBiondo and members of the Subcommittee expressed
concerns about several aspects of the proposed Coast Guard
move, including adequacy of access to the facility, isolation
of the Coast Guard if no other entities move to the campus, and
any additional costs that would be borne by the Coast Guard to
move to the new facility and to support its operations. Most
importantly, the Subcommittee was concerned with the impact
potential costs from the move will have on the ability of the
Service to conduct their critical missions.
Title: What Will It Cost?: Protecting the Taxpayer from an
Unachievable Coast Guard Acquisition Program
Date: October 4, 2011
Purpose: Subcommittee met to examine Coast Guard
Acquisitions programs. This hearing was a follow up to the
April 13, 2011, Subcommittee hearing on the same. This hearing
reviewed issues raised in the July 2011 Government
Accountability Office (GAO) report entitled ``Action Needed as
Approved Deepwater Program Remains Unachievable''.
Summary: The Subcommittee heard testimony from two separate
panels. Mr. John Hutton of the Government Accountability Office
testified on the first panel, and Admiral Robert J. Papp,
Commandant of the U.S. Coast Guard testified on the second.
The Coast Guard began a process of replacing its aging
vessels and aircraft in the late 1990's. The program's focus
was those assets that carry out missions farther than 50 miles
from shore and the modernization of the information technology
systems that the Service relies upon to coordinate its
operations. The program was known as the Integrated Deepwater
Program (Deepwater). To manage the acquisition program, the
Coast Guard engaged a Lockheed Martin/Northrop Grumman team,
called the Integrated Coast Guard System (ICGS). Deepwater
encountered significant quality and cost issues. It was the
subject to several hearings and an investigation by the
Committee, and is the subject of continuing review by the GAO.
The Coast Guard has terminated the Deepwater contract with ICGS
and is now performing the acquisition functions in-house. The
assets scheduled for recapitalization remain the same.
Members of the Subcommittee had several questions regarding
GAO's recommendations for keeping the Coast Guard acquisitions
program on schedule. They also sought answers from the
Commandant on steps taken by the Service to minimize cost
overruns and prevent further delays.
Title: Assuring the Safety of Domestic Energy Production:
Lessons Learned from the DEEPWATER HORIZON Oil Spill
Date: November 2, 2011
Purpose: Subcommittee convened to examine the lessons
learned in the wake of the BP DEEPWATER HORIZON oil spill,
review the latest investigations into the causes of the spill
and the Coast Guard response to it, hear the recommendations of
those involved in these investigations, and find out what
actions the Service has taken or will take in response to those
recommendations.
Summary: The Subcommittee heard testimony from Rear Admiral
Paul Zukunft, U.S. Coast Guard Assistant Commandant for Marine
Safety, Security and Stewardship; U.S. Coast Guard Vice Admiral
(retired) Roger Rufe, Chairman of the Incident Specific
Preparedness Review for the DEEPWATER HORIZON Oil Spill; and
Mr. Stephen Caldwell, Director of GAO's Homeland Security and
Justice Team. Mr. Caldwell was accompanied by Mr. Frank Rusco,
Director of GAO's Natural Resources and the Environment Team.
Subcommittee heard the recommendations of the Government
Accountability Office (GAO) and U.S. Coast Guard individuals
who were involved in the investigations, and examined what
actions the Service will need to take in response to those
recommendations. Members questioned witnesses about findings
from the three most recent reports on the spill, namely the
Joint Investigative Team (JIT) Report, the Incident Specific
Preparedness Review (ISPR), and the Federal On Scene
Coordinator Report (FOSC).
Title: Protecting U.S. Sovereignty: Coast Guard Operations
in the Arctic
Date: December 1, 2011
Purpose: Subcommittee met to review the status of the Coast
Guard's icebreaker fleet and explore options for meeting the
Coast Guard's statutory obligations in the Arctic and assisting
those in the maritime transportation and energy sectors take
advantage of the significant economic opportunities in the
region.
Summary: The Subcommittee heard testimony from two separate
panels. Admiral Robert J. Papp, Commandant of the United States
Coast Guard, and the Honorable Mead Treadwell, Lieutenant
Governor of Alaska, testified on the first panel. The second
panel consisted of Dr. Kelly Falkner, Deputy Director of the
National Science Foundation's Office of Polar Programs; Mr.
Stephen Caldwell, Director of GAO's Homeland Security and
Justice Issues Team; Mr. David Whitcomb, Vice President for
Production Support at Vigor Industrial and testifying on behalf
of the Shipbuilders Council of America; and Rear Admiral
Jeffrey Garrett (USCG ret.).
The Coast Guard maintains two Polar Class heavy
icebreakers, however neither is currently operational. The
POLAR SEA is being decommissioned and the POLAR STAR is
undergoing significant repairs to extend its service life.
Questions remain about how long the POLAR STAR will last after
its repairs are complete, as well as whether the Service and
the Administration are prepared to make critical decisions
regarding our Nation's goals and objectives in the Arctic and
provide Congress with a fiscally responsible plan to meet those
goals and objectives. Members of the Subcommittee and witnesses
all emphasized the importance of maintaining a U.S. icebreaker
fleet for national security, scientific and economic purposes.
Title: Offshore Drilling in Cuba and the Bahamas: The U.S.
Coast Guard's Oil Spill Readiness and Response Planning
Date: January 30, 2012
Purpose: The Subcommittee held a field hearing in Sunny
Isles Beach, Florida, to examine Cuban and Bahamian plans to
drill in proximity to the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ)
and review the Coast Guard's level of preparedness to handle
oil spills occurring at these sites.
Summary: The Subcommittee heard testimony from the
Honorable Jennifer Carroll, the Lieutenant Governor of Florida;
Rear Admiral William Baumgartner, Commander of U.S. Coast Guard
District 7; Rear Admiral Cari Thomas, the U.S. Coast Guard's
Director of Response Policy; Ms. Debbie Peyton, Chief of the
Emergency Response Division at the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration; Mr. Lars Herbst, Gulf of Mexico
Regional Director at the Department of Interior's Bureau of
Safety and Environment Enforcement; and Dr. John Proni,
Executive Director at Florida International University's
Applied Research Center.
In January of 2012, the Spanish-based company Repsol YPF
began drilling an exploratory well in the North Cuba Basin,
just 70 miles south of Key West, Florida. In addition to the
contract with Repsol, the Cuban government has entered into
agreements with five other companies for potential development
of offshore blocks in the North Cuba Basin. Given the strained
nature of diplomatic relations between the United States and
Cuba, the Subcommittee was eager to hear not only about the
Coast Guard and other federal agencies' plans to prevent and
respond to spills in the North Cuba Basin which reach U.S.
waters, but also in what enforcement mechanisms are at the
United States' disposal to ensure the responsible party is held
accountable for an extra-territorial spill. Witnesses from the
Coast Guard and Department of Interior discussed their
knowledge of the latest developments in Cuban and Bahamian
drilling plans and updated the Subcommittee on the status of
spill-response plans being developed between federal, state,
and local authorities. The topic of liability was also
examined, specifically as it relates to oil spill penalties
established under the Clean Water Act and Oil Pollution Act of
1990.
Title: A Review of Cruise Ship Safety and Lessons Learned
from the COSTA CONCORDIA Accident
Date: February 29, 2012
Purpose: The Subcommittee met to examine the COSTA
CONCORDIA accident and the safety of cruise vessels in general
operating out of U.S. ports.
Summary: The Subcommittee heard testimony from three
separate panels. Testifying on the first panel was Vice Admiral
Brian M. Salerno, the U.S. Coast Guard's Deputy Commandant for
Operations. On the second panel were Mr. Sameer and Mrs. Divya
Sharma, American survivors from the COSTA CONCORDIA accident.
The third panel consisted of witness from the cruise line
industry, including Ms. Christine Duffy, President and CEO of
the Cruise Lines International Association (CLIA), accompanied
by Mr. Michael Crye, Executive Vice President at CLIA; Mr.
George Wright, Senior Vice President of Marine Operations at
Princess Cruises, accompanied by Vicky Rey, Vice President of
Guest Services and Support at Carnival Cruise Lines; Captain
Evans Hoyt, Master of Norwegian Cruise Lines' NORWEIGAN SPIRIT
and PRIDE OF AMERICA; and Mr. Brian Schoeneman, Legislative
Director for the Seafarers International Union (SIU).
On January 13, 2012, at approximately 9:40 p.m., the
Italian-owned and operated cruise ship COSTA CONCORDIA struck a
granite reef just off the coast of the Italian island of
Giglio. The collision caused a 164 foot long gash in the port
side of the COSTA CONCORDIA. The vessel suffered flooding,
causing it to list to its port side. Eventually, it came to
rest on its starboard side in 45 feet of water along the shore
of Giglio near the island's port. Extensive press reports at
the time of the hearing indicated that the Captain of the COSTA
CONCORDIA, Francesco Schettino, overrode a pre-programmed,
owner-approved navigation track line in order to pass close to
the island of Giglio. Thirty-two people died in this incident.
The Subcommittee heard details about the accident related
to the evacuation of the vessel, which was reported as chaotic
and disorganized. Mr. and Mrs. Sharma shared their harrowing
story about the lack of guidance provided by COSTA CONCORDIA
crew members and the overall state of panic that pervaded the
ship after it struck the reef. The Coast Guard discussed
various aspects of current cruise line regulations and assured
the Subcommittee that a high priority was being placed on
ensuring ``vessels that visit the United States are in
substantial compliance with applicable international and
domestic standards.'' Lastly, representatives from the cruise
line industry expressed confidence in American cruise line
operators and encouraged Americans not to be dissuaded from
taking cruises due to the COSTA CONCORDIA accident.
Title: Protecting Maritime Jobs and Enhancing Marine Safety
in the Post-Budget Control Act Fiscal Environment: A Review of
the Administration's Fiscal Year 2013 Coast Guard and Maritime
Transportation Budget Request
Date: March 7, 2012
Purpose: The Subcommittee held a hearing to examine the
fiscal year (FY) 2013 budget requests for the United States
Coast Guard, Federal Maritime Commission, and Maritime
Administration.
Summary: The Subcommittee heard testimony from Admiral
Robert J. Papp, Jr., Commandant of the U.S. Coast Guard; Master
Chief Petty Office of the U.S. Coast Guard Michael P. Leavitt;
the Honorable Richard A. Lidinsky, Jr., Chairman of the Federal
Maritime Commission; and the Honorable David T. Matsuda,
Administrator at the U.S. Department of Transportation's
Maritime Administration.
The President requested $9.96 billion in FY 2013 for Coast
Guard activities, $602.4 million (or -5.7 percent) less than
the FY 2012 enacted level. This amount does not include $254.5
million for Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO), which the
administration proposes to appropriate to the Department of
Defense (DoD) in FY 2013 and then make available to the Coast
Guard. For the activities of the Federal Maritime Commission
(FMC), the President requested $26 million in FY 2013, an
increase of $1.9 million (or 7.9 percent) above the FY 2012
enacted level. Lastly, the President requested $344 million in
FY 2013 for the activities of the United States Maritime
Administration (MARAD), a reduction of $5.4 million (or -1.6
percent) below the FY 2012 enacted level.
The Subcommittee had concerns with several provisions
within the President's budget, especially the deep cuts
proposed to the Coast Guard's acquisitions account. Members of
the Subcommittee questioned Admiral Papp on a number of the
decisions made in the budget, including delays, and in some
cases altogether elimination, of funding for vital assets;
cutting over 1,000 servicemember positions, including those
critical to frontline operations; decommissioning three 110
foot patrol boats and three recently upgraded HH-65 helicopter;
and spending $24.5 million over the budget baseline for the
Coast Guard's move to the new Department of Homeland Security
headquarters at St. Elizabeths.
Title: Recent Regulation of the Maritime Industry: Ensuring
U.S. Job Growth While Improving Environmental and Worker Safety
Date: April 26, 2012
Purpose: The Subcommittee met to review the status of
regulations by the U. S. Coast Guard and the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) and how such regulations impact the
maritime industry.
Summary: The Subcommittee heard testimony from two separate
panels. On the first panel was Vice Admiral Brian M. Salerno,
the U.S. Coast Guard Deputy Commandant for Operations. Vice
Admiral Salerno was accompanied by Mr. Jeffrey Lantz, U.S.
Coast Guard Director of Commercial Regulations and Standards.
Also on the first panel was Mr. James Hanlon, the Director of
the Office of Wastewater Management at the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA). The second panel consisted of the
Honorable Chris Koch, President and CEO of the World Shipping
Council; Mr. James Gutowski of the Fisheries Survival Fund; Mr.
Jimmy Lafont of Calais and Sons in Cut Off, LA; Mr. Don Marcus,
Secretary-Treasurer of the International Organization of
Masters, Mates and Pilots; and Mr. Paul Cozza, President and
CEO of CSL International.
The Federal Government creates or modifies rules and
regulations through a rulemaking process guided by the
Administrative Procedure Act (APA), codified in title 5 of the
United States Code. The process involves notice in the Federal
Register and the opportunity for public comment in a docket
maintained by the regulating agency. This is a lengthy process
and often requires several layers of bureaucratic review prior
to the rule becoming final.
Several rules under development by the Coast Guard and EPA
in 2012 would have substantial implications for the maritime
industry. The Subcommittee sought updates from both agencies on
the status of new and existing regulations, including the Coast
Guard's final rule regulating the discharge of ballast water
from ships in U.S. waters, and the EPA's related Vessel General
Permit for Discharges Incidental to Normal Operation of
Vessels, which is expected to be finalized in December of 2012.
A number of other regulations were also addressed, including
rules related to the North American Emission Control Areas,
Transportation Worker Identification Credentials (TWIC), and
fishing vessel safety.
Title: Creating American Jobs and Assuring the Safety and
Security of America's Waterways: A Review of the Coast Guard's
5-year Capital Improvement Plan
Date: May 16, 2012
Purpose: The Subcommittee met to review the status of the
Coast Guard's current acquisition program and examine the
program's sustainability. This was the third hearing the
Subcommittee has held this Congress to review the Service's
acquisition program. The last hearing was held on October 4,
2011.
Summary: The Subcommittee heard testimony from Vice Admiral
John Currier, U.S. Coast Guard Deputy Commandant for Mission
Support.
The Coast Guard began a process of replacing its aging
vessels and aircraft in the late 1990s. The program's focus was
those assets that carry out missions farther than 50 miles from
shore and the modernization of the information technology
systems that the Service relies upon to coordinate its
operations. The program was known as the Integrated Deepwater
Program (Deepwater). Deepwater encountered significant quality
and cost issues. The Coast Guard has terminated the Deepwater
contract with ICGS and is now performing the acquisition
functions in-house. The assets scheduled for recapitalization
remain the same.
In July of 2011, the Government Accountability Office (GAO)
released a study on the Coast Guard's acquisition program
entitled ``Action Needed As Approved Deepwater Program Remains
Unachievable''. The title refers to the GAO's finding that it
will be impossible for the Coast Guard to complete its major
acquisitions without breaching its 2007 baseline of 20 to 25
years for construction and delivery of recapitalized assets at
a total cost of $24.2 billion. The GAO estimated it could take
an additional 10 years to complete and could cost at least an
additional $5 billion. The Subcommittee is very concerned with
the findings by GAO and was further troubled by the Coast
Guard's 2013 budget request, which proposed to slash the
acquisitions account by $271.6 million. Members of the
Subcommittee questioned Admiral Currier on several of the
proposals in the FY 13 budget related to the acquisitions
account and sought an update on the status of assets listed in
the program of record.
Title: Review of Vessels Used to Carry Strategic Petroleum
Reserve Drawdowns
Date: June 27, 2012
Purpose: The Subcommittee met to review the process used to
determine the availability of U.S.-flagged vessels during the
summer 2011 drawdown of crude oil from the Strategic Petroleum
Reserve (SPR) and what steps are being taken to improve that
process.
Summary: The Subcommittee heard testimony from the
Honorable David Matsuda, Administrator at the U.S. Maritime
Administration and Thomas Allegretti, President and CEO of
American Waterways Operators, testifying on behalf of the
American Maritime Partnership.
On June 23, 2011, President Obama announced the U.S. and
its partners in the International Energy Agency would release a
total of 60 million barrels of oil onto the world market over a
30-day period to offset the disruption in the oil supply caused
by unrest in the Libya. As part of the effort, the U.S. pledged
to release 30 million barrels of oil from the SPR. As part of
the announcement on the SPR drawdown, DOE indicated that there
would be a blanket waiver of the Jones Act for vessels seeking
to move SPR oil between SPR terminal sites and refineries. A
day later, on June 24, 2011, DOE dropped the language providing
for a blanket waiver of the Jones Act. DOE then issued a
``Notice of Sale of SPR Oil'' which amended and added
requirements for bidders on top of those mandated under 10 CFR
Part 625. According to press reports and information provided
to the Subcommittee, in the days following the issuance of the
Notice of Sale officials at the DOE and MARAD made statements
and took actions which may have been inconsistent with the laws
and regulations governing Jones Act waivers.
By September 2, 2011, DOE had completed the drawdown of
30.6 million barrels of oil from the SPR. Ultimately, 44
waivers of the Jones Act were issued to foreign owned, flagged,
built, and/or crewed vessels to carry nearly 25.2 million
barrels of SPR oil by water (the remaining 5.4 million barrels
went by pipeline). Each waiver involved a foreign vessel
carrying 500,000 barrels or more. Only one delivery of SPR oil
was conducted by a qualified Jones Act vessel. That U.S. vessel
carried 150,000 barrels or less than 1 percent (0.59%) of the
total SPR oil moved by vessel.
Members of the Subcommittee were concerned with the process
undertaken by the Obama Administration to verify that there
were not U.S.-flagged vessels capable of carrying oil from the
drawdown. The Subcommittee sought an explanation from MARAD
regarding the Agency's decision to issue the 44 Jones Act
waivers and also sought verification from industry that there
was sufficient capacity available on U.S.-flagged vessels at
the time of the drawdown. Furthermore, the Subcommittee
requested input from both parties on how apparent
miscommunication between U.S. carriers and the Administration
could be avoided during future drawdowns.
LEGISLATION
Title: Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Act of 2011
Bill Number: H.R. 2838 (Passed House on November 15, 2011)
Summary: H.R. 2838, the Coast Guard and Maritime
Transportation Act of 2011, authorizes $8.4 billion in funding
for the Coast Guard in FY 12, $8.6 billion in FY 13, and $8.7
billion in fiscal year 2014. The bill authorizes the end-of-
year strength for military personnel at 47,000 for each of the
FY 12 through 14. The bill also authorizes $22 million for the
Federal Maritime Commission in each of the FY 12 through 15.
Finally, the bill makes changes to current law affecting marine
safety, marine transportation system, and the authorities of
the Coast Guard. The changes to current law include requiring
the Coast Guard Academy to institute the same sexual harassment
policy that exists at the other military service academies,
repealing a law requiring that the Commandant of the Coast
Guard establish an Ombudsman for each Coast Guard District,
prohibiting the Commandant from going to production on a sixth
national security cutter before acquiring a sufficient number
of Long Range Interceptor II and Cutter Boat Over the Horizon
IV small boats for each of the first three national security
cutters, setting specific deadlines for decommissioning the
Coast Guard's two inoperable polar icebreakers, providing a
formal authorization to the existing interagency Committee on
the Marine Transportation System, and changing the frequency of
dockside examinations for commercial fishing vessels from two
to five years.
On September 2, 2011, Subcommittee on Coast Guard and
Maritime Transportation Chairman Frank A. LoBiondo introduced
for himself, and Transportation and Infrastructure Committee
Chairman John L. Mica, H.R. 2838, the Coast Guard and Maritime
Transportation Act of 2011. On September 8, 2011, the Committee
on Transportation and Infrastructure met in open session to
consider H.R. 2838, and ordered the bill, as amended, reported
favorably to the House of Representatives by voice vote with a
quorum present. The bill was considered by the House beginning
on November 4, 2011 and was passed by the chamber on November
15, 2011 by voice vote.
Title: Piracy Suppression Act of 2011
Bill Number: H.R. 2839 (Reported to the House on November
10, 2011)
Summary: Piracy off the Horn of Africa, and in other high
risk waters throughout the world, puts thousands of lives in
danger, undermines freedom of navigation, and impacts the world
economy. H.R. 2839, the Piracy Suppression Act of 2011,
provides new authorities to suppress the threat of piracy on
the high seas.
H.R. 2839 instructs the Secretary of Transportation to
update an existing training program to include instruction on
acceptable use of force against pirates and techniques to use
in the event of being taken hostage, requires the use of
private armed security on vessels carrying government impelled
cargo through high risk waters, and orders the Government
Accountability Office to report to the Committee efforts to
track ransom payments and the movement of money through Somali
piracy networks.
On September 2, 2011, Subcommittee on Coast Guard and
Maritime Transportation Chairman Frank A. LoBiondo introduced
for himself, and Transportation and Infrastructure Committee
Chairman John L. Mica, H.R. 2839, the Piracy Suppression Act of
2011. On September 8, 2011, the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure met in open session, and ordered the bill
reported favorably to the House of Representatives by voice
vote with a quorum present. Amended portions of H.R. 2839 were
included as an amendment to H.R. 2838, the Coast Guard and
Maritime Transportation Act of 2011, and were considered by the
House beginning on November 4, 2011. H.R. 2838 passed on
November 15, 2011 by voice vote.
Title: Commercial Vessel Discharges Reform Act of 2011
Bill Number: H.R. 2840 (Passed House on November 3, 2011)
Summary: Discharges of ballast water are currently governed
differently by the Coast Guard and the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA), as well as by numerous state laws and
regulations. As a result, vessels engaged in international and
interstate commerce are required to meet several different
standards for the treatment of ballast water, some of which are
not technologically achievable or verifiable. The Commercial
Vessel Discharges Reform Act of 2011 establishes a single,
uniform national standard for the treatment of ballast water
discharged from vessels into navigable waters. The bill also
provides for uniform federal regulation of other discharges
incidental to the normal operation of a vessel.
H.R. 2840 amends Title II of the Clean Water Act by adding
a new section specifying the circumstances under which a
discharge of ballast water from a commercial vessel into
navigable waters is permitted and identifies applicable
vessels. The bill establishes an initial performance standard
that is consistent with the IMO standard and requires vessel
operators to conduct ballast water treatment using technologies
certified to meet the performance standard. Furthermore, the
legislation requires the Administrator of the EPA to review the
performance standard no later than January 1, 2016, and every
ten years thereafter to determine whether revising the
performance standard is appropriate.
On September 2, 2011, Subcommittee on Coast Guard and
Maritime Transportation Chairman Frank A. LoBiondo introduced
for himself, Transportation and Infrastructure Committee
Chairman John L. Mica, and Subcommittee on Water Resources and
Environment Chairman Bob Gibbs, H.R. 2840, the Commercial
Vessel Discharge Reform Act. On October 13, 2011, the Committee
on Transportation and Infrastructure met in open session to
consider H.R. 2840, and ordered the bill, as amended, reported
favorably to the House of Representatives by voice vote with a
quorum present. H.R. 2840 incorporated into H.R. 2838, The
Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Act of 2011, in a House
Rules Committee print for Floor consideration on October 28,
2011. The House began consideration of H.R. 2838 on November 4,
2011. H.R. 2838 was passed by the House on November 15, 2011 by
voice vote.
Title: America's Cup Act of 2011
Bill Number: H.R. 3321 (Enacted on November 29, 2011)--P.L.
112-61
Summary: H.R. 3321 provides a limited waiver of domestic
cabotage laws for competing and support vessels participating
in America's Cup related races. Excluded from the waiver are
vessels transporting more than 25 individuals (in addition to
the crew) and vessels transporting individual's point-to-point
for hire. It also provides waivers of cabotage laws for several
other specific vessels and clarifies that vessels carried on a
movable dry dock in Alaska are not considered merchandise under
Chapter 551 of title 46.
On November 2, 2011, Representative Wally Herger introduced
H.R. 3321, The America's Cup Act of 2011. On November 4, 2011,
the House agreed to the motion to suspend the rules and pass
H.R. 3321 by a vote of 387-2, 1 present. H.R. 3321 was signed
into law on November 29, 2011 (Public Law 112-61).
Title: The Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Act of
2012
Bill Number: H.R. 5887 (Ordered Reported on June 7, 2012)
Summary: H.R. 5887, the Coast Guard and Maritime
Transportation Act of 2012, authorizes $8.6 billion for the
Coast Guard for fiscal year 2013, $8.7 billion for fiscal year
2014, and $8.76 billion for fiscal year 2015. The bill also
makes amendments to laws regarding Coast Guard authorities,
shipping, and navigation. Specifically, H.R. 5887 provides for
a 1.7 percent military pay raise in fiscal year 2013,
consistent with the budget request; extends the date on which
new fishing vessels must be classed to give the Coast Guard
sufficient time to provide guidance to the fishing industry and
shipyards; prevents the Coast Guard from reducing the number of
Response Boat-Mediums it plans to acquire until the Service
provides the Committee with adequate justification; prevents
the Coast Guard from removing parts from the its polar
icebreaker, USCGC POLAR SEA, until the Service provides the
Committee with a business case analysis on the reactivation and
service life extension of the POLAR SEA; and includes
provisions providing greater parity in authority between the
Department of Defense and the Coast Guard.
On June 1, 2012, Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime
Transportation Chairman Frank A. LoBiondo introduced H.R. 5887,
The Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Act of 2012. The
Subcommittee on Coast Guard & Maritime Transportation held an
oversight hearing to review the Administration's budget
proposal on March 7, 2012, an oversight hearing on how Coast
Guard regulations impact the maritime sector on April 26, 2012,
and an oversight hearing the Service's acquisition program on
May 16, 2012. On June 7, 2012, the Committee on Transportation
and Infrastructure met in open session to consider H.R. 5887,
and ordered the bill, as amended, reported favorably to the
House of Representatives by voice vote with a quorum present.
Title: The Marine Debris Act Reauthorization Amendments of
2011
Bill Number: H.R. 1171 (Ordered Reported on June 7, 2012)
Summary: H.R.1171, the Marine Debris Reauthorization
Amendments of 2011, reauthorizes the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) Marine Debris Program.
NOAA's Marine Debris Program addresses the adverse impact of
marine debris on the economy, the marine environment, and
navigation safety through voluntary programs that help
identify, assess, prevent, reduce, and remove marine debris.
H.R. 1171 would reauthorize NOAA's Marine Debris Program at
currently appropriated levels through fiscal year 2015, clarify
the purpose of the Marine Debris Program, and amend the Act to
provide a definition of ``marine debris.''
On March 17, 2011, Representative Sam Farr introduced H.R.
1171, the Marine Debris Act Reauthorization Amendments of 2011.
The Subcommittee on Coast Guard & Maritime Transportation held
an oversight hearing to review ways to improve Coast Guard
operations and implement efficiencies on July 26, 2011. H.R.
1171 was among the major topics discussed at the hearing. On
June 7, 2012, the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure met in open session to consider H.R. 1171, and
ordered the bill, as amended, reported favorably to the House
of Representatives by voice vote with a quorum present.
Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency
Management
During the 112th Congress, the Subcommittee on Economic
Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management,
chaired by Representative Jeff Denham, with Delegate Eleanor
Holmes Norton serving as Ranking Member, held 17 Subcommittee
hearings (73 witnesses and approximately 39 hours). The
Subcommittee also held two markup sessions and one roundtable
discussion.
HEARINGS
Title: Sitting on Our Assets: Cutting Spending and Private
Redevelopment of Underperforming Buildings
Date: February 10, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony on the costs to the taxpayer of
underperforming or vacant assets, models for their
redevelopment or reuse, and how spending can be reduced through
private redevelopment of underperforming assets. The hearing
was conducted pursuant to the Committee's plan for oversight of
real property management and Clause 2(n) of House Rule XI on
waste, fraud, abuse or mismanagement of government programs.
Summary: The Subcommittee received testimony from the
General Services Administration (GSA) Public Buildings Services
Commissioner, the director of the Physical Infrastructure Team
of the GAO, and the Chairman of the 2005 Department of Defense
Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission.
This field hearing was held at the Annex of the Old Post
Office Building on Pennsylvania Avenue, NW in downtown
Washington, DC. The Old Post Office Building is just one
example of a poorly managed federal property. The Annex, which
was built with $1.8 million in government funding in addition
to millions in private funds, has been unoccupied for ten
years. According to reports, the maintenance of the vacant
Annex costs taxpayers $6.5 million each year.
GSA testified in agreement that the Old Post Office
Building Annex was a commercial failure and that it would
transform the asset for better use and to put up a Request for
Proposals for private redevelopment. GSA told the Subcommittee
that it was taking the necessary steps to aggressively renovate
and reuse other underperforming federal properties across the
country. The Chairman of the 2005 BRAC Commission explained the
process for the past realignment of military installations and
how it could be applied to civilian property in order to
maximize value from underperforming assets.
Title: Managing Costs and Mitigating Delays in the Building
of Social Security's New National Computer Center
Date: February 11, 2011
Purpose: A joint oversight hearing between the Subcommittee
on Economic Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency
Management and the Committee on Ways and Means, Subcommittee on
Social Security to receive testimony on the site selection and
construction of the Social Security Administration's (SSA) new
national computer processing and data storage facility to
replace the National Computer Center (NCC), currently located
in Woodlawn, MD. The hearing was conducted pursuant to the
Committee's plan of supervision for the construction and
renovation of federal property under the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act of 2009.
Summary: The Subcommittees received testimony from the
Inspector General of the Social Security Administration, the
deputy commissioner of the GSA Public Buildings Service, and
the deputy commissioner of Systems for the SSA.
The Subcommittees previously held a joint hearing on the
new NCC on December 15, 2009. The new facility is funded from
the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, which provided $500
million for the project. The replacement of the NCC is the
single largest building project funded under the American
Recovery and Reinvestment Act.
The Subcommittees were concerned with delays in site
selection and its effect on the project's budget. GSA testified
that it had selected a site at Urbana in Frederick County, MD,
in early February 2011 and was beginning the process for
design/build construction solicitation. GSA noted that the
project remained on budget but pushed back the construction
completion date from October 2013 to September 2014. SSA
detailed aspects of the Information Technology (IT) workload
for the new NCC, which will take responsibility for certifying
payments of over $60 billion a month to 50 million American
seniors.
Title: Cutting Spending and Consolidating Federal Office
Space: GSA's Capital Investment and Leasing Program
Date: March 10, 2011
Purpose: Receive testimony on GSA's Capital Investment and
Leasing Program (CILP) including alteration, design,
modernization, construction, leasing and building purchase
activities. The hearing was conducted pursuant to the
Committee's plan for oversight of real property management and
the Federal Buildings Fund (FBF).
Summary: The Subcommittee received testimony from the
commissioner of GSA's Public Building Service (PBS). The CILP
provides the necessary resources to maintain current real
property assets and acquire new or replacement assets, through
ownership or leasing. The President's FY 12 Budget requests a
total of $9.5 billion in new obligational authority for the FBF
to fund various projects. At the hearing, the PBS Commissioner
testified about its requests for $840 million for new
construction projects including five new land ports of entry,
FBI consolidation in San Juan, PR, and the St. Elizabeth's DHS
consolidation in Washington, DC GSA also requested more than
$395 million in funding for repairs and alterations.
Title: Improving the Nation's Response to Catastrophic
Disasters: How to Minimize Costs and Streamline our Emergency
Management Programs
Date: March 30, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony on how to better respond to
disasters in the wake of the catastrophic earthquakes that
devastated Japan in early March 2011. The hearing was conducted
pursuant to the Committee's Oversight Plan for streamlining
emergency management programs.
Summary: The Subcommittee received testimony from
representatives of the Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA), the U.S. Forest Service, the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC), the American Red Cross, and state and local
emergency managers.
This hearing was held in response to the catastrophic
earthquakes that devastated Japan in early March 2011. It
specifically focused on using better coordination between
local, state, and federal authorities. With saving lives being
the top priority in disaster recoveries, minimizing costs and
cutting the bureaucratic red tape are also of utmost
importance.
FEMA testified on improvements made to disaster
preparedness through its ``Whole Community'' approach. This
program recognizes that FEMA is not the Nation's sole emergency
management team and to achieve maximum effectiveness in
preparedness and recovery, FEMA must work with the entire
emergency management community. FEMA also touched upon its
national public service campaign, Ready. The program partners
with the Advertising Council to educate and empower Americans
to prepare for and respond to all emergencies, including
natural disasters and potential terrorist attacks. The goal of
the campaign is to get the public involved and to increase the
level of basic preparedness across the Nation.
Title: Can a Civilian BRAC Commission Consolidate Federal
Office Space and Save Taxpayers Billions?
Date: April 6, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony on whether a civilian BRAC
process can effectively consolidate federal office space,
maximize value to the taxpayer, and save taxpayers billions.
The hearing was conducted pursuant to the Committee's plan for
oversight of real property management and Clause 2(n) of House
Rule XI on waste, fraud, abuse or mismanagement of government
programs.
Summary: The Subcommittee received testimony from the
Office of Management and Budget, the GSA, the GAO, and the
Chairman of the 2005 DoD BRAC Commission.
In FY 09, the Federal government spent $1.7 billion in
annual operating costs for underutilized buildings and $134
million annually for excess buildings. A civilian BRAC process,
which would establish a fair process of evaluating federal
space needs, has the potential to save the taxpayers billions
of dollars by addressing the currently underutilized federal
real property and over-reliance on costly leasing. GAO conducts
biennial reviews on high-risk areas within the Federal
government to bring focus to specific areas needing added
attention and oversight. Areas are identified as ``high'' risk
due to their greater vulnerabilities to fraud, waste, abuse,
and mismanagement or areas that need broad-based transformation
to address major economic, efficiency, or effectiveness
challenges. Unfortunately, despite executive orders and
memoranda issued during two administrations and acts of
Congress intended to improve the management of federal real
property, these problems persist. GAO acknowledged that while
the government works to improve its real property planning the
government still has not made significant reductions in excess
property. GAO added that a process similar to DoD's BRAC
Commission could help move this program forward.
Title: Richard H. Poff Federal Building Renovation: Is it
Costing the Taxpayer Too Much?
Date: April 14, 2011
Purpose: Receive testimony on the renovation and
modernization of the Richard H. Poff Federal Building, located
in Roanoke, Virginia. The hearing was conducted pursuant to the
Committee's plan of supervision for the construction and
renovation of federal property under the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-5).
Summary: The Subcommittee received testimony from
Congressman Bob Goodlatte, the Mid-Atlantic Regional
Administrator of the GSA, the Inspector General of GSA, and the
Clerk of the U.S. District Court of Western Virginia.
The costs of the Poff Federal Building renovation are
projected to exceed the project's estimated $51 million price
tag by $10-15 million or more. According to the GSA, the
purpose of the project is to update building systems and
improve its emergency efficiency by incorporating ``greening''
elements. Included in the American Recovery and Reinvestment
Act was $5.5 billion for the Federal Building Fund of the GSA.
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act designated $4.5
billion of those funds for converting GSA buildings into High
Performance Green Buildings, as defined by the Energy
Independence and Security Act (EISA) of 2007. The Richard H.
Poff Federal Building (Poff Federal Building) is included in
GSA's Spend Plan as an American Recovery and Reinvestment Act
project. The property is located in Roanoke, Virginia and was
constructed in 1975. It has approximately 316,000 gross square
feet of space and is occupied by the Department of Veterans
Affairs (VA) (49 percent), the U.S. Courts and U.S. Marshals
(36 percent), and other agencies (15 percent). Congressman
Goodlatte has expressed concerns and has followed up with GSA
and the GSA IG on a number of these issues, such as to the
cost-benefit analysis related to some of the greening elements,
whether the renovation costs are reasonable, whether renovation
was the most cost-effective solution for meeting the tenants'
space needs, and the impact of the construction on the tenant
agencies. In addition, Senators Webb and Warner, both of
Virginia, have also expressed concerns, particularly regarding
the impact of the renovation on current tenants.
Title: How to Stop Sitting on Our Assets: A Review of the
Civilian Property Realignment Act
Date: May 12, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony on specific legislative
proposals to employ a BRAC-like process to civilian properties
to produce significant savings to the taxpayer. The hearing was
conducted pursuant to the Committee's plan for oversight of
real property management and waste, fraud, abuse or
mismanagement of government programs.
Summary: The Subcommittee received testimony from the
Office of Management and Budget, the Department of State, the
Chairman of the 2005 Department of Defense BRAC Commission and
the private sector.
H.R. 1734, the Civilian Property Realignment Act, was
introduced by Subcommittee Chairman Jeff Denham on May 4, 2011.
The legislation would establish a framework through which a
board or commission would independently review Federal
properties and make recommendations for consolidations, co-
locations, redevelopment, selling or other actions to minimize
costs and produce savings for the taxpayer. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) estimates that the proposal could
save taxpayers more than $15 billion.
The Administration submitted a similar proposal for a
civilian BRAC in early 2011. The OMB Controller testified that
the differences between the Denham and Administration proposals
are bridgeable and that he looked forward to continuing to work
together to establish a civilian BRAC process. H.R. 1734, would
create a nine member commission appointed by the President and
confirmed by the Senate with input from House and Senate
leadership. The Administration's proposal requires Federal
agencies to send information and initial recommendations to the
Board. H.R. 1734 would require initial recommendations
submitted to the Commission be compiled through GSA, in
consultation with the chairperson of the Federal Real Property
Council, and analyzed against standardized criteria that are
consistent with the standards detailed in the legislation and
published in the Federal Register. The Administration's
proposal includes additional provisions for an annual review of
the postal field offices and an annual assessment of the assets
owned or managed by the State Department's Bureau of Overseas
Building Operations. The Administration's proposal terminates
the Board in 12 years. H.R. 1734 terminates the Commission in 6
years. H.R. 1734 also mandates an independent leasing authority
and requires that agencies seeking to lease space for the
purposes of a public building work through GSA to acquire such
space. The witnesses stressed the importance of private sector
participation and expertise to the success of the initiative.
The managing partner of JBG Companies, which invests, develops,
and manages commercial real estate in the Washington area,
testified if the private sector sees progress with a civilian
BRAC process and the opportunity to work with the Federal
government, many would ``come out of the woodwork'' with
proposals to better utilize Federal properties and save
taxpayers money.
Title: The Securities and Exchange Commission's $500
Million Fleecing of America
Date: June 16, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony on the Securities and Exchange
Commission's (SEC) management of its independent authority to
lease space and the May 16, 2011, SEC Inspector General (IG)
report related to SEC's lease procurement of 900,000 square
feet of space under a 10-year lease worth over $500 million.
The hearing was conducted pursuant to the Committee's plan for
oversight of agencies with independent leasing authority and
Clause 2(n) of House Rule XI on waste, fraud, abuse or
mismanagement of government programs.
Summary: The Subcommittee received testimony from the SEC,
the SEC Inspector General, and the GSA.
On July 28, 2010, the SEC entered into a sole source lease
for 900,000 square feet of space with an option to lease
500,000 additional square feet at Constitution Center located
at 7th and D Streets, SW, in Washington, DC. The SEC's
rationale for the need for new space related to passage of
Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act
(Dodd-Frank), which expanded SEC's responsibilities. The $556
million lease was ``negotiated'' in three business days and
signed on July 28, 2010, and not long after it was signed
questions were raised regarding whether the SEC needed the
space. The building is owned by David Nassif Associates
(Landlord) and is the former location of the Department of
Transportation headquarters. The building was completely
renovated by the Landlord to be a modern, efficient class-A
office building, reportedly exceeding Level IV security
standards and is expected to be rated LEED Gold, a top green
building certification. Following reports of the lease
agreement, the SEC IG initiated an investigation into the
lease. On May 16, 2011, the SEC IG concluded its investigation
and, at the request of the Subcommittee, the SEC released the
report to the Subcommittee.
Title: The Securities and Exchange Commission's $500
Million Fleecing of America: Part Two
Date: July 6, 2011
Purpose: The Subcommittee held a second hearing to receive
testimony on the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission's
(SEC) mismanagement of its independent authority to lease space
and the May 16, 2011 SEC IG report related to SEC's lease
procurement of 900,000 square feet of space under a 10-year
lease of Constitution Center in Washington, DC worth over $500
million. The hearing was conducted pursuant to the Committee's
plan for oversight of agencies with independent leasing
authority and Clause 2(n) of House Rule XI on waste, fraud,
abuse or mismanagement of government programs.
Summary: Received testimony from the Chairman of the SEC
and Inspector General of the SEC.
The SEC Chairman testified that she took full
responsibility for the misguided lease of Constitution Center.
Because of the Subcommittee's investigation, the SEC Chairman
agreed to give up the agency's independent leasing authority
and consult with GSA on future leasing opportunities.
The SEC IG testified that he had referred the investigation
to the Department of Justice. He also noted that several SEC
employees may face disciplinary action for backdating documents
that justified the lease.
Title: FEMA Reauthorization and Cutting the Red Tape in
Recovery
Date: July 14, 2011
Purpose: The Subcommittee held a hearing to examine the
issues of communities recovering from a disaster in the context
of a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
reauthorization. The hearing was conducted pursuant to the
Committee's Oversight Plan for streamlining emergency
management programs.
Summary: Received testimony from the Administrator of the
Federal Emergency Management Agency and state and local
emergency managers.
The Administrator of FEMA testified that pre-disaster
preparedness and mitigation are critical to recovery and
resilience-building. Additionally, timely decisions can
significantly reduce recovery time and cost. The FEMA
Administrator believed that it is important that all members of
the team understand their role in disaster response and
recovery and to begin to prepare for disasters before they
occur. The Administrator highlighted FEMA's recovery
capabilities and programs that can be provided when states
request federal assistance for presidentially declared
disasters of all sizes, including catastrophic events and
terrorist attacks. The process begins with quickly processing
state requests for disaster assistance. Then, after life-saving
and life-sustaining operations have ceased, the recovery
process requires the restoration of basic services within 60
days.
A representative of a federally recognized Indian tribe in
Arizona testified about their support for H.R. 1953,
legislation that would authorize Indian tribes to directly
request the President for a major disaster or emergency
declaration instead of being treated as a local entity.
Title: The Economic Development Administration: How to
Improve Effectiveness through Reforms and Consolidations
Date: July 27, 2011
Purpose: The Subcommittee held a hearing to receive
testimony on the Economic Development Administration (EDA) and
how its programs can be improved.
Summary: Received testimony from the EDA, the Government
Accountability Office (GAO), local economic development
officials, and the private sector.
EDA testified about its work to promote economic
development around the Nation in the current tough economic
climate. The EDA reported that their best investments foster
public and private partnerships as well as supporting ``bottom-
up'' business strategies from local and community leaders. The
EDA also testified that the agency was working on coordinating
its various efforts and trying to prevent the duplication of
other federal activities in certain areas.
GAO testified about its report regarding 80 economic
development programs whose purpose seems to overlap with
directives of federal agencies. EDA reported that the
Department of Commerce, the Department of Housing and Urban
Development, the U.S. Small Business Administration and the
Department of Agriculture appear to have taken actions to
implement some collaborative practices but have offered little
evidence so far that they have taken steps to develop
compatible policies or procedures with other federal agencies
or to search for opportunities to leverage physical and
administrative resources with their federal partners. GAO also
found that the agencies appear to collect only limited
information on program outcomes--information that is necessary
to determine whether this potential for overlap and
fragmentation is resulting in ineffective or inefficient
programs.
Title: Streamlining Emergency Management: Improving
Preparedness, Response, and Cutting Costs
Date: October 13, 2011
Purpose: The Subcommittee held a hearing to examine how the
emergency management system and programs can be streamlined to
reduce costs and improve preparedness and response.
Summary: Received testimony from the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA), the Department of Homeland Security
(DHS) Office of the Inspector General, state and local
emergency managers and the private sector.
FEMA testified that the more efficient its operations are,
the more people it can support and that the agency is
constantly looking for ways to cut costs and streamline its
processes. Through careful management of the Disaster Relief
Fund (DRF) funds; implementation of ``FEMAStat,'' a management
tool used to identify potential process improvements; and
increased oversight of contract administration, FEMA has
identified and capitalized upon numerous opportunities to use
its resources more efficiently. Over the past two years, FEMA
has put additional mechanisms in place to reduce costs and
identify funds that could be de-obligated and returned to the
DRF. By increasing the level of oversight of the status of
mission assignments, contracts, and grants, FEMA has been able
to return over $4.7 billion (as of September 27, 2011) to the
DRF since the beginning of FY 2010. In addition to improvements
to FEMA's operational efficiency, it also testified to having
increased the effectiveness of the Individual Assistance (IA)
program. FEMA's IA program provides assistance to individuals
and families after a disaster, including emergency assistance,
the Individuals and Households Program (IHP), Crisis Counseling
Program, Disaster Legal Services, Disaster Unemployment
Assistance and the Disaster Case Management Program.
The IG testified to areas in which improvement was needed
to speed recovery and reduce costs. The IG highlighted that
there were hundreds of field offices still open dating back to
the Northridge Earthquake. The IG asserted that speeding up
recovery would result in more timely closure of these offices
thus reducing administrative costs. The IG agreed that steps
like implementing cost estimating would help streamline the
process.
State emergency managers testified to the importance of
ensuring that state emergency management programs remain
resilient and that there is better coordination of resources
between federal, state, and local entities.
Title: A Review and Analysis of the Proposed $400 Million
Los Angeles, California Federal Courthouse Project
Date: November 4, 2011
Purpose: The Subcommittee held a hearing that focused on
the current justification of a third courthouse in Los Angeles,
California including the size, scope, compliance with courtroom
sharing guidelines, and cost implications of the entire
courthouse complex in Los Angeles.
Summary: Received testimony from the U.S. courts, the
General Services Administration (GSA) and the Government
Accountability Office (GAO). The hearing was conducted pursuant
to Clause 2(n) of House Rule XI on waste, fraud, abuse or
mismanagement of government programs.
The hearing was held in response to the GSA's insistence on
moving forward with construction of a new $400 million federal
courthouse in Los Angeles, California while ignoring profound
criticism that the project is unnecessary due to the actual
space needs for Federal judges and the lack of courtroom
sharing in the current Spring Street and Roybal courthouses. In
the view of the Subcommittee, the project would ultimately be a
wasteful expenditure of taxpayer money.
A Los Angeles Federal district court judge and GSA
testified to the need of the new courthouse. The Federal judge
reported that there were security concerns in the Spring Street
courthouse and that it was no longer meeting GSA's building
requirements for federal courthouses. First proposed in its
2001 Capital Investment and Leasing Program, GSA acknowledged
that the decade old project should have progressed more
efficiently.
GAO testified to the results of its recent reports, which
found that the addition of a third courthouse to the Los
Angeles courthouse complex would exceed the needs of their
judicial system. The GAO report has found this type of waste in
courthouses across the country. GAO found that the proposed
courthouse was designed to provide courtrooms to accommodate
the judiciary's estimate of 61 district and magistrate judges
in the Los Angeles Court by 2011--which, as of October 2011,
exceeds the actual number of such judges by 14. This disparity
calls into question the space assumptions on which the original
proposals were based. In addition, the Los Angeles court was
planning for less courtroom sharing than is possible. In 2011,
the judiciary also approved sharing for bankruptcy judges.
Additional courtroom sharing could reduce the number of
additional courtrooms needed for the Los Angeles courthouse,
thereby increasing the potential options for housing the Los
Angeles court.
Title: One Year Later: Still Sitting on Our Assets
Date: February 9, 2012
Purpose: The Subcommittee held a field hearing at the Annex
of the Old Post Office Building (OPO) on Pennsylvania Avenue NW
in downtown Washington, District of Columbia to receive
testimony on progress made in redeveloping the property as well
as the status of other underperforming and vacant federal
properties throughout the country. The hearing was conducted
pursuant to Clause 2(n) of House Rule XI on waste, fraud, abuse
or mismanagement of government programs.
Summary: Received testimony from the Commissioner of the
Public Buildings Service of the General Services Administration
(GSA).
The OPO Annex opened in the 1980s but was never fully
occupied. To this day, the Annex remains vacant and
deteriorating and GSA spends about $12 million to operate and
maintain the facility, which results in an annual operating
loss of $6.5 million. The Subcommittee held a field hearing at
the OPO a year ago on February 8, 2011, where members urged GSA
to redevelop the property through private investment.
During this hearing, GSA announced its plans to finally
redevelop the OPO by selecting a bid from Trump Hotel
Collection. GSA testified that there were several bids to
renovate the property into a hotel or office space and that the
GSA awarded preliminary approval to the Trump Organization. GSA
reported that the agency would begin negotiations with the
Trump Organization over the next year with a target
construction date in 2013.
The Subcommittee also questioned GSA on numerous
underutilized federal assets around the country including the
Cotton Annex in Washington, District of Columbia, the Los
Angeles Courthouse project, the Walter Hoffman United States
Courthouse project in Norfolk, Virginia, and the Thurgood
Marshall and Daniel Patrick Moynihan Federal Courthouses in New
York, New York.
Title: Sitting on Our Assets: The Cotton Annex
Date: March 22, 2012
Purpose: The Subcommittee held a field hearing at the
Cotton Annex at 300 12th Street SW in downtown Washington,
District of Columbia to receive testimony on the costs to
taxpayers of underperforming or vacant federal properties,
models for their redevelopment or reuse, and how spending can
be reduced through private redevelopment of underperforming
assets. The hearing was conducted pursuant to Clause 2(n) of
House Rule XI on waste, fraud, abuse or mismanagement of
government programs.
Summary: Received testimony from Senator Scott P. Brown (R-
MA) and Robert Peck, Commissioner of the Public Buildings
Service of the General Services Administration (GSA).
The Cotton Annex is an empty 89,000 square-foot building
occupying a substantially larger parcel of highly desirable but
underdeveloped land in Washington, District of Columbia. Much
of the prized site is taken up by a large parking lot. The
building was most recently occupied by the Department of
Agriculture, but has been vacant for the last five years. The
Congressional Budget Office conservatively estimated the sale
value of the building and land at $150 million.
Senator Scott Brown expressed his concern about GSA's
mismanagement of federal assets and testified about his efforts
to get federal property management reform legislation passed in
the Senate. Senator Brown noted that he would introduce a
companion bill to Subcommittee Chairman Jeff Denham's reform
legislation, H.R. 1734, the Civilian Property Realignment Act,
which passed the House of Representatives on February 7, 2012.
Commissioner Peck testified that the Cotton Annex
represents one of the few remaining developable parcels in
Washington, District of Columbia in GSA's inventory. The
Commissioner said that the operational costs of the vacant
building were $279,000 in FY 11 and that this was fully funded
by revenue gained from renting the facility's parking lot to
the Federal Protective Service. The Commissioner alluded to
various options that GSA was considering for the property,
including potential redevelopment scenarios for the renovation/
replacement of GSA's Heating Operations and Transmission
District (HOTD). Commissioner Peck also noted that given prior
studies showing that Federal construction presents the highest
and best use of the property, GSA's desire to locate agencies
in government-owned space, the potential uses this property may
have, and the fact that the property has generated a net
positive return, GSA has continued to hold on to this property.
Title: GSA's Squandering of Taxpayer Dollars: A Pattern of
Mismanagement, Excess, and Waste
Date: April 17, 2012
Purpose: The Subcommittee held a hearing to receive
testimony on GSA's waste of taxpayer dollars on a lavish 2010
Western Regional Conference (WRC), its ``Hats Off'' employee
rewards program, and other waste and abuse of taxpayer dollars.
The hearing was conducted pursuant to Clause 2(n) of House Rule
XI on waste, fraud, abuse or mismanagement of government
programs.
Summary: Received testimony from GSA Inspector General
Brian Miller, GSA Deputy Administrator Susan Brita, former GSA
Administrator Martha Johnson, Acting GSA Administrator Daniel
Tangherlini, GSA Chief Financial Officer Alison Doone, former
Commissioner of the GSA Public Buildings Service (PBS) Robert
Peck, Deputy PBS Commissioner David Foley, and PBS Events
Planner Lisa Daniels. Region 9 PBS Commissioner Jeff Neely was
invited to the hearing, but refused to testify.
On April 2, 2012, the GSA Inspector General issued a
Management Deficiency Report on the GSA Public Buildings
Service and its 2010 WRC. The IG indicates that the GSA Deputy
Administrator requested that the IG investigate allegations of
possible excessive expenditures and employee misconduct related
to the 2010 WRC. The 2010 conference had approximately 300
attendees and occurred at the M Resort Spa Casino just outside
Las Vegas, Nevada. The IG found that the total cost of the
conference was $822,751 including $136,504 spent on eight pre-
conference scouting trips alone. The report also found that
over $75,000 was spent in a ``team building'' exercise, where
several bicycles were assembled for charity. Conference
planners also ignored protocols for bid contracts for hotels
and A/V companies and even hired a mind-reader and a clown,
among other outlandish purchases. The GSA IG report found that
this conference was overly excessive, wasteful, and in some
cases impermissible.
The hearing focused primarily on the 2010 WRC and other
examples of gross misconduct by GSA employees that arose during
the investigation. Officials were also questioned about the
rapidly growing budget of the Public Buildings Service and
requests were again made by Subcommittee leaders for a detailed
and transparent list of the agency's administrative costs.
Title: Sitting on Our Assets: The Georgetown Heating Plant
Date: June 19, 2012
Purpose: The Subcommittee held a field hearing at the
Georgetown Heating Plant at 1051 29th Street NW in Washington,
DC to receive testimony on the costs to the taxpayer of
underperforming or vacant assets and ensuring that the process
for the planned sale of the Georgetown Heating Plant provides
the highest return to the taxpayer. The hearing was conducted
pursuant to Clause 2(n) of House Rule XI on waste, fraud, abuse
or mismanagement of government programs.
Summary: Received testimony from Mr. Flavio Peres, Deputy
Assistant Commissioner of Real Property Utilization and
Disposal for the General Services Administration (GSA).
The Georgetown Heating Plant, also known as the West Heat
Plant, was constructed in 1948 to provide steam to federal
buildings on the west side of the city. The plant was
decommissioned in 2000 and subsequently served as a fuel
storage site and a parking facility for government vehicles.
Since ceasing operation as a steam plant, the facility has cost
the taxpayer more than $3.5 million in operating expenses,
despite the fact that the facility sits in the densely
developed area of Georgetown adjacent to high value real estate
development. The facility was only declared surplus property in
November 2011, 11 years after it was closed as a steam plant.
GSA is now commencing its marketing and appraisal efforts and
intends to sell the property through a public sale targeted for
the fall of 2012. GSA intends the property to be sold ``As-is,
Where-is'' and there is no indication as to how the local city
agencies will zone the site for private use. However,
immediately surrounding the facility is dense commercial and
residential development, including retail, hotels, and
residences.
The Deputy Commissioner testified that GSA formally
declared the parcel excess to its needs on October 19, 2011. As
the first step in the disposal process, GSA screened the
property for other Federal needs, and with no expressions of
interest, declared the property surplus to the Government's
needs in November 2011. After conducting required homeless
screening in accordance with the McKinney-Vento Homeless Act,
GSA commenced marketing and appraisal efforts in support of a
public sale of the property. The Deputy Commissioner stated
that GSA was proceeding with required reviews under the
National Environmental Policy Act and the National Historic
Preservation Act, and that these evaluations were slated for
completion in the late summer 2012. GSA testified that the
property would be sold by online auction at realestatesales.gov
in fall 2012 and that it already had a great deal of interest
from private sector developers. Upon questioning by members of
the Subcommittee as to the perceived value of the plant, the
Deputy Commissioner refused to give an estimate, but said that
it would be ``substantial.''
ENACTED LEGISLATION
Title: To designate the United States Courthouse under
construction at 98 West First Street, Yuma, Arizona, as the
``John M. Roll United States Courthouse''
Public Law Number: P.L. 112-2 (February 17, 2011)
Bill Number: S. 188
Summary: The law designated the United States Courthouse
under construction at 98 West First Street, Yuma, Arizona, as
the John M. Roll United States Courthouse.
Judge John M. Roll was born in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, in
1947. After moving to Arizona, he studied at the University of
Arizona, where he received both his undergraduate and law
degrees. His distinguished legal career spanned nearly forty
years and included prosecutorial positions at the city, county,
and federal levels. Roll began his career by serving as an
assistant city attorney in Tucson, Arizona and later as deputy
county attorney in Pima County, Arizona. He was later appointed
a state judge and served on the Arizona Court of Appeals, where
he became vice-chief judge. In 1991, Roll was nominated to the
federal bench by President George H.W. Bush. In 2006, he was
elevated to chief judge of the U.S. District Court of Arizona.
On January 8, 2011, Judge Roll was assassinated in a
shooting massacre at an Arizona supermarket that left six
people dead and thirteen wounded, including Congresswoman
Gabrielle Giffords of Tucson.
Title: To designate the Federal building and United States
Courthouse located at 217 West King Street, Martinsburg, West
Virginia, as the W. Craig Broadwater Federal Building and
United States Courthouse
Public Law Number: P.L. 112-11 (April 25, 2011)
S. Number: S. 307
Summary: The law designates the Federal Building and the
United States Courthouse located at 217 West King Street,
Martinsburg, West Virginia, as the ``W. Craig Broadwater
Federal Building and United States Courthouse.''
Judge Broadwater was born on August 8, 1950 in Elk City,
Oklahoma. He attended West Virginia University, where he earned
his undergraduate and law degrees. He spent several years in
private practice until he was appointed as a state circuit
judge. In 1996, President Clinton nominated him to the federal
bench in the Northern District of West Virginia and he was
confirmed by the Senate.
In addition to his time as a U.S. District Court judge,
Broadwater was a decorated military officer. After being
commissioned in the U.S. Army in 1972, he began his career with
a tour in Korea as an Army Military Intelligence Officer.
Broadwater continued his service with the West Virginia
National Guard, where he eventually rose to the rank of
Brigadier General. His awards included the Defense Superior
Service Medal and the Bronze Star.
Judge Broadwater died on December 18, 2006 after a long
battle with cancer. He is survived by his wife and three
children.
Title: Authorizing the use of the Capitol Grounds for the
Greater Washington Soap Box Derby
Resolution Number: H. Con. Res. 16 (Passed the House on May
11, 2011)
Summary: H. Con. Res. 16 authorizes the use of the Capitol
Grounds for the Greater Washington Soap Box Derby.
Title: Authorizing the use of the Capitol Grounds for the
National Peace Officers' Memorial Service.
Resolution Number: H. Con. Res. 46 (Passed the House on May
11, 2011)
Summary: H. Con. Res. 264 permits the Grand Lodge of the
Fraternal Order of Police and its auxiliary to sponsor a free
public event, the 30th annual National Peace Officers' Memorial
Service, on the Capitol grounds on May 15, 2011, to honor the
law enforcement officers who died in the line of duty during
2010.
Title: To designate the United States Courthouse located at
80 Lafayette Street in Jefferson City, Missouri, as the
``Christopher S. Bond United States Courthouse.''
Public Law Number: P.L. 112-31 (September 23, 2011)
Bill Number: S. 846
Summary: The law designated the United States Courthouse
located at 80 Lafayette Street in Jefferson City, Missouri, as
the ``Christopher S. Bond United States Courthouse.''
Senator Bond was born in St. Louis, Missouri on March 6,
1939. He pursued his undergraduate degree at Princeton
University and his law degree at the University of Virginia.
After law school, he clerked for the Chief Judge of the United
States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in Atlanta,
Georgia.
After some time in private practice in Washington, DC, he
moved back to Missouri, where he was elected as Missouri State
Auditor in 1970. In 1972, he was elected Governor of Missouri
at the age of 33, making him the youngest governor in state
history and first Republican governor to serve in almost three
decades. Although he lost his reelection bid in 1976, he
reclaimed the governorship in 1980 and served a second term. In
1986, he was elected to the U.S. Senate, where he served for 24
years until his retirement in 2011. During his long tenure, he
served on several committees and was Chairman of the Committee
on Small Business and Entrepreneurship from 1995 to 2001.
Title: Authorizing the use of the Capitol Grounds for the
District of Columbia Special Olympics Law Enforcement Torch Run
Resolution Number: H. Con. Res. 67 (Passed the House on
September 7, 2011)
Summary: H. Con. Res. 264 authorized the use of the Capitol
Grounds for the 26th Annual District of Columbia Special
Olympics Law Enforcement Torch Run that will be held on
September 30, 2011.
Title: Designating room HVC 215 of the Capitol Visitor
Center as the ``Gabriel Zimmerman Meeting Room''
Bill Number: H. Res. 364 (Passed the House on November 30,
2011)
Summary: H. Res. 364 was introduced by Rep. Wasserman-
Schultz on July 21, 2011.
This resolution would designate room HVC 215 of the Capitol
Visitor Center as the ``Gabriel Zimmerman Meeting Room.''
Gabriel Zimmerman served as Director for Community Outreach for
Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords of Arizona. At approximately
10:10 a.m. on January 8, 2011, a gunman attempted the
assassination of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, opening fire
at her ``Congress on Your Corner'' event in front of a Safeway
supermarket in Tucson, Arizona, killing Zimmerman and 6 others
while critically wounding 13, including Congresswoman Giffords.
Gabriel Zimmerman was a 1998 graduate of University High
School in Tucson, Arizona, a 2002 graduate of the University of
California at Santa Cruz, and a 2006 graduate of Arizona State
University, where he received a Master's degree in social work.
Prior to joining Congresswoman Giffords' staff, Zimmerman
worked as a social worker assisting troubled youth. Gabriel
Zimmerman began his Congressional career in January 2007 as
Constituent Services Supervisor for then newly elected
Congresswoman Giffords, a role in which he supervised a robust
constituent services operation and worked directly with the
people of Arizona's Eighth Congressional District. He was later
promoted to Director of Community Outreach, where he organized
hundreds of events to allow constituents to meet with the
Congresswoman.
Gabriel Zimmerman was the first Congressional staffer in
history to be murdered in the performance of his official
duties.
Title: John F. Kennedy Center Reauthorization Act of 2012
Public Law Number: P.L. 112-131 (June 8, 2012)
Bill Number: H.R. 4097 (Passed the House on May 7, 2012)
Summary: H.R. 4097 was introduced by Chairman John Mica on
February 28, 2012. This bill reauthorizes the John F. Kennedy
Center Act. It also authorizes an expansion project for the
south end of the facility with stipulations that it will be
less than 100,000 square feet and will improve the existing
accessibility and educational functions of the building. The
project will use non-appropriated funds. The legislation
authorizes $22.3 million for Maintenance, Repair, and Security
as well as $13.6 million for capital projects for fiscal years
2013 and 2014.
OTHER LEGISLATION
Title: To re-designate the Federal building and United
States Courthouse located at 200 East Wall Street in Midland,
Texas, as the ``George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush United
States Courthouse and George Mahon Federal Building''
Bill Number: H.R. 362 (Passed the House on May 2, 2011)
Summary: H.R. 362 re-designates the Federal building and
United States Courthouse located at 200 East Wall Street in
Midland, Texas, as the George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush
United States Courthouse and George Mahon Federal Building.
The former presidents George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush
have honorably served this Nation for many decades. President
George H.W. Bush dedicated his life to public service. His
public service began when he was just 18 and enlisted in the
armed forces. He became the youngest pilot in the Navy when he
earned his wings and flew 58 combat missions, receiving the
Distinguished Flying Cross for bravery in action after getting
shot down by anti-aircraft fire.
Later, he was elected to Congress as a representative from
the state of Texas and served in this chamber for two terms.
Subsequently, he served in various other public service
positions critical to the Nation, including as Ambassador to
the United Nations, as Chief of the U.S Liaison Office in
China, and as Director of the Central Intelligence Agency. He
was later elected Vice President in 1982 and stood by President
Ronald Reagan's side for eight years, contributing to the
policies that brought the Cold War to an end. In 1988, he was
elected the 41st President of the United States. During his
term in office, he skillfully navigated the diplomacy with new
nations created following the breakup of the Soviet Union and
helped to overthrow and bring to justice the corrupt Manuel
Noriega regime in Panama. In February 2011, President George
H.W. Bush was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom by
President Barack Obama. This award is the highest civilian
honor given for ``an especially meritorious contribution to the
security or national interests of the United States, world
peace, cultural, or other significant public or private
endeavors.''
In 2000, his son, George W. Bush, followed in his footsteps
when he was elected the 43rd President of the United States,
after serving six years as the Governor of Texas. President
George W. Bush led our Nation in response to the worst
terrorist attack on our soil. He helped to unite the Nation
after the 9-11 terrorist attacks and, under his leadership, led
the reforms of our intelligence and security capabilities to
better counter this unconventional threat. During his two
terms, he effectuated the overthrow of a dictator in Iraq and
removed the Taliban from power in Afghanistan, upsetting a key
staging ground for al-Qaida and bringing democracy to an
oppressed country.
Title: To direct the Administrator of General Services to
transfer administrative jurisdiction, custody, and control of
the building located at 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, in the
District of Columbia, to the National Gallery of Art, and for
other purposes.
Bill Number: H.R. 690 (Ordered reported on February 16,
2011)
Summary: H.R. 690, the Federal Trade Commission and
National Gallery of Art Facility Consolidation, Savings, and
Efficiency Act of 2011, requires the Administrator of GSA, not
later than December 31, 2014, to transfer administrative
jurisdiction, custody, and control of the building located at
600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, in Washington, DC, to the National
Gallery of Art (NGA) and to name such building as the North
Building of the National Gallery of Art. The legislation
requires the National Gallery of Art to pay the costs of
remodeling, renovating, or reconstructing such building. The
Administrator of GSA also must relocate the offices of the
Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to other modernized buildings in
Washington, DC, that are owned by the Federal government.
H.R. 690 saves the taxpayers an estimated $300 million in
avoided renovation and lease costs of the FTC and NGA.
Additional benefits include $200 million in non-taxpayer
renovations of the Apex Building by the NGA. The Apex building
will be utilized more efficiently by the NGA, as currently only
a little more than half of the facility's 306,000 square feet
is usable for FTC operations.
Title: Committee Resolution--To reduce facility costs by
consolidating National Gallery of Art and Federal Trade
Commission operations in the District of Columbia
Date: February 16, 2011 (Approved by Full Committee)
Summary: Expressed the Committee's view that the GSA shall
transfer administrative jurisdiction and custody and control of
the building located at 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington,
DC to the National Gallery of Art and relocate the Federal
Trade Commission, currently located at 600 Pennsylvania Avenue
NW, Washington, DC.
Title: To designate the United States courthouse under
construction at 101 South United States Route 1 in Fort Pierce,
Florida, as the ``Alto Lee Adams, Sr., United States
Courthouse.''
Bill Number: H.R. 1791 (Passed the House on November 14,
2011)
Summary: This bill designates the United States courthouse
under construction at 101 South United States Route 1 in Fort
Pierce, Florida, as the ``Alto Lee Adams, Sr., United States
Courthouse.''
Chief Justice Adams was born in 1899 and was raised on a
farm in Walton County, Florida. After graduating from the
University of Florida College of Law in 1921, he practiced law
in Fort Pierce, Florida from 1924 to 1938. He was then
appointed as Circuit Court Judge for St. Lucie County. After
Floridians adopted an amendment to add a seventh justice on the
state Supreme Court in 1940, Governor Fred Cone appointed Chief
Justice Adams to the newly created seat. Chief Justice Adams
served on the Court from 1940 until 1951 and was Chief Justice
from 1949 until 1951. He sat on the bench again from 1967 until
1968.
Outside of his judicial career, Chief Justice Adams was
active in his community. In 1937, he served as President of the
Florida State Elks Association. From 1937-1938, he served as
the Vice Chairman of the State Welfare Board. Chief Justice
Adams also devoted time to local business interests in St.
Lucie County, including citrus groves and Bass Motors. He began
a cattle ranch in 1937, which is still run by the Adams family.
The ranch now encompasses over 65,000 acres in three counties.
Title: The National Women's History Museum and Federal
Facilities Consolidation and Efficiency Act of 2011
Bill Number: H.R. 2844 (Ordered reported to the House on
October 13, 2011)
Summary: H.R. 2844 was introduced by Committee Chairman
John Mica on September 9, 2011.
The legislation directs the Administrator of General
Services (GSA) to convey, by quitclaim deed, to the National
Women's History Museum, Inc. (the Museum) specified property
(commonly known as the ``Cotton Annex'' site) in the District
of Columbia, on terms which the Administrator deems
appropriate. It requires the purchase price for the property to
be: (1) its market value based on its highest and best use, as
determined by an independent appraisal performed under the
assumption that the property does not contain any hazardous
substances, waste, or pollutants requiring a response under
applicable environmental laws; and (2) paid into the Federal
Buildings Fund. It requires the property to be dedicated for
use as a site for a national women's history museum for a 99-
year period and prohibits using federal funds to purchase the
property or design and construct any facility on such property.
The bill also directs the Administrator, not later than
December 31, 2012, to transfer administrative jurisdiction,
custody, and control of the building located at 600
Pennsylvania Avenue NW, in Washington, DC, to the National
Gallery of Art and to name such building as the North Building
of the National Gallery of Art. It requires the National
Gallery of Art to pay the costs of remodeling, renovating, or
reconstructing such building and prohibits the use of
appropriated funds for the initial costs of such activities. It
directs the Administrator to relocate the Federal Trade
Commission (FTC) employees and operations housed in such
building to specified space in the leased building known as the
Constitution Center located at 400 7th Street SE, in
Washington, DC.
Title: The Brian A. Terry Memorial Act
Bill Number: H.R. 2668 (Ordered reported to the House on
October 13, 2011)
Summary: H.R. 2668 was introduced by Rep. Issa on July 27,
2011.
This legislation would honor the sacrifice of Border Patrol
Agent Brian A. Terry by designating the station of the United
States Border Patrol located at 2136 South Naco Highway in
Bisbee, Arizona, as the ``Brian A. Terry Border Patrol
Station.''
A native of Flat Rock, Michigan, Agent Brian A. Terry
proudly served his country with the United States Marine Corps
and continued his service as a police officer with the cities
of Ecorse and Lincoln Park, Michigan, prior to joining the
United States Border Patrol. Agent Terry was a member of the
699th Session of the Border Patrol Academy assigned to the Naco
Border Patrol Station within the Tucson Sector.
On December 14, 2010, Border Patrol Agent Brian A. Terry
was conducting a Border Patrol Tactical unit (BORTAC) operation
in the area of ``Peck Wells.'' At 11:15 p.m., near Rio Rico,
Arizona, and about 15 miles north of Nogales, Arizona, Agent
Terry and his team spotted a group of individuals approaching
their position. Officials later found the suspects to be
preying on illegal immigrants with the intent to rob them.
Shortly thereafter, an encounter ensued and gunfire was
exchanged that left Agent Terry mortally wounded by a bullet
fired from an AK-47. Agent Terry succumbed to his injuries on
December 15, 2010.
Title: The Civilian Property Realignment Act
Bill Number: H.R. 1734 (Passed the House on February 7,
2012)
Summary: H.R. 1734 was introduced by Subcommittee Chairman
Jeff Denham on May 4, 2011. The legislation would establish a
framework through which a board or commission would
independently review Federal properties and make
recommendations for consolidations, co-locations,
redevelopment, selling or other actions to minimize costs and
produce savings for the taxpayer. OMB estimates that the
proposal could save taxpayers more than $15 billion.
Title: To designate the United States Courthouse at 222
West 7th Avenue, Anchorage, Alaska, as the ``James M.
Fitzgerald United States Courthouse.''
Public Law Number: P.L. 112-101 (Signed by the President on
March 14, 2012)
S. Number: S. 1710 (Congressman Don Young introduced a
House companion bill, H.R. 3182, on October 13, 2011).
Summary: The law designates the United States Courthouse at
222 West 7th Avenue, Anchorage, Alaska, as the ``James M.
Fitzgerald United States Courthouse.'' Judge James M.
Fitzgerald had 47 years of experience as a judge both in the
State of Alaska and on the Federal bench. He was one of the
first judges appointed to the Superior Court in Alaska when
Alaska became a state in 1959 and was later appointed to the
Alaska Supreme Court in 1972. In 1974, President Ford appointed
Judge Fitzgerald to the U.S. District Court for the District of
Alaska where he remained until his retirement in 2006. Prior to
his service as a judge, he was an assistant U.S. attorney and
upon moving to Alaska worked as the city attorney in Anchorage
and as legal counsel to the Governor of Alaska. He also served
as the first state commissioner of public safety and helped
organize the Alaska State Troopers.
Title: FEMA Reauthorization Act of 2012
Bill Number: H.R. 2903 (Ordered reported to the House on
March 8, 2012)
Summary: H.R. 2903 reauthorizes the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA), the Urban Search and Rescue System
(US&RS), and the Emergency Management Assistance Compact Grants
(EMAC) at current year levels.
Additionally, H.R. 2903 provides a framework for FEMA's
upgrade of its old Emergency Alert System (EAS) to the
Integrated Public Alert and Warning System (IPAWS). The
language was developed in response to problems identified by
the Government Accountability Office (GAO) as well as key
stakeholders who are an integral part of ensuring the
development of IPAWS is successful, including State and local
emergency managers, broadcasters, and the wireless industry.
Title: To designate the new United States Courthouse in
Buffalo, NY as the ``Robert H. Jackson United States
Courthouse''
Bill Number: H.R. 3556 (Ordered reported to the House on
March 8, 2012)
Summary: Justice Jackson was born on February 13, 1892 in
Pennsylvania and was raised in Frewsburg, New York. He attended
the Albany School of Law and was admitted to the New York Bar
in 1913 and joined a law practice in Jamestown, NY. He later
moved to practice in Buffalo where he also served as city
corporation counsel.
In 1936, Jackson became Assistant Attorney General under
President Franklin D. Roosevelt, heading the Antitrust
Division. From 1938 to 1940, Jackson was nominated as the U.S
Solicitor General. In 1940, President Roosevelt nominated him
to become U.S. Attorney General. In 1941, President Roosevelt
nominated him as an associate justice on the U.S. Supreme Court
where he served until his death in 1954.
Title: Authorizing the use of the Capitol Grounds for the
District of Columbia Special Olympics Law Enforcement Torch Run
Resolution Number: H. Con. Res. 118 (Passed the House on
May 7, 2012)
Summary: H. Con. Res. 118 authorized the use of the Capitol
Grounds for the 27th Annual District of Columbia Special
Olympics Law Enforcement Torch Run held on June 1, 2012.
Title: Authorizing the use of the Capitol Grounds for the
Greater Washington Soap Box Derby
Resolution Number: H. Con. Res. 106 (Passed the House on
May 7, 2012)
Summary: H. Con. Res. 106 authorized the use of the Capitol
Grounds for the Greater Washington Soap Box Derby held on June
16, 2012.
Title: Authorizing the use of the Capitol Grounds for the
National Peace Officers' Memorial Service
Resolution Number: H. Con. Res. 117 (Passed the House on
May 7, 2012)
Summary: H. Con. Res. 117 permitted the Grand Lodge of the
Fraternal Order of Police and its auxiliary to sponsor a free
public event, the 31st annual National Peace Officers' Memorial
Service, on the Capitol grounds on May 15, 2012, to honor the
law enforcement officers who died in the line of duty during
2011.
Title: To designate the United States Courthouse at 100
North Church Street in Las Cruces, New Mexico as the ``Edwin L.
Mechem United States Courthouse.''
Bill Number: H.R. 3742 (Ordered Reported to the House on
June 7, 2012)
Summary: Judge Edwin Mechem was born on July 2, 1912 in
Alamogordo, NM. After attending schools in New Mexico, he
transferred to the University of Arkansas at Fayetteville where
he received a degree in law. Mechem returned to New Mexico to
practice in Las Cruces and Albuquerque. From 1942-1945, he
served as an FBI agent and from 1947-1948, he served as a
member of the New Mexico House of Representatives. Mechem was
elected Governor of New Mexico in 1950 and 1952, did not run in
1954 to seek a U.S. Senate Seat, and was elected again in 1956
and 1960. He also served as a U.S. Senator from 1962 to 1964.
In 1970, he was appointed by President Richard Nixon as a
federal judge for the U.S. District Court for the District of
New Mexico. He served from 1970-1982 and took senior status
from 1982 until his death in 2002.
Title: To designate the United States Courthouse located at
709 West 9th Street in Juneau, Alaska, as the ``Robert
Boochever United States Courthouse.''
Bill Number: H.R. 4347 (Ordered Reported to the House on
June 7, 2012)
Summary: Judge Boochever was born on October 2, 1917 in New
York City, NY. He attended Cornell University where he received
his B.A. and LL.D. During World War II, he served as a Captain
in the United States Army Infantry. After the war, he was an
assistant U.S. Attorney in Juneau, Alaska from 1946-1947 and
then in private practice until 1972. He served as a Justice of
the Alaska Supreme Court from 1972 to 1980, where he was Chief
Justice from 1975-1978.
In 1980, Judge Boochever was nominated by President Jimmy
Carter to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth
Circuit. He assumed senior status on 1986 and served until his
death in 2011.
LEASE PROSPECTUSES APPROVED
On March 8, 2012, the Committee approved 11 General
Services Administration (GSA) lease resolutions. They included
the Department of Interior--National Park Service, the Federal
Communications Commission, the Department of Veterans Affairs,
the Department of Health and Human Services-CDC, the National
Institutes of Health, the Department of State--U.S. Agency for
International Development, the National Science Foundation, the
Office of Director of National Intelligence, the Department of
Labor, the Food and Drug Administration, and the U.S. Coast
Guard.
The Committee approved resolutions represent a $19,493,319
reduction in annual lease payments and $316,770,420 total
reduction over the lease terms from the prospectuses submitted
by the Administration or current leases.
Department of Interior--National Park Service--Washington,
DC--PDC-02-WA11
Rentable Square Feet: 158,000
Lease Term: 15 years
Annual Rent: $7,742,000
Federal Communications Commission--Washington, DC--PDC-03-
WA11
Rentable Square Feet: 64,745
Lease Term: 10 years
Annual Rent: $3,172,505
Department of Veterans Affairs--Washington, DC--PDC-01-WA11
Rentable Square Feet: 181,000
Lease Term: 15 years
Annual Rent: $8,507,000
Department of Health and Human Services--CDC--Suburban
Maryland--PMD-01-WA11
Rentable Square Feet: 104,000
Lease Term: 15 years
Annual Rent: $3,536,000
National Institutes of Health--Suburban Maryland--PMD-02-
WA11
Rentable Square Feet: 352,717
Lease Term: 20 years
Annual Rent: $11,992,378
Department of State--International Development--Washington,
DC--PDC-12-WA11
Rentable Square Feet: 392,302
Lease Term: 15 years
Annual Rent: $19,222,798
National Science Foundation--Northern Virginia--PVA-01-WA11
Rentable Square Feet: 667,759
Lease Term: 15 years
Annual Rent: $24,200,000
Office of Director of National Intelligence--Northern
Virginia--PVA-09-WA12
Rentable Square Feet: 183,000
Lease Term: 20 years
Annual Rent: $7,137,000
Department of Labor--Northern Virginia--PVA-02-WA11
Rentable Square Feet: 100,000
Lease Term: 3 years
Annual Rent: $3,800,000
Food and Drug Administration--Suburban Maryland--PMD-07-
WA11
Rentable Square Feet: 101,000
Lease Term: 3 years
Annual Rent: $3,434,000
U.S. Coast Guard--Corpus Christi, TX--PTX-07-CC12
Rentable Square Feet: 180,000
Lease Term: 20 years
Annual Rent: $3,530,200
Subcommittee on Highways and Transit
To date, the Subcommittee on Highways and Transit, chaired
by Representative John J. Duncan, Jr., with Representative
Peter A. DeFazio serving as Ranking Member, held four
Subcommittee hearings and six Full Committee hearings (57
witnesses and approximately 12 hours), covering numerous issues
within the jurisdiction of the Subcommittee.
HEARINGS
Title: Accelerating the Project Delivery Process:
Eliminating Bureaucratic Red Tape and Making Every Dollar Count
Date: February 15, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony related to improving the
existing laws and regulations governing project delivery in
order to accelerate the delivery process for surface
transportation projects. The hearing was part of the
Subcommittee's efforts to reauthorize Federal surface
transportation programs under SAFETEA-LU, which expired on
September 30, 2009, but was extended through September 30,
2011.
Summary: Limited financial resources for transportation
infrastructure can be more effectively utilized by speeding up
the process for project approval. According to the ``Highway
Planning and Project Development Process'' timeline put
together by the Federal Highway Administration, the Federal
project delivery process can take up to 15 years from planning
through construction. An analysis conducted by the National
Surface Transportation Policy and Revenue Committee found that
a $500 million project that took 14 years to complete would see
its cost double due to the impact of delays and inflation.
The Subcommittee heard testimony from Victor Mendez,
Administrator of the FHWA, Debra L. Miller, Secretary of the
Kansas DOT on behalf of the American Association of State
Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), Will Kempton,
Chief Executive Officer of the Orange County Transportation
Authority, Tom Margro, Chief Executive Officer of the
Transportation Corridor Agencies, and Michael Replogle, Global
Policy Director and Founder of the Institute for Transportation
and Development Policy.
The Subcommittee heard testimony specifically relating to
streamlining and cutting red tape that so often hinders the
cost-effectiveness of surface transportation projects. The
Subcommittee discussed with the witnesses the improvements that
could be made to existing rules and regulations governing
project delivery in order to expedite the delivery process for
all projects and reduce the cost of transportation projects. As
the reauthorization of the Federal surface transportation
programs moves forward, the Subcommittee will look at potential
reforms to the project delivery process.
Title: Improving and Reforming the Nation's Surface
Transportation Programs
Date: March 29, 2011 and March 30, 2011
Purpose: Received stakeholder testimony related to the
reauthorization of the Federal surface transportation programs.
These hearings were part of the Subcommittee's effort to
reauthorize Federal surface transportation programs under
SAFETEA-LU, which expired on September 30, 2009, but was
extended through September 30, 2011.
Summary: The Subcommittee received testimony regarding
views and proposals on reauthorization of the Federal surface
transportation programs from the surface transportation
community, including highways, transit, highway safety and
motor carrier safety interests. The witnesses offered ideas and
suggestions for improving and reforming the Nation's surface
transportation programs.
The Highway Account of the HTF had a balance of $22.55
billion at the end of FY 2000. The balance dropped to $13
billion by the expiration of TEA 21--the previous six-year
surface transportation authorization--at the end of FY 03. In
September 2008, the balance in the Highway Account decreased to
a level requiring Congress to transfer $8 billion into the HTF
from the General Fund. Subsequent General Fund transfers to the
HTF in 2009 and 2010 totaled $26.5 billion. Current projections
show the cash balance in the Highway Account of the HTF will be
depleted sometime in 2013 and the Mass Transit Account will be
depleted sometime in 2014.
With the HTF expected to be depleted in 2013, the witnesses
provided ideas for innovative financing tools and private
investment in financing surface transportation projects,
methods the Subcommittee will explore to help the Federal
government and states find ways to do more with less and better
leverage existing revenue sources. The Subcommittee also
gathered ideas on potential reforms to the project delivery
process and explored what improvements could be made to
existing rules and regulations governing project delivery in
order to expedite the delivery process for all projects and
reduce the cost of transportation projects.
DOT currently administers over 100 highway, transit, and
highway safety programs, many of which serve duplicative
purposes or are no longer needed. The Subcommittee discussed
with the witnesses approaches that would consolidate or
eliminate duplicative or unnecessary programs. The Subcommittee
will study performance management approaches that increase the
accountability and transparency of Federal surface
transportation funds moving forward to ensure their
effectiveness.
Title: Policy Proposals from Members of Congress to Reform
the Nation's Surface transportation Programs
Date: April 5, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony from Members of Congress on
their policy proposals for the reauthorization of the Federal
surface transportation programs. This hearing was part of the
Subcommittee's effort to reauthorize Federal surface
transportation programs under SAFETEA-LU, which expired on
September 30, 2009, but was extended through September 30,
2011.
Summary: The Subcommittee received testimony from Members
of Congress representing Ohio, California, Kentucky, New York,
Texas, Oregon, North Carolina, Connecticut, Massachusetts, and
Pennsylvania who presented ideas and policy proposals for
improving and reforming the Nation's surface transportation
programs.
Compounding the state, local, and private sector funding
and financing shortfalls severely hinders the ability to
adequately finance surface transportation programs. Members
addressed the critical issue of Federal surface transportation
funding and financing shortfalls the Nation faces. With the HTF
expected to be depleted in 2013, Members provided the
Subcommittee with innovative financing tool proposals and ideas
for private investment in financing surface transportation
projects; methods the Subcommittee will explore to help the
Federal government and states find ways to do more with less
and better leverage existing revenue sources. The Subcommittee
also looked at potential reforms to the project delivery
process by exploring what improvements could be made to
existing rules and regulations governing project delivery in
order to expedite the delivery process for all projects and
reduce the cost of transportation projects.
Members provided the Subcommittee with specific policy
proposals that would streamline the project delivery process,
develop a programmatic reform agenda, propose innovative
financing solutions, and create a system of performance
standards that increase transparency and accountability of
Federal surface transportation funds. With the HTF expected to
be depleted in 2013, Members provided the Subcommittee with
innovative financing tools and private investment in financing
surface transportation projects they supported and methods the
Subcommittee will explore to help the Federal government and
states find ways to do more with less and better leverage
existing revenue sources.
Title: National Infrastructure Bank: More Bureaucracy and
More Red Tape
Date: October 12, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony related to the Administration's
national infrastructure bank proposal that is part of the
American Jobs Act of 2011 (H.R. 12). The hearing was part of
the Subcommittee's effort to reauthorize Federal surface
transportation programs under SAFETEA-LU, which expired on
September 30, 2009, but is extended through March 31, 2012.
Summary: The Subcommittee heard from the Secretary of the
Oklahoma Department of Transportation, a Senior Research Fellow
from the Heritage Foundation, a Civil Engineer and
Transportation Economist from the Independent Institute, a
former member of the National Surface Transportation
Infrastructure Financing Commission, and the Director of Public
Policy from the Progressive Policy Institute. The witnesses
offered ideas and suggestions on improvements, as well as
alternatives, to the national infrastructure bank proposal
offered by the Obama Administration, including suggestions to
better utilize both the Transportation Infrastructure Finance
and Innovation Act (TIFIA) program and state infrastructure
banks (SIBs).
On September 8, 2011, President Obama transmitted to
Congress the American Jobs Act of 2011. President Obama's
proposal would create the American Infrastructure Financing
Authority (AIFA), capitalized with $10 billion, to leverage
private and public capital and to invest in a broad range of
infrastructure projects of national and regional significance.
The AIFA would be run by a board of directors consisting of
seven voting members selected by the President and confirmed by
the Senate. The majority leader of the Senate, the minority
leader of the Senate, the Speaker of the House of
Representatives and the minority leader of the House of
Representatives would each recommend one person to the
President to be nominated to the board. The President would
select the other three board nominees on his own. Only four of
the board members could be from the same political party.
The AIFA would provide loans or loan guarantees to
transportation infrastructure projects on highways, bridges,
transit, airports, ports, inland waterways and rail systems
(including high-speed rail); water infrastructure projects at
wastewater treatment facilities, storm water management
systems, solid waste disposal facilities, drinking water
treatment facilities, dams and levees; and energy
infrastructure projects for pollution reduced energy
generation, transmission and distribution, storage, and energy
efficiency enhancements for buildings (public and commercial).
In the selection of projects, the board of director of AIFA
would give consideration to the economic, financial, technical,
environmental, public benefits and cost of each infrastructure
project under consideration and would prioritize those projects
based on their contribution to regional or national economic
growth, value to taxpayers, demonstration of a clear and
significant public benefit, job creation, and environmental
concerns.
The President's proposal is similar to the existing TIFIA
program, which supplements traditional surface transportation
funding and financing methods by providing Federal credit
assistance to surface transportation projects of regional and
national significance. The President's proposal is also similar
to state infrastructure banks. SIBs are revolving fund
mechanisms that allow states to finance highway, transit, and
rail projects through loans and credit enhancements by
utilizing their Federal surface transportation funds.
According to the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA),
TIFIA has provided $8.4 billion in credit assistance to 24
projects totaling over $31 billion in total investment. In FY
11, 34 projects submitted letters of interest seeking $14
billion in TIFIA loans and in FY 10, 39 projects submitted
letters of interest seeking $12 billion in TIFIA loans. In both
years the program had the capacity to issue approximately $1
billion in loans.
According to FHWA, since the creation of the program in
1995, a total of $661 million in Federal funds have been used
to capitalize SIBs. SIBs have made $6.25 billion in loan
agreements over the 16 years since they were authorized--a
1:9.45 ratio. Each dollar of Federal funds used to capitalize
SIBS, combined with state funds and bonds issued against these
funds, has resulted in 9.45 times the credit assistance
compared to the original Federal capitalization.
LEGISLATION
Title: The Surface Transportation Extension Act of 2011
Public Law Number: P.L. 112-5 (March 4, 2011)
Bill Number: H.R. 662
Summary: The Surface Transportation Extension Act of 2011
(STEA) extends, through September 30, 2011, the authority for
Federal surface transportation programs originally authorized
under the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient,
Transportation Equity Act--a Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) that
otherwise would have expired on or ceased to apply after March
4, 2011.
STEA also authorized funding for the Federal highway,
transit, and highway safety programs for FY 11. Rather than
authorizing additional funding for highway projects earmarked
in SAFETEA-LU, STEA provides that funding to the States and
allows them to fund projects that they choose. STEA authorizes
the Federal Transit Administration to distribute funding
provided for transit earmarks in SAFETEA-LU through a
competitive process.
STEA also extends the authority to expend funds from the
Highway Trust Fund and the Sport Fish Restoration and Boating
Trust Fund to October 1, 2011.
Title: Surface and Air Transportation Programs Extension
Act of 2011
Public Law Number: P.L. 112-30 (September 16, 2011)
Bill Number: H.R. 2887
Summary: The Surface and Air Transportation Programs
Extension Act of 2011 extends, through March 31, 2012, the
authority for Federal surface transportation programs
originally authorized under the Safe, Accountable, Flexible,
Efficient, Transportation Equity Act--a Legacy for Users
(SAFETEA-LU) that otherwise would have expired on or ceased to
apply after September 30, 2011. The bill also authorized
funding for the Federal highway, transit, and highway safety
programs for the first half of FY 12.
The Surface and Air Transportation Programs Extension Act
of 2011 also extends the authority to expend funds from the
Highway Trust Fund and the Sport Fish Restoration and Boating
Trust Fund to April 1, 2012.
Title: Surface Transportation Extension Act of 2012
Public Law Number: P.L. 112-102 (March 30, 2012)
Bill Number: H.R. 4281
Summary: The Surface Transportation Act of 2012 extends,
through June 30, 2012, the authority for Federal surface
transportation programs originally authorized under the Safe,
Accountable, Flexible, Efficient, Transportation Equity Act--a
Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) that otherwise would have expired
on or ceased to apply after March 31, 2012. The bill also
authorized funding for the Federal highway, transit, and
highway safety programs for the third quarter of FY 12.
The Surface Transportation Act of 2012 also extends the
authority to expend funds from the Highway Trust Fund and the
Sport Fish Restoration and Boating Trust Fund to July 1, 2012.
Title: The American Energy and Infrastructure Jobs Act
Bill Number: H.R. 7 (Reported to the House on February 13,
2012)
Summary: This five year, $260 billion bill authorizes
funding at current levels for Federal-aid highway, public
transportation, and highway and motor carrier safety programs
through FY 2016. In addition to authorizing funds, this bill
makes significant programmatic reforms by reducing bureaucratic
delay, enhancing the project delivery process, reforming
surface transportation programs, increasing safety, and better
leveraging existing resources in order to enhance productivity
and create more jobs for the American people. The new Federal
Highway Program created by this bill focuses primarily on the
National Highway System, dedicating more than half of the
funding provided for the program to funding projects on the
National Highway System.
Currently, there are over 100 Federal surface
transportation programs, dozens of which were created over the
last 50 years to address issues beyond the Federal government's
original programmatic goals. Many of these programs are
duplicative or do not serve a National interest, but add to the
massive Federal bureaucracy. This bill reforms surface
transportation programs by consolidating or eliminating
approximately 70 programs that are duplicative or do not serve
a Federal purpose. Rather than applying spending cuts evenly
across all existing programs, this bill identifies programs
that serve similar purposes and consolidates or eliminates
them. Furthermore, this bill lifts the mandate that States
spend highway funding on non-highway activities. States will be
permitted to fund such activities if they choose, but they will
be provided the flexibility to identify and address their most
critical infrastructure needs.
Additionally, H.R. 7 increases the value of infrastructure
resources by better leveraging existing Federal funds and
adopting policies that attract private sector investment. This
bill builds upon and improves the successful Transportation
Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA) loan program
by dedicating $1 billion a year towards the program to provide
low interest loans to fund transportation projects. Providing
additional funding for TIFIA will help meet demand for credit
assistance for transportation projects and enable increased
leveraging of Highway Trust Fund dollars with State, local, and
private-sector funding. Under this initiative, existing lanes
on the Interstate Highway System remain toll-free; however,
States will have the ability to toll new capacity on the
Interstate System. States will also have greater flexibility to
toll non-Interstate highways. Moreover, H.R. 7 rewards States
that create and capitalize State Infrastructure Banks to
provide loans for transportation projects at the State and
local level. This bill increases the percentage of Federal
highway funding that a State can dedicate to a State
Infrastructure Bank from 10 percent to 15 percent and provides
States a specific amount of funding that can only be used to
fund State Infrastructure Banks.
Government bureaucracy and red tape in the approval and
permitting process needlessly delay infrastructure projects.
According to the Federal Highway Administration, highway
projects can take up to 15 years to complete. While State and
local governments deal with the seemingly endless review
process, transportation capacity and safety improvements stall,
construction costs escalate, and job creation remains on hold.
H.R. 7 streamlines and condenses the project review process by
cutting bureaucratic red tape, allowing Federal agencies to
review transportation projects concurrently, setting hard
deadlines for Federal agencies to approve projects, and
delegating more decision making authority to States.
H.R. 7 directs a strong focus towards giving States more
flexibility and holding them accountable through strict
performance measures and transparency requirements. States will
maintain the opportunity to fund the broad range of eligible
projects under the current Surface Transportation and
Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality programs, but they will
not be required to spend a specific amount of funding on
specific types of projects, such as transportation museums or
landscaping. More than 90 percent of Federal Highway Program
funding will be distributed through formula programs to State
departments of transportation, allowing State and local
transportation officials to prioritize projects.
Title: Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act
(MAP-21)
Bill Number: H.R. 4348 (Conference Report approved by the
House on June 29, 2012)
Summary: The Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century
Act (MAP-21) reauthorizes federal highway, transit and highway
safety programs at current funding levels through the end of
fiscal year 2014. The Act includes significant reforms to cut
federal red tape and bureaucracy, consolidate and eliminate
duplicative programs or programs which are not in the federal
interest, and ensure that states have more flexibility to focus
funding on their most critical needs. The Act contains no
earmarks and does not increase spending. Highlights of the
measure include:
Streamlining the Project Delivery Process--Completing a
major highway project can take 15 years, but only a fraction of
that time involves actual construction. While projects navigate
the approval process, construction costs escalate. MAP-21
streamlines the project approval process, adding much needed
common sense and efficiency.
Program Reform & Consolidation--Since the creation of the
Highway Trust Fund and the core highway and bridge programs,
numerous additional federal programs have been created,
diluting the focus of the Trust Fund. Currently there are well
over 100 programs. In the last four years, $35 billion in
General Fund transfers have been necessary to maintain Highway
Trust Fund solvency. MAP-21 consolidates and eliminates
programs, and better focuses limited gas tax revenues on
critical needs.
Improves Safety--MAP-21 includes provisions to strengthen
highway and motor carrier safety programs. The legislation
consolidates National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
incentive grant programs, and increases funding flexibility for
states that qualify for safety incentive grants. The measure
also improves motor carrier safety in a balanced fashion that
does not over-regulate the industry, as the initial Senate
proposal would have done.
Hazmat Safety--MAP-21 reauthorizes the Department of
Transportation's hazardous materials safety programs, secures
reforms to the hazmat special permits and approvals program,
and removes burdensome statutory changes. The legislation also
bans proposed wetlines regulation until the Government
Accountability Office can analyze costs and benefits.
Title: Temporary Surface Transportation Extension Act of
2012
Bill Number: H.R. 6064 (Introduced on June 29, 2012)
Summary: The Temporary Surface Transportation Extension Act
of 2012 extends, through July 6, 2012, the authority for
Federal surface transportation programs originally authorized
under the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient,
Transportation Equity Act--a Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) that
otherwise would have expired on or ceased to apply after June
30, 2012. The bill also authorized funding for the Federal
highway, transit, and highway safety programs through July 6,
2012, to allow time for enrollment of H.R. 4348, which
reauthorizes these programs through fiscal year 2014. In
addition, the bill extends the authority to expend funds from
the Highway Trust Fund and the Sport Fish Restoration and
Boating Trust Fund to July 6, 2012.
Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials
To date, the Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines, and
Hazardous Materials, chaired by Representative Bill Shuster,
with Representative Corrine Brown serving as Ranking Member,
has held five hearings on issues related to rail and hazardous
materials, one roundtable discussion on pipeline safety issues,
and one pipeline-related hearing. Additionally, the Full
Committee held five rail-related hearings and one roundtable
discussion during this period. The Subcommittee heard from 74
witnesses, including the 30 witnesses from the five full
Committee hearings under its jurisdiction.
HEARINGS
Title: Roundtable--Developing True High Speed Rail to the
Northeast Corridor: Stop Sitting on Our Federal Assets
Date: January 27, 2011
Purpose: Continued the discussion on developing high-speed
rail in the NEC, including a broad range of stakeholders,
financial investors, and local government participants.
Summary: Directly after the field hearing, Members of the
Committee convened for a follow-up roundtable. The 12
roundtable participants included representatives from Amtrak,
the FRA, Northeastern State representatives, infrastructure
investment companies, local planning organizations, national
advocacy groups, rail labor, and an advocacy organization for
Amtrak riders.
Title: Sitting on our Assets: Rehabilitating and Improving
our Nation's Rail Infrastructure
Date: February 17, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony on the Railroad Rehabilitation
& Improvement Financing (RRIF) program, highlighting its
importance in helping railroads, States and other public
authorities to finance the development of railroad
infrastructure, which in turn creates new jobs and drives
economic benefits.
Summary: Testimony highlighted RRIF loan applicants'
experiences with the RRIF program, and recommended ways to
improve the DOT's management of the program. The Subcommittee
heard testimony from the Deputy Secretary of DOT, short line
and commuter railroad representatives, and two rail industry
financial advisors. Discussions centered on how to make the
RRIF program more effective and widely utilized, and to speed
up the loan process at DOT.
Railroad infrastructure is crucial to our Nation's economic
growth and international competitiveness. The RRIF program
provides low-interest federal loans and loan guarantees to
finance further development of railroad infrastructure. RRIF
loans are available to railroads, rail freight shippers, state
and local governments, and government-sponsored authorities,
and are used to make critical infrastructure improvements,
refinance debt, or develop new facilities. Despite these clear
advantages of the RIFF loan program, loan evaluations are often
a long process that impedes infrastructure improvements to our
Nation's railways. The bureaucratic red tape coupled with the
environmental protection issues, changes in scope, limited
personnel on the part of short line railroads, and the
intrinsic complexity of some proposals make the RIFF
application process slow and burdensome. The Subcommittee
proposed the feasibility of removing some of these impediments,
particularly within the DOT, to make the RRIF loan program more
effective and popular.
On March 28, 2011, the Subcommittee held a bipartisan,
staff-level workshop with staff from DOT, rail industry
representatives, national advocacy organizations, and rail
industry financial advisors to more fully discuss proposed
changes and improvements to the RRIF program, for possible
inclusion in the upcoming surface transportation
reauthorization bill.
Title: Roundtable--Pipeline Safety
Date: March 7, 2011
Purpose: Discussed pipeline safety issues with elected
officials, Federal and State pipeline safety regulators,
industry stakeholders, and safety advocates discussion in King
of Prussia, Pennsylvania, in response to two pipeline incidents
in Pennsylvania in early 2011 and to gather information as part
of the Subcommittee's efforts to reauthorize the Federal
pipeline safety programs which expired on September 30, 2010.
Summary: Participating in the discussion were Members of
the Pennsylvania congressional delegation, Alan Mayberry,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety for the DOT,
Ed Pawlowski, Mayor of Allentown, PA, Craig White, CEO of
Philadelphia Gas Works, John Walsh, CEO of UGI Utilities, Inc.,
Robert Powelson, Chairman of the Pennsylvania Utility
Commission, Rick Kessler, Vice President of the Pipeline Safety
Trust, and a representative of the Mayor of Philadelphia.
Participants discussed the natural gas pipeline explosion that
occurred in Philadelphia on January 18, 2011, and the natural
gas pipeline explosion that occurred in Allentown on February
9, 2011. Participants also discussed the division of
responsibilities between Federal and State regulators and
pipeline owners and operators. In addition, the participants
discussed changes that should be made in Federal and State laws
to improve pipeline safety.
Title: Finding Ways to Encourage and Increase Private
Sector Participation in Passenger Rail Service
Date: March 11, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony on intercity passenger rail in
the U.S. and how to make it more effective and less expensive,
specifically through private competition and to examine the FRA
and Amtrak's implementation of the Passenger Rail Investment
and Improvement Act of 2008 (PRIIA).
Summary: Witnesses suggested reforms to Federal intercity
passenger rail programs for possible inclusion in the upcoming
surface transportation reauthorization bill. The Subcommittee
heard testimony from the Administrator of the FRA, a vice
president of Amtrak, a State department of transportation, an
expert in international models of competitive rail operations,
a representative of independent rail operators, and the AFL-
CIO.
Created in 1970 under the Rail Passenger Service Act,
Amtrak has been the sole provider of regularly scheduled
intercity passenger rail since 1981. Amtrak operates at a loss,
averaging a per-ticket taxpayer subsidy of $54.48 per ticket.
By comparison, commuter railroads are able to contract out
service elements to private companies that specialize in
providing those services. Amtrak competes with the private rail
companies to provide commuter rail services. Currently, 11 of
the 23 commuter rail systems in the U.S. are operated by
private sector operators, eight are operated in-house by the
local transit authority, and four are operated under contract
by Amtrak.
PRIIA, the most recent passenger rail authorization, allows
for greater State control of intercity passenger rail
initiatives and participation by private sector service
providers. This same law also included provisions to improve
Amtrak service, cost-effectiveness, and accountability. If
implemented correctly, PRIIA would improve Amtrak's performance
and service along with its bottom line.
Title: Federal Regulatory Overreach in the Railroad
Industry: Implementing the Rail Safety Improvement Act
Date: March 17, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony on implementation of the Rail
Safety Improvement Act of 2008 (RSIA), focusing on the FRA's
rule implementing requirements for freight and passenger
railroads to install positive train control systems by December
31, 2015.
Summary: The Subcommittee heard testimony from
Representative Elton Gallegly (CA-24), the daughter of a victim
of the 2008 Metrolink crash, the FRA Associate Administrator
for Safety, one representative each from the Class I freight
railroads, the shortline railroads, and commuter railroads, and
a rail labor union representative. Discussions centered on the
DOT's final rule implementing of positive train control mandate
included in the Rail Safety Improvement Act, and on how that
rule goes beyond Congressional intent and violates President
Obama's Executive Order on January 2011, which directs that
regulations shall be cost-effective and based on the best
possible science, and shall not be overly burdensome on
affected industries and the U.S. economy.
The Rail Safety Improvement Act (RSIA) comprises Division A
of the broad rail authorization bill signed in 2008. Division B
is comprised of the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement
Act, or PRIIA, which was the topic of the March 11, 2011,
oversight hearing. RSIA includes major provisions meant to
improve safety of freight and passenger rail operations for the
benefit of rail passengers, employees, and communities. The
RSIA includes a mandate for the installation of positive train
control (PTC) technology on freight main lines carrying toxic-
by-inhalation cargo and on all passenger rail lines. PTC
technology is designed to automatically stop or slow a train
before accidents caused by human error. The inclusion of the
PTC mandate in RSIA was in part spurred by a major commuter
rail accident in September 2008 in Chatsworth, California, in
which 25 people were killed and 135 injured.
In January 2010, FRA published its final rule to implement
the PTC mandate, causing great concern in the rail industry
that the FRA rule exceeded the scope of the agency's regulatory
powers. The 20-year costs to Class I and commuter railroads of
implementing PTC are estimated by FRA to be $13.21 billion,
with a cost-to-benefit ratio of 22:1. Short line railroads
would also be adversely affected although they are not
explicitly required to install PTC. Instead, since they operate
on tracks that would have been made PTC-compatible, short lines
would also have to upgrade their own equipment.
Title: Railroad and Hazardous Materials Transportation
Programs: Reforms and Improvements to Reduce Regulatory Burdens
Date: April 7, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony from stakeholders in the rail
and hazardous materials safety areas regarding legislative
priorities for changes or reforms to current law authorizations
and administrative regulatory policies at the FRA and the
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA)
and to focus on the areas of intercity passenger rail, high-
speed rail, rail safety, and rail financing along with
hazardous materials transportation safety.
Summary: The Subcommittee heard testimony from nineteen
witnesses, including representatives from the National
Transportation Safety Board, Amtrak, private rail providers,
rail associations, manufacturing associations, and several
unions. Because of the variety of stakeholders, there were a
variety of messages heard by the Subcommittee regarding the
impact of FRA and PHMSA programs and regulations on the
stakeholders' businesses. The Subcommittee will analyze all
testimony received in this hearing as they prepare a Rail Title
and Hazardous Materials Transportation Safety Title for the
Surface Transportation reauthorization bill.
Title: Reducing Regulatory Burdens and Ensuring Safe
Transportation of Hazardous Materials
Date: April 12, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony on the reauthorization of the
hazardous materials safety programs of the PHMSA, which expired
in 2008, focusing on how to reduce the regulatory burdens, and
how to transport hazardous materials safely and efficiently.
Summary: The invited witnesses included the Administrator
of PHMSA, representatives of parties interested in
transportation of hazardous materials, and the Teamsters Union.
Discussions centered on hazardous materials regulations and
their impact on a variety of hazardous materials manufacturers,
offerors, and shippers, and the employees of these businesses.
PHMSA promulgates and enforces hazardous materials
regulations for all modes of transportation. There are 1.4
million daily movements of hazardous materials. These materials
are essential to the U.S. economy and the general public.
The Subcommittee discussed streamlining the regulation
process to prevent duplication, increase uniformity, and
transparency. Background checks, equitable enforcement,
international representation, state hazardous materials
permits, cargo tank wetlines, special permits and approvals,
package opening and inspection, and preemption issues were
among the topics discussed.
Title: Silvertip Pipeline Oil Spill in Yellowstone County,
Montana
Date: July 14, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony related to the July 1, 2011
release of crude oil from the Silvertip Pipeline in Yellowstone
County, Montana.
Summary: The Committee heard testimony from the
Administrator of the Pipelines and Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration (PHMSA), the President of the ExxonMobil
Pipeline Company, and a scientist from the National Wildlife
Federation. Senator Jon Tester (R-MT) also gave a statement at
the beginning of the hearing, at the request of Rep. Denny
Rehberg (MT-At Large).
After the Silvertip pipeline incident in Yellowstone
County, Montana in July of 2011, the Subcommittee found the
witness testimony to be useful in generating discussions on
PHMSA regulations and ExxonMobil corporate policy. Given that
the U.S. has the largest network of energy pipelines in the
world, the safety and enhanced reliability of pipeline
transportation must be a priority. By examining ways to improve
safety and coordination between regulators on the federal,
state, and local level, pipeline spills and accidents can be
avoided if not altogether eliminated.
LEGISLATION
Title: The Pipeline Safety, Regulatory Certainty, and Job
Creation Act of 2011
Bill Number: H.R. 2845 (Reported on December 1, 2011; House
Report 112-297, Part I)
Summary: H.R. 2845 amends title 49, United States Code, to
reauthorize the federal pipeline safety programs administered
by the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
(PHMSA) of the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) for FY
12 through 2015. H.R. 2845 provides for enhanced safety in
pipeline transportation and provides for enhanced reliability
in the transportation of the Nation's energy products by
pipeline. The bill also ensures regulatory certainty which will
help create a positive environment for job development.
The bill increases the maximum amount of civil penalties
the U.S. can seek from pipeline owner or operators who violate
pipeline safety rules and regulations. H.R. 2845 requires
states eliminate most exemptions to their ``Call Before You
Dig'' programs in order to receive federal grant funding. The
bill allows the Secretary to issue a rulemaking requiring the
installation of automatic and remote-controlled shutoff valves
on newly constructed transmission pipelines but does not
require operators to retrofit existing pipelines.
The bill requires the Secretary to study expanding pipeline
integrity management requirements and leak detection systems
but gives Congress the final say in whether or not the
requirements should be expanded or the leak detection systems
should be required. H.R. 2845 requires USDOT and pipeline
operators to provide information to first responders on the
location of pipelines in their jurisdiction. The bill requires
USDOT to review regulations regarding accident reporting
requirement for pipeline operators.
The bill authorizes funding to be appropriated for several
pipeline safety programs. Specifically, the bill authorizes
$107 million a year to be appropriated for safety inspections.
The bill also authorizes grants to states funded from pipeline
safety fees collected from pipeline operators. Further, it
authorizes approximately $13 million a year to be appropriated
out of the General Fund for emergency response grants and
damage prevention programs.
Title: To provide for the resolution of the outstanding
issues in the current railway labor-management dispute
Bill Number: H.J. Res. 91
Summary: This resolution would require the parties
represented by the National Carriers' Conference Committee and
the National Railway Labor Conference to settle specified
disputes between railway carriers and their railroad employees
(represented by specified labor unions) to prevent a freight
labor strike at 12:01 a.m. on December 6, 2011, by implementing
the report and recommendations of the Presidential Emergency
Board No. 243 issued on November 5, 2011.
Title: American Energy and Infrastructure Jobs Act
Bill Number: H.R. 7
Summary: The Subcommittee had two titles in H.R. 7, as
reported by the Committee on Feb. 3, 2012: Title VIII,
Railroads, and Title IX, Hazardous Material Transportation.
Both titles of the bill eliminated unnecessary or duplicative
federal programs, decreased regulatory burdens on private
industry and strived to set realistic goals by leveraging
federal investments, streamlined project delivery, reduced
regulatory burdens, reformed Amtrak, and promoted
accountability and transparency. No earmarks were included, and
existing law earmarks were eliminated. This bill is the basis
of the House conferee negotiations with the Senate on surface
transportation reauthorization.
Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment
To date, the Subcommittee on Water Resources and
Environment, Chaired by Bob Gibbs of Ohio, with Timothy Bishop
of New York serving as the Ranking Member, held three joint
hearings, one roundtable and 15 subcommittee hearings (with 94
witnesses spanning 36.5 hours), covering the breadth of issues
within the purview of the subcommittee.
The jurisdiction of the Subcommittee includes the civil
works programs of the Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) and the
clean water and Superfund programs of the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA). Other agencies under the
Subcommittee's jurisdiction include the Tennessee Valley
Authority (TVA), the Saint Lawrence Seaway Development
Corporation, the International Boundary Water Commission, and
certain programs of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration and the Natural Resources Conservation Service.
The Subcommittee shares the goals of the Full
Transportation and Infrastructure Committee: creating jobs,
saving the tax payer money, and reducing the size of the
federal government with the added goal of maintaining our
Nation's safe, clean and usable water resources. The hearings
and legislation of the Subcommittee demonstrate a commitment to
oversight over the EPA's Clean Water Act programs and the Corps
of Engineers Civil Works mission. In addition to many oversight
opportunities, unique challenges facing the Subcommittee
include aging water resources infrastructure, under funded
programs and expansive, overreaching federal policies.
HEARINGS
Title: Improving Oil Spill Prevention and Response,
Restoring Jobs, and Ensuring our Energy Security:
Recommendations from the National Commission on the BP
Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling
Date: February 11, 2011
Purpose: A joint hearing between the Subcommittees on Water
Resources and Environment and Coast Guard and Maritime
Transportation to hear testimony regarding the BP Deepwater
Horizon oil spill and the status of offshore drilling
operations and safety.
Summary: In the wake of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill,
the National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill
and Offshore Drilling was created to find the root cause of the
accident and provide recommendations on how to prevent such
disasters and improve response in the future. The Commission
issued their report on January 11, 2011, and it contained 14
specific recommendations that fell under the jurisdiction of
the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
The witnesses' testimonies elaborated on the 14
recommendations made in the report, ranging from creating an
independent agency within the Department of Interior to enforce
regulations on offshore drilling, to raising the liability cap
on oil production facilities, to increasing communication
between Federal agencies and local governments during a Spill
of National Significance. The Subcommittee will continue to
provide oversight of waters, energy independence, and jobs.
Title: To Consider Reducing the Regulatory Burden Posed by
the Case National Cotton Council v. EPA (6th Cir. 2009) and to
Consider Related Draft Legislation
Date: February 16, 2011
Purpose: A joint hearing between the Subcommittee on Water
Resources and Environment and the Agriculture Committee's
Subcommittee on Nutrition and Horticulture. The purpose was
twofold: to hear testimony regarding the 6th Circuit Court's
ruling on the National Cotton Council v. EPA and to consider
draft legislation that would address the judicial decision.
Summary: Stakeholders from across the country and a
representative of the EPA gave testimony that spoke to the
burden that redundant regulation placed on their localities.
The hearing resulted in the introduction of H.R. 872, the
Reducing Regulatory Burdens Act of 2011, which was reported
favorably by both the Transportation and Infrastructure and
Agriculture Committees and was passed by the House.
Title: Review of the FY 12 Budget and Priorities of the
Environmental Protection Agency: Impacts on Jobs, Liberty, and
the Economy
Date: March 2, 2011
Purpose: Following the release of the President's budget
request for FY 12, the Subcommittee met to review the budget
and priorities of the EPA. Nancy Stoner, Acting Assistant
Administrator, Office of Water, EPA, and Mathy Sanislaus,
Assistant Administrator, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency
Response, were witnesses.
Summary: Members questioned the EPA on agency
``guidances,'' the use of numerical nutrient standards
throughout the country, and other expansions of the EPA's
regulations.
Title: Review of the FY 12 Budget and Priorities of the
Army Corps of Engineers, Tennessee Valley Authority, and the
Natural Resources Conservation Service: Finding Ways To Do More
With Less
Date: March 8, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony from the Honorable Jo Ellen
Darcy, Assistant Secretary of the Army--Civil Works, Lt. Gen.
Robert Van Antwerp, Chief Engineer of the Army Corps, John
Thomas, Chief Financial Officer of the Tennessee Valley
Authority (TVA), and Thomas Christiansen, a regional
conservationist with the Department of Agriculture's Natural
Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), regarding how the
President's budget impacts their agencies.
Summary: The Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) provides water
resources development projects, usually through cost-sharing
partnerships with nonfederal sponsors. Navigation, flood damage
reduction, shoreline protection, hydropower, dam safety, water
supply, recreation, environmental restoration and protection,
are all activities in the Corps' Civil Mission. The FY 12
budget reduces most major accounts that fund Corps projects and
activities. TVA supplies power to nearly eight million people
over an 80,000 square mile service area. Their responsibilities
include the multi-purpose management of land and water
resources throughout the Tennessee Valley and fostering
economic development. The NRCS facilitates Small Watershed
Programs, Surveys and Planning, Flood Prevention Operations and
Watershed Rehabilitation Programs.
The hearing highlighted the role of the Corps and NRCS in
the development of water infrastructure. Both entities face
shrinking budgets but by no means diminished demands on water
infrastructure. Questions from Members focused on the need for
the Corps to maximize benefit to cost, streamline their
processes, and work more closely with other agencies. The long
term fiscal health of the TVA was also addressed.
Title: EPA Mining Policies: Assault on Appalachian Jobs
Parts I and II
Dates: May 5, 2011 and May 11, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony from State regulators, the
mining industry, impacted organizations, economists, and Nancy
Stoner, Assistant Administrator at the Office of Water, EPA,
regarding the EPA's policies and actions toward Appalachian
Mining. The hearing was conducted pursuant to the Committee's
plan for oversight of the Clean Water Act.
Summary: Under the Clean Water Act, the EPA and States
share in the protection of water quality. Congress gave EPA
limited authority to promulgate water quality standards only
when a State's proposed new or revised standard does not
measure up to requirements set by the CWA and the State refuses
to accept EPA proposed revisions.
In 2007 the Corps issued a Sec. 404 permit in connection
with the Arch Coal, Mingo Logan, Inc., Spruce No. 1 Surface
Mine. Arch Coal conducted a ten year environmental review prior
to the issuance of the permit and the EPA agreed to all the
terms and conditions included. In April 2010, EPA published a
Proposed Determination to prohibit, restrict or deny the
authorized discharges to certain of the waters associated with
the project site, without alleging any violation of the permit.
In September 2010, EPA withdrew the discharge authorization.
Testimony and questions focused on the Spruce Mine permit
revocation, the policy and procedure behind the action, its
national impact on mining and the larger economy. H.R. 2018,
the Clean Water Cooperative Federalism Act of 2011, was
introduced as a result of this hearing.
Title: Running Roughshod Over States and Stakeholders:
EPA's Nutrients Policies
Date: June 24, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony from stakeholders including
State administrators, water quality regulators, and a municipal
wastewater reclamation official. The focus of the hearing was
to provide oversight of the EPA's nutrients policies and quest
for States to adopt numerical nutrient water quality standards
under the Clean Water Act.
Summary: Testimony will focus on the science and burden of
the EPA nutrient policy. EPA is pressing States to adopt
numerical standards based on historical ambient nutrient water
quality data collected from other water bodies that may not
have sufficiently comparable characteristic. Nutrients are
essential for natural plant and animal growth. However,
nutrients can adversely affect aquatic life or human health if
present in excessive concentrations. Water quality standards
define the goals for a water body by designating uses, setting
criteria to protect those uses, and provisions to protect water
quality. When a state adopts a new or revised water quality
standard, the EPA must approve, disapprove, or conditionally
approve the standard depending on requirements of the CWA. Each
state has standards that prevent water from containing
excessive nutrients. Setting numeric water quality standards
presents unique challenges that are difficult to solve. Numeric
standards are not universally appropriate for substances like
nutrients that are both widely variable, naturally occurring,
ubiquitous, and a natural and necessary component of healthy
ecosystems.
Title: H.R. 104: The Realizing America's Maritime Promise
Act
Date: July 8, 2011
Purpose: To consider and hear testimony regarding H.R. 104
the Realizing American's Maritime Promise Act. The Harbor
Maintenance Trust Fund (HMTF) provides funds for the United
States Army Corps of Engineers to carry out the dredging of
navigation channels to their authorized depths and widths. It
was established by the Water Resources Development Act of 1986
to fund the harbor operation and maintenance activities of the
Corps. The HMTF is based upon a user fee collected from
shippers (not including exporters) that utilize the Nation's
coastal ports. In FY 10 the HMTF grew by $1.3 billion, but only
$828.6 million was spent in total operations, burgeoning the
HMTF balance to nearly $5.6 billion by the end of FY 10. At the
end of FY 11 the HMTF is estimated to have a balance of $6.1
billion. Since the HMTF is not ``off-budget'' or separate from
the general fund, all surplus funds have, in effect, already
been spent by the federal government. Despite the theoretical
HMTF balance, the Nation's federally maintained navigation
channels are dangerously under maintained. Only one third of
the Nation's navigation channels are at their authorized depths
and widths, portions of the important Atlantic Intracoastal
Waterway have been closed to commercial navigation due to lack
of maintenance dredging , and eight out of the Nation's ten
largest ports are not at their authorized depths and widths.
Summary: The Subcommittee heard testimony from the author
of the legislation, Hon. Charles Boustany (R-LA), and
representatives from industries and communities that would be
impacted by H.R. 104. The legislation would require the total
budget resources for expenditures from the HMTF for harbor
maintenance programs to equal the level of receipts plus
interest credited to such Fund for that fiscal year. The
primary result would be greater funds for the operation and
maintenance of federally maintained channels what would support
robust coastwise trade.
Title: Reducing Regulatory Burdens, Ensuring the Flow of
Commerce, and Protecting Jobs: A Common Sense Approach to
Ballast Water Regulation
Date: July 13, 2011
Purpose: Joint hearing between the Subcommittee on Coast
Guard and Maritime Transportation and Subcommittee on Water
Resources and Environment to hear testimony from important
industry groups and government agencies on current rules
governing the discharge of ballast water. The Subcommittees
sought input from witnesses on how to best move forward with
efforts to reform current ballast water discharge rules.
Summary: The Subcommittees heard testimony from two
separate panels. The first panel of witnesses included Vice
Admiral Brian Salerno, U.S. Coast Guard Deputy Commandant for
Operations; Mr. James Hanlon, Director of the Office of
Wastewater Management at the Environmental Protection Agency;
Dr. Deborah Swackhamer, Chair of the EPA's Science Advisory
Board; and Dr. James Carlton, Chair of the Committee on Numeric
Limits for Living Organisms in Ballast Water at the National
Research Council. The second panel consisted of Mr. Thomas
Allegretti, President of the American Waterways Operators, and
Mr. Michael Jewell, President of the Marine Engineers'
Beneficial Association.
In order to maintain stability during transit, most ocean
going vessels fill internal tanks with ballast water during the
loading of cargo and then release it during unloading. Ballast
water has long been recognized as one of several pathways by
which invasive species are transported globally and introduced
into coastal waters where they did not live before. Many
aquatic nuisance species have been introduced into U.S. waters
via ballast water discharges. Ballast water is currently
governed differently by the Coast Guard and the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), as well as by numerous state laws and
regulations. As a result, vessels engaged in international and
interstate commerce are required to meet several different
standards for the treatment of ballast water, some of which are
not technologically achievable or verifiable. Witnesses from
private industry emphasized the importance of developing clear
and consistent ballast water standards in order for the United
States to continue being a leader in the international maritime
trade. Additionally, the EPA and the Coast Guard pledged to
continue working with Congress to develop a more cost effective
and sensible approach to regulating ballast water discharge.
From the testimony presented at this hearing, legislative
language regarding ballast water discharges was crafted and
passed as an element of the FY 11 Coast Guard Authorization
bill in November of 2011 setting a national standard for
standard for ballast water. This legislation ensures the free
movement of waterborne trade throughout the country.
Title: Roundtable--Missouri River Flood
Date: August 19, 2011
Purpose: To meet with community leaders, Corps officials
and impacted individuals of the major 2011 Missouri River flood
event in Pierre, SD.
Summary: Participating in the discussion were Committee
Members; Mr. Witt Anderson--Director of Programs for the
Northwestern Division of the Corps (SES); Ms. Jody Farhat--
Chief of Missouri River Basin Water Management; Colonel Robert
Ruch--Commander of the Omaha District of the Corps; Mr. Eric
Stasch--Operations Manager for the Lake Oahe Project at Pierre,
SD; Mayor Laurie Gill--Pierre, SD; Jeff Dooley--Community
Manager; Dakota Dunes, SD; Kevin Vaughn--SD resident and flood
victim from Wynstone, SD (in Union County); Steven Rounds--
Owner Oahe Marina and Resort, Pierre, SD. The group discussed
the impacts of the flood and future preventative measures.
Title: The Economic Importance and Financial Challenges of
Recapitalizing the Nation's Inland Waterways Transportation
System
Date: September 21, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony from the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, a representative from the barge industry, a
representative from the Inland Waterways Users Board, a
representative from the agriculture sector, a representative
from the inland navigation economics profession, and another
nongovernmental organization to hear testimony.
Summary: Today the Inland Waterways Transportation System
provides an alternative to truck and rail and is the most cost-
effective and energy efficient means for transporting
commercial goods, especially major bulk commodities like grain,
coal, and petroleum products. The Inland Waterways
Transportation System is also a key component of State and
local economies and job creation efforts and is essential in
maintain economic competitiveness and national security. The
United States Army Corps of Engineers operates and maintains
approximately $235 billion worth of water resources
infrastructure assets, including a network of 11,000 miles of
the ``fuel-taxed'' Inland Waterways Transportation System. The
Corps operates and maintains 221 lock chambers at 185 sites on
27 inland rivers and intracoastal waterways segments. The fuel-
taxed Inland Waterways Transportation System carries over 546
million tons of freight annually. Despite the importance of the
system, it is in serious disrepair: 57 percent of our inland
system is more than 50 years old, and 37 percent of the system
is more than 70 years old. The hearing provided Congressional
oversight of the system and the role of the Inland Waterways
Users Board.
Title: The Economic Importance of Seaports: Is the United
States Prepared for 21st Century Trade Realities?
Date: October 26, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony from the Corps, Port
Authorities from across the country, and industry
representatives regarding the status of port infrastructure,
challenges plaguing the industry and the fiscal and policy
opportunities that could promote robust coastwise trade.
Summary: The waterborne trade that is facilitated at the
Nation's ports is vital to the American economy. Millions of
jobs throughout the country are dependent upon the commercial
shipping industry. Waterborne trade accounts for the largest
percentage of imports across all modes, and is the preferred
method of transport of vital goods such as oil. It remains the
cheapest, safest and most environmentally-friendly form of bulk
cargo transport. Any impediment to safe, reliable shipping has
ripple effects felt by workers, taxpayers and consumers. This
hearing examined congressional policies that could support
robust coastwise trade.
Title: Hydraulic Fracturing of Shale Beds: Ensuring
Regulatory Approaches that Will Help Protect Jobs and Domestic
Energy Production
Date: November 16, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony from EPA, federal and state
regulators, and industry representatives on regulatory
approaches to the hydraulic fracturing of shale beds. This
hearing provided oversight to forthcoming EPA issued national
effluent limitation guidelines specifically created for the
hydraulic fracturing of shale gas.
Summary: The development and production of oil and gas in
the U.S., including shale gas, are regulated under a complex
set of federal, state, and local laws that address every aspect
of exploration and operation. The EPA administers most of the
federal laws, including the Clean Water Act, which is under the
jurisdiction of this Subcommittee. Most federal laws have
provisions for granting ``primacy'' to the states (i.e., state
agencies implement the programs with federal oversight). State
and local agencies not only implement and enforce federal laws,
but also have their own sets of laws to administer. The States
have broad powers to regulate, permit, and enforce all shale
gas development activities--the drilling and fracture of the
well, production operations, management and disposal of wastes,
and abandonment and plugging of the well. State regulation of
the environmental practices related to shale gas development
addresses the regional and state-specific character of the
activities. State laws often add additional levels of
environmental protection and requirements to the already strict
federal requirements. In 2011 EPA announced plans to develop
additional guidelines specifically for the production of oil
and gas from shale formations. This hearing provided
congressional oversight of the federal regulation of this
growing industry.
Title: The Missouri River Flood: An Assessment of River
Management in 2011 and Operational Plans for the Future
Date: November 30, 2011
Purpose: The Subcommittee heard testimony from Members of
Congress representing Congressional districts within the
Missouri River Valley, local officials and residents impacted
by the catastrophic Missouri River flood of 2011.
Summary: The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers manages a
comprehensive system for the purposes of flood control,
navigation improvement, irrigation, municipal and industrial
water supply, hydroelectric generation facilities, and other
important purposes for the ten states in the Missouri River
Basin. 2011 was an extraordinary year for flooding in the
basin, as it is estimated that by the end of the year the basin
will have received approximately 61 million acre feet of water,
easily exceeding the previous record of 49 million acre feet,
set in 1997. The Army Corps of Engineers is in the process of
writing their 2012 operating plan for the basin, and the flood
of 2011 will serve as a source of many lessons learned as they
work to determine a plan to operate the system in the coming
year. The Subcommittee reviewed the response to the 2011 flood,
as well as the management of the system throughout the year, in
order to better understand how best to operate the system in
the future.
Title: Integrated Planning and Permitting: An Opportunity
for EPA to Provide Communities with Flexibility to Make Smart
Investments in Water Quality
Date: December 14, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony from city mayors, the
commissioner of a city's department of environmental
protection, a municipal wastewater utility director, a state
water quality program director, an environmental activist
advocate, and the EPA on the agency's proposed integrated
planning and permitting regulatory prioritization effort under
the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (commonly referred to
as the ``Clean Water Act'').
Summary: It is widely accepted that clean drinking water
and public wastewater services are necessary priorities to
sustain public health, support our economy, and protect the
environment. Significant amounts of public resources have been
devoted to water infrastructure in American communities over
the last 40 years to meet these priorities. An impressive
inventory of physical assets has been developed over this
period. Since 1972, with the enactment of the Clean Water Act,
Federal, State, and local investment in our national wastewater
infrastructure has been over $250 billion. This investment has
provided significant environmental, public health, and economic
benefits to the Nation.
However, our Nation's ability to provide clean water is
being challenged, as our existing national wastewater
infrastructure is aging, deteriorating, and in need of repair,
replacement, and upgrading. Old and deteriorated infrastructure
often leak, have blockages, and fail to adequately treat
pollutants in wastewater, thereby creating water pollution
problems. EPA has initiated a national rulemaking to establish
a potentially far-reaching program to regulate stormwater
discharges from newly developed and redeveloped sites and add
to or make other regulatory requirements more stringent under
its stormwater program. As a result of many communities
becoming financially constrained, representatives of local
government are increasingly voicing concerns over EPA's
policies and unfunded mandates, including the cumulative
impacts of multiple regulatory requirements being imposed on
them, and over how EPA is dealing with communities to address
the regulatory mandates that EPA is imposing on them.
Importantly, municipalities are seeking a more collaborative
approach where EPA and State water regulators work more like
``partners'' than ``prosecutors'' with communities to yield
better solutions that achieve the goal of eliminating sewer
overflows and addressing other water quality issues through the
use of best engineering and innovative approaches at the lowest
cost, resulting in the greatest environmental benefits.
Title: Review of Innovative Financing Approaches for
Community Water Infrastructure Projects--Parts I and II
Date: February 28, 2012 and March 19, 2012
Purpose: To receive testimony from city mayors, municipal
and private water utility directors, experts in municipal and
private capital project finance, associations of water quality
professionals and contractors, and a state infrastructure
financing authority on potential innovative financing tools,
including public or private funding and investment mechanisms,
to better enable local communities to finance wastewater and
drinking water facilities mandated by state and Federal
environmental laws and regulations.
Summary: The Subcommittee focused on potential innovative
financing tools, including public or private funding and
investment mechanisms, to better enable local communities to
finance wastewater and drinking water facilities mandated by
state and federal environmental laws and regulations. Local
governments continue to be concerned about the impacts unfunded
federal mandates have on their ability to meet compliance
obligations, especially given municipalities' dwindling
revenues due to the economic downturn.
Title: A Review of the President's FY 13 Budget Request for
the Army Corps of Engineers
Date: March 27, 2012
Purpose: To receive testimony from the Army Corps of
Engineers regarding the President's FY 13 appropriation
request. The Corps of Engineers provides water resources
development projects for the nation, usually through cost-
sharing partnerships with nonfederal sponsors.
Summary: The appropriation request in the Administration's
FY 2013 budget submittal for the Corps of Engineers is $4.731
billion. This allocation is far below the amount needed to
provide for the many missions of the Corps. Members addressed
their concerns regarding the funding levels.
Title: A Review of the President's Fiscal Year 2013 Budget
Request for the Environmental Protection Agency
Date: March 28, 2012
Purpose: To receive testimony from the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) regarding the President's FY 13
appropriation request. The President's request for the EPA was
$8.3445 billion.
Summary: The EPA has the primary responsibility for
carrying out the Clean Water Act, which provides for a major
federal/state program to protect, restore, and maintain the
quality of the nation's waters. However, significant parts of
the program are administered by the states with EPA's approval.
EPA also administers the Superfund program, which is aimed at
investigating and cleaning up uncontrolled and abandoned sites
contaminated with hazardous substances.
Title: How Reliability of the Inland Waterway System
Impacts Economic Competitiveness
Date: April 18, 2012
Purpose: To receive testimony from the Army Corps of
Engineers, shippers, and industry officials on the importance
of preserving the reliability of the Inland Waterways System.
Summary: The Inland Waterways System provides a cost-
effective and energy efficient alternative to truck and rail
transportation and is also important to State and local
economies and job creation efforts. One 15-barge tow on a river
can carry as much cargo as 216 rail cars or 1,050 large trucks.
However, the unreliability of the aging locks and dams on the
System is making waterways a less attractive means of
transportation, and moving cargo from waterways to rail or
truck would produce significant national economic and
environmental impacts. A catastrophic failure of the system
would impact the economy including the valuable agriculture and
energy sectors. The witnesses testified to how the success of
the inland waterways system is vital to the nation's economic
competitiveness.
LEGISLATION
Title: Reducing Regulatory Burdens Act of 2011
Bill Number: H.R. 872 (Passed the House on March 31, 2011)
Summary: The Subcommittee considered legislation to amend
the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act and the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act (commonly referred to as
the Clean Water Act) to clarify the Congressional intent
regarding the regulation of pesticides in or near navigable
waters and for other purposes. On March 2, 2011, Rep. Bob Gibbs
introduced the Reducing Regulatory Burdens Act of 2011,
designated H.R. 872. The bill was narrowly crafted to eliminate
the duplicative regulations over the lawful and proper
application of pesticides. It was referred to the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure's Subcommittee on Water
Resources and Environment and to the Committee on Agriculture's
Subcommittee on Nutrition and Horticulture.
The bill had 137 cosponsors and was ordered reported by the
Full Committee on March 16, 2011, with a manager's amendment
making technical corrections. On March 31, 2011, the House
agreed to suspend the rules and pass the bill as amended by a
vote of 292-130. The bill was referred to the Senate Committee
on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
Title: Clean Water Cooperative Federalism Act of 2011
Bill Number: H.R. 2018 (Passed the House on July 13, 2011)
Summary: The Clean Water Cooperative Federalism Act of 2011
amends the Clean Water Act to preserve the authority of each
State to make determinations relating to the State's water
quality standards, and to restrict EPA's ability to second-
guess or delay a State's permitting and water quality
certification decisions under the Clean Water Act in several
important respects including State water quality standards,
dredge and fill permits, and requiring a deadline for Agency
comment.
The bill was introduced on May 26, 2011, receiving
widespread and bipartisan support. It was reported by the Full
Committee on July 8, 2011. On July 13, 2011, the bill passed
the House in a bipartisan vote of 239 to 184.
Title: To preserve existing rights and responsibilities
with respect to waters of the United States, and for other
purposes.
Bill Number: H.R. 4965 (Ordered reported on June 7, 2012)
Summary: H.R. 4965 prohibits the Secretary of the Army and
the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
from: finalizing, adopting, implementing, administering, or
enforcing the proposed guidance described in the notice of
availability and request for comments entitled ``EPA and Army
Corps of Engineers Guidance Regarding Identification of Waters
Protected by the Clean Water Act'' or using such guidance, or
any substantially similar guidance, as the basis for any
decision regarding the scope of the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act (commonly known as the Clean Water Act) or any
rulemaking. Additionally, it provides that the use of such
guidance as the basis for any rule shall be grounds for
vacating such rule.
The bill was introduced on April 27, 2012 receiving
widespread and bipartisan support. The bill was order reported
by the Full Committee on June 7, 2012.
OVERSIGHT PLAN
The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure approved
the oversight guiding document, the 112th Oversight Plan, in
open session on January 26, 2011. In the report, the Committee
determined it will focus its oversight responsibility on
improving the overall performance and operation of the agencies
and entities within the Committee's jurisdiction by eliminating
fraud, wasteful spending, abuse and mismanagement where
possible. Specifically, the Committee will focus its oversight
authority on determining: (1) how the departments and agencies
under its jurisdiction can spend fewer taxpayer dollars while
continuing to carry out their statutory mandates; (2) how to
decrease the size of departments and agencies that implement
the Committee's authorized programs; and (3) how best to
utilize government resources to create jobs and economic
opportunities for all Americans.
The Full Committee will focus on oversight of the American
Recovery and Reinvestment Act and effectiveness of DOT
discretionary grant programs. The Subcommittee on Aviation will
focus on funding of the FAA, safety programs, security
programs, NextGen, NTSB, and the financial condition of the
airlines and passenger services. The Subcommittee on Coast
Guard and Maritime Transportation will focus on the Coast Guard
acquisitions, mission balance, maritime domain awareness, oil
spill prevention and response, short sea shipping, piracy,
ballast water and incidental discharges, vessel capacity, and
the budgets of the agencies within its jurisdiction.
Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings, and
Emergency Management will focus on Federal courthouses, GSA
broker contracts, real property management, FBF, leasing
authorities, CILP, Federal Protective Service, DHS
headquarters, and other issues within its jurisdiction. The
Subcommittee on Highways and Transit will focus its oversight
responsibility on streamlining project delivery, program
consolidation and elimination, redefining the Federal role in
surface transportation, performance and accountability,
innovative financing, transportation funding, transit
oversight, and safety program accountability. The Subcommittee
on Railroads, Pipelines and Hazardous Materials will focus its
oversight on the implementation of previous rail legislation,
Amtrak, rail safety programs, pipeline safety, hazardous
materials safety, and the Surface Transportation Board.
Finally, the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment
will focus its oversight on the Clean Water Act and water
infrastructure programs, the Army Corps of Engineer civil works
program, the EPA and its program management of the Superfund
and Brownfield program, and the TVA.
The full Oversight Plan can be viewed on the Committee's
website here: http://transportation.house.gov/Media/File/112th/
112th_Oversight_Plan.pdf
Summary of Actions Taken and Recommendations Made Regarding Oversight
Plan
Full Committee
Report Title: Stimulus Status: Two Years and Counting
Date: May 4, 2011
Purpose: To continue oversight of the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act, pursuant to Committee-approved Oversight
Plan, by examining the audit work performed by the GAO, the DOT
IG, and the EPA IG on implementation of the American Recovery
and Reinvestment Act. GAO and the two IGs performed extensive
audit work on the implementation of funded programs from the
DOT, including the FHWA, the FTA, the FAA, the FRA, and the
EPA. The audits uncovered significant lapses in oversight by
the implementing agencies, mismanagement of grants and funds,
and lack of transparency.
Report Title: TSA Ignores More Cost-Effective Screening
Model
Date: June 3, 2011
Purpose: Investigate the basis and rationale for the
January 28, 2011 decision by John Pistole, Administrator,
Transportation Security Administration (TSA), to halt the
expansion of the Screening Partnership Program (SPP), the
comparative efficiencies of SPP and non-SPP screening, and the
various screening models used in the international community
Summary: Since the creation of the SPP, a total of sixteen
airports have chosen to opt-out of the federal screening model
and use private contractors for passenger and baggage
screening. On January 28, 2011, TSA Administrator John Pistole
announced that he would not expand the SPP and denied pending
SPP applications from five airports. The report investigates
the basis and rationale for Administrator Pistole's decision,
the comparative efficiencies of SPP and non-SPP screening, and
the various screening models used in the international
community. See full summary in summary section above.
Report Title: A Decade Later: A Call for TSA Reform
Date: November 16, 2011
Purpose: Investigate TSA's operations ten years after its
creation and provide recommendations to improve TSA operational
efficiency
Summary: TSA has a vital and important mission and is
critical to the security of the traveling public. This report
is an examination and critical analysis of the development,
evolution, and current status and performance of TSA ten years
after its creation. See full summary in summary section above.
Report Title: Airport Insecurity: TSA's Failure to Cost-
Effectively Procure, Deploy and Warehouse its Screening
Technologies
Date: May 9, 2012
Purpose: Investigate TSA's management of its procurement,
deployment, and storage of screening technologies
Result: The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, led to
dramatic reforms in how the federal government protects the
traveling public and the Nation's transportation sector.
Securing commercial aviation became a top priority for Congress
and resulted in the development and passage of the Aviation and
Transportation Security Act of 2001 (ATSA). ATSA created the
Transportation Security Administration (TSA) and directed the
agency to secure travelers through improved passenger and
baggage screening operations. To successfully carry out its
mission, TSA utilizes many layers of security, including
screening technology.
This report is a critical examination and analysis of TSA's
procurement, deployment, and storage of screening technologies.
During the past ten years, TSA has struggled to cost-
effectively utilize taxpayer funding to procure and deploy
security equipment at the Nation's 463 airports where TSA
provides screening operations. The report makes recommendations
emphasizing TSA's need to more effectively develop its
deployment strategy prior to the procurement of screening
technologies. In addition, TSA must look for ways to reduce
significant shipping costs for the thousands of pieces of
equipment it deploys annually. See full summary in summary
section above.
Aviation
The GAO conducted several reviews related to aviation
safety. The GAO issued the following reports to Chairman Petri,
Chairman Mica, and other Members of the Subcommittee:
A report on the unauthorized international
travel of children in June 2011.
A report on airline passenger protections in
September 2011.
An aviation safety report on enhanced
oversight and improved availability of risk-based data
in October 2011.
A report on collaboration of air traffic
control modernization efforts in the U.S. and the E.U.
in November 2011.
A report on pilot training and FAA oversight
in November 2011.
A follow up report to a January 2010 report
on the NTSB's implementation of GAO recommendations
issued between 2006-2008 in January 2012.
A report on systemic challenges with FAA's
management of key programs' costs and timelines
associated with NextGen in February 2012.
The GAO also conducted a number of reviews related to
aviation security. The GAO issued the following reports to
Chairman Mica and other Members:
A report on Transportation Security
Administration's (TSA) enhanced explosive detection
requirements for checked baggage in July 2011.
A report on the TSA's foreign airport
assessment program in both classified and public
versions in October 2011.
A report on transportation security
information sharing in November 2011.
A classified report on TSA's Advanced
Imaging Technology in January 2012.
A classified report on Terrorists Watchlists
in January 2012.
A report on the TSA's screening partnership
program has been initiated and a follow-up report on
the TSA's behavior detection program or SPOT is in the
queue.
The DOT IG conducted a review of the new collective
bargaining agreement (CBA) that the FAA entered into with the
National Air Traffic Controllers Association (NATCA). The
review was published on June 16, 2011, and addresses the impact
the new CBA will have on the FAA and industry at the request of
the Subcommittee. The DOT IG conducted an audit of Air Traffic
Control (ATC) systems and networks located at two FAA
facilities within the continental United States at the request
of Chairman Mica. The report summarizes the results of our
information technology vulnerability assessment of the FAA
operational ATC systems, and was issued April 15, 2011. The DOT
IG is also conducting the following reviews and audits:
FAA's Air Traffic Safety Action Program
(ATSAP);
FAA's air traffic facility realignment and
consolidation activities;
ARRA grants for airport projects;
Aviation safety inspector and operations
research analyst staffing;
FAA's aviation safety information analysis
and sharing system;
The underlying causes of problems with
implementing NextGen; and
FAA's implementation of PBN and NavLean.
The Department of Homeland Security Office of Inspector
General (DHS OIG) has undertaken an audit of the management of
oversight of transportation security at Honolulu International
Airport. The report is expected to be complete in 2012. The DHS
OIG will also be conducting a follow-up audit of the TSA's
National Deployment Force (NDF) in FY2012.
Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation
Twelve of the 19 hearings held by the Subcommittee during
the first 18 months of the 112th Congress were directly derived
from sections of the approved Oversight Plan for the
Subcommittee. Section one and section ten of the Subcommittee's
Oversight Plan detail the overseeing of the Coast Guard,
Federal Maritime Commission, and Maritime Administration's
budget. In March of 2011 and March of 2012, the Subcommittee
held hearings to examine the Administration's FY 2012 and FY
2013 budget requests for these agencies and explored ways to
implement cost savings by leveraging efficiencies and cutting
waste, fraud and abuse.
Section two of the Oversight Plan is concerned with the
Subcommittee's overseeing of the Coast Guard's acquisition
program. The Subcommittee held a hearing in April regarding the
current status of the Coast Guard's acquisition programs, as
well as a review of the policies and procedures the Service
uses to determine mission needs requirements. In October, the
Subcommittee held a follow-up hearing on the acquisition
program and reviewed issues raised in the Government
Accountability Office's report entitled ``Action Needed as
Approved Deepwater Program Remains Unachievable.'' The
Subcommittee called another meeting to examine the status of
the Service's acquisitions program on May 16, 2012, where
topics discussed at both of the previous hearings were reviewed
in addition to several new developments.
Section five of the Oversight Plan highlights the
Subcommittee's concern with oil spill prevention and response,
with specific attention devoted toward the response efforts
during the DEEPWATER HORIZON oil spill in the summer of 2010.
The Subcommittee, in conjunction with the Subcommittee on Water
Resources and Environment, held a joint hearing in February
regarding improvements that can be made to oil spill prevention
and response, while ensuring access to domestic energy
resources and protecting vital energy sector jobs. The
Subcommittee held a second hearing on this topic in November,
where members reviewed the findings and recommendations within
a number of recently published reports on the DEEPWATER HORIZON
oil spill. On January 30, 2012, the Subcommittee held a field
hearing in Sunny Isles Beach, FL to examine Cuban and Bahamian
plans to drill in proximity to the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone
(EEZ) and review the Coast Guard's level of preparedness to
handle oil spills occurring at these sites.
Section six of the Oversight Plan outlines the
Subcommittee's intentions to examine the feasibility of short
sea shipping along U.S. Coasts. The revitalization of our
marine highways represents a cost effective and efficient mode
of transportation that has the potential to create new maritime
industry jobs for Americans. In June of 2011, the Subcommittee
held a hearing entitled ``Creating Jobs and Increasing U.S.
Exports by Enhancing the Marine Transportation System.''
Witnesses at the hearing suggested various ways to enhance and
expand the U.S. marine transportation system and create U.S.
maritime jobs without burdening the American taxpayer. The
Jones Act was specifically targeted by both members and
witnesses alike as being a key component in preserving American
maritime jobs and the U.S. shipbuilding industry.
Section seven of the Oversight Plan details the
Subcommittee's oversight plans regarding piracy and the United
States' efforts to ensure the safety of Americans on the high
seas. In March, the Subcommittee held a hearing regarding ways
to improve the Federal Government's efforts to safeguard
American lives and property on the high seas against acts of
piracy. Specific attention was given to acts of piracy that
occur off the Horn of Africa.
Section eight of the Oversight Plan lays out the
Subcommittee's plans to work with the Subcommittee on Water
Resources and the Environment to conduct oversight on the EPA's
current efforts to regulate the discharge of ballast water and
other ``discharges incidental to the normal operation of
vessels'' such as bilge water, deck wash and air conditioning
condensate. In July, the Subcommittee held a hearing entitled
``Reducing Regulatory Burdens, Ensuring the Flow of Commerce,
and Protecting Jobs: A Common Sense Approach to Ballast Water
Regulation.'' The Subcommittee pledged to continue working with
various industry actors and relevant agencies to develop a
single nationwide standard that ensures efficient movement of
maritime commerce, defends seafaring and port jobs, and
protects the environment. Ballast water regulation was also a
major topic at the Subcommittee's April 26, 2012 regulatory
hearing. The Subcommittee reviewed the Coast Guard's published
final rule governing the discharge of ballast water and also
discussed the EPA's related rule expected to be published in
December of this year.
Economic Development, Public Buildings and Emergency Management
The activities of the Subcommittee demonstrated its
commitment to the Oversight Plan approved by the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure. In regards to the
jurisdiction of the Subcommittee, the plan included a focus on
implementing better management of federal real estate,
streamlining emergency management programs, and supervising the
construction and renovation of federal property under the
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.
The Subcommittee is deeply invested in the oversight of
federal real property. In fact, during the 111th Congress, the
Republican staff released a report, ``Sitting on Our Assets:
The Federal Government'' Misuse of Taxpayer-Owned Assets,''
which detailed billions of dollars of wasteful spending on
underutilized federal properties. The Subcommittee is committed
to identifying these underutilized federal buildings and assets
in order to shed waste and save taxpayer money. The
Subcommittee has developed major pieces of legislation in
support of this mission. H.R. 690, the Federal Trade Commission
and National Gallery of Art Consolidation, Savings, and
Efficiency Act, saves the taxpayers an estimated $300 million
in avoided renovation and lease costs of the FTC and the NGA.
The House of Representatives also passed H.R. 1734, the
Civilian Property Realignment Act, which was introduced by
Chairman Jeff Denham. The legislation sets up a BRAC-like
commission for the realignment of civilian federal property
that has the potential to save taxpayers an estimated $15
billion.
The Subcommittee has also held the following hearings to
carry out the Committee-approved Oversight Plan:
Title: Sitting on Our Assets: Cutting Spending and Private
Redevelopment of Underperforming Buildings
Date: February 10, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony on the costs to the taxpayer of
underperforming or vacant assets, models for their
redevelopment or reuse, and how spending can be reduced through
private redevelopment of underperforming assets. The hearing
was conducted pursuant to the Committee's plan for oversight of
real property management and Clause 2(n) of House Rule XI on
waste, fraud, abuse or mismanagement of government programs.
Title: Managing Costs and Mitigating Delays in the Building
of Social Security's New National Computer Center
Date: February 11, 2011
Purpose: The Subcommittee held a joint oversight hearing
with the Committee on Ways and Means, Subcommittee on Social
Security to receive testimony on the site selection and
construction of the SSA's new national computer processing and
data storage facility to replace the NCC, currently located in
Woodlawn, Maryland. The hearing was conducted pursuant to the
Committee's plan of supervision for the construction and
renovation of federal property under the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act of 2009.
Title: Cutting Spending and Consolidating Federal Office
Space: GSA's Capital Investment and Leasing Program
Date: March 10, 2011
Purpose: The Subcommittee held a hearing to receive
testimony on GSA's Capital Investment and Leasing Program
(CILP) including alteration, design, modernization,
construction, leasing and building purchase activities. The
hearing was conducted pursuant to the Committee's plan for
oversight of real property management and the Federal Buildings
Fund (FBF).
Title: Can a Civilian BRAC Commission Consolidate Federal
Office Space and Save Taxpayers Billions?
Date: April 6, 2011
Purpose: The Subcommittee held a hearing to receive
testimony on whether a civilian BRAC process can effectively
consolidate federal office space, maximize value to the
taxpayer, and save taxpayers billions. The hearing was
conducted pursuant to the Committee's plan for oversight of
real property management and Clause 2(n) of House Rule XI on
waste, fraud, abuse or mismanagement of government programs.
Title: Richard H. Poff Federal Building Renovation: Is it
Costing the Taxpayer Too Much?
Date: April 14, 2011
Purpose: The Subcommittee held a hearing to receive
testimony on the renovation and modernization of the Richard H.
Poff Federal Building, located in Roanoke, Virginia. The
hearing was conducted pursuant to the Committee's plan of
supervision for the construction and renovation of federal
property under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of
2009.
Title: How to Stop Sitting on Our Assets: A Review of the
Civilian Property Realignment Act
Date: May 12, 2011
Purpose: The Subcommittee held a hearing to receive
testimony on specific legislative proposals to employ a BRAC-
like process to civilian properties to produce significant
savings to the taxpayer. The hearing was conducted pursuant to
the Committee's plan for oversight of real property management
and Clause 2(n) of House Rule XI on waste, fraud, abuse or
mismanagement of government programs.
Summary: Chairman Denham introduced H.R. 1734, the Civilian
Property Realignment Act, on May 4, 2011, as a result of the
Subcommittee's oversight activities.
Title: The Securities and Exchange Commission's $500
Million Fleecing of America
Date: June 16, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony on the Securities and Exchange
Commission's (SEC) management of its independent authority to
lease space and the May 16, 2011, SEC Inspector General (IG)
report related to SEC's lease procurement of 900,000 square
feet of space under a 10-year lease worth over $500 million.
The hearing was conducted pursuant to the Committee's plan for
oversight of agencies with independent leasing authority and
Clause 2(n) of House Rule XI on waste, fraud, abuse or
mismanagement of government programs.
Title: The Securities and Exchange Commission's $500
Million Fleecing of America: Part Two
Date: July 6, 2011
Purpose: The Subcommittee held a second hearing to receive
testimony on the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission's
(SEC) mismanagement of its independent authority to lease space
and the May 16, 2011 SEC IG report related to SEC's lease
procurement of 900,000 square feet of space under a 10-year
lease of Constitution Center in Washington, DC worth over $500
million. The hearing was conducted pursuant to the Committee's
plan for oversight of agencies with independent leasing
authority and Clause 2(n) of House Rule XI on waste, fraud,
abuse or mismanagement of government programs.
Title: FEMA Reauthorization and Cutting the Red Tape in
Recovery
Date: July 14, 2011
Purpose: The Subcommittee held a hearing to examine the
issues of communities recovering from a disaster in the context
of a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
reauthorization. The hearing was conducted pursuant to the
Committee's Oversight Plan for streamlining emergency
management programs.
Title: Streamlining Emergency Management: Improving
Preparedness, Response, and Cutting Costs
Date: October 13, 2011
Purpose: The Subcommittee held a hearing to examine how the
emergency management system and programs can be streamlined to
reduce costs and improve preparedness and response. The hearing
was conducted pursuant to the Committee's Oversight Plan for
streamlining emergency management programs.
Title: A Review and Analysis of the Proposed $400 Million
Los, Angeles, California Federal Courthouse Project
Date: November 4, 2011
Purpose: The Subcommittee held a hearing that focused on
the current justification of a third courthouse in Los Angeles,
California including the size, scope, compliance with courtroom
sharing guidelines, and cost implications of the entire
courthouse complex in Los Angeles.
Summary: Received testimony from the U.S. courts, the
General Services Administration (GSA) and the Government
Accountability Office (GAO). The hearing was conducted pursuant
to Clause 2(n) of House Rule XI on waste, fraud, abuse or
mismanagement of government programs.
Title: One Year Later: Still Sitting on Our Assets
Date: February 9, 2012
Purpose: The Subcommittee held a field hearing at the Annex
of the Old Post Office Building (OPO) on Pennsylvania Avenue
NW, in downtown Washington, District of Columbia to receive
testimony on progress made in redeveloping the property as well
as the status of other underperforming and vacant federal
properties throughout the country. The hearing was conducted
pursuant to Clause 2(n) of House Rule XI on waste, fraud, abuse
or mismanagement of government programs.
Title: Sitting on Our Assets: The Cotton Annex
Date: March 22, 2012
Purpose: The Subcommittee held a field hearing at the
Cotton Annex at 300 12th Street SW., in downtown Washington,
District of Columbia to receive testimony on the costs to
taxpayers of underperforming or vacant federal properties,
models for their redevelopment or reuse, and how spending can
be reduced through private redevelopment of underperforming
assets. The hearing was conducted pursuant to Clause 2(n) of
House Rule XI on waste, fraud, abuse or mismanagement of
government programs.
Title: GSA's Squandering of Taxpayer Dollars: A Pattern of
Mismanagement, Excess, and Waste
Date: April 17, 2012
Purpose: The Subcommittee held a hearing to receive
testimony on GSA's waste of taxpayer dollars on a lavish 2010
Western Regional Conference (WRC), its ``Hats Off'' employee
rewards program, and other waste and abuse of taxpayer dollars.
The hearing was conducted pursuant to Clause 2(n) of House Rule
XI on waste, fraud, abuse or mismanagement of government
programs.
Title: Sitting on Our Assets: The Georgetown Heating Plant
Date: June 19, 2012
Purpose: The Subcommittee held a field hearing at the
Georgetown Heating Plant at 1051 29th Street NW, in Washington,
DC to receive testimony on the costs to taxpayers of
underperforming or vacant assets and ensuring that the process
for the planned sale of the Georgetown Heating Plant provides
the highest return to the taxpayer. The hearing was conducted
pursuant to Clause 2(n) of House Rule XI on waste, fraud, abuse
or mismanagement of government programs.
Highways and Transit
As the Subcommittee on Highways and Transit held hearings
to help craft important transportation authorization
legislation, the hearings served a dual purpose of providing
oversight opportunities, according to the Committee's Oversight
Plan, including oversight on streamlining project delivery,
program consolidation and elimination, redefining the Federal
role in surface transportation, performance and accountability,
innovative financing, and highway safety.
Title: Improving and Reforming Our Nation's Surface
Transportation Programs: Beckley, West Virginia Field Hearing
Date: February 14, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony on the local transportation
challenges facing the State of West Virginia, and the local
area surrounding Beckley. The hearing was conducted pursuant to
the Committee's plan for oversight of surface transportation
program management and Clause 2(d)(1) of House Rule X on
elimination of duplicative programs.
Title: Accelerating the Project Delivery Process:
Eliminating Bureaucratic Red Tape and Making Every Dollar
Count.
Date: February 15, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony related to improving the
existing laws and regulations governing project delivery in
order to accelerate the delivery process for surface
transportation projects. The hearing was conducted pursuant to
the Subcommittee's plan for oversight of surface transportation
program management and Clause 2(d)(1) of House Rule X on
elimination of duplicative programs.
Title: Improving and Reforming Our Nation's Surface
Transportation Programs: Columbus, Ohio Field Hearing.
Date: February 19, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony on the local transportation
challenges facing Ohio, and the local area surrounding
Columbus. The hearing was conducted pursuant to the Committee's
plan for oversight of surface transportation program management
and Clause 2(d)(1) of House Rule X on elimination of
duplicative programs.
Title: Improving and Reforming Our Nation's Surface
Transportation Programs to Support Job Creation and the Economy
Date: February 23, 2011
Committee: Transportation and Infrastructure; Joint Hearing
with the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works
Purpose: Received testimony in a joint hearing in Los
Angeles, California, with the U.S. Senate on the local
transportation challenges facing Southern California. The
hearing was conducted pursuant to the Committee's plan for
oversight of surface transportation program management and
Clause 2(d)(1) of House Rule X on elimination of duplicative
programs.
Title: Improving and Reforming Our Nation's Surface
Transportation Programs: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma Field Hearing
Date: February 24, 2011
Purpose: Receive testimony on the local transportation
challenges facing Oklahoma, and the local area surrounding
Oklahoma City. The hearing was conducted pursuant to the
Committee's plan for oversight of surface transportation
program management and Clause 2(d)(1) of House Rule X on
elimination of duplicative programs.
Title: Improving and Reforming Our Nation's Surface
Transportation Programs: Maitland, Florida Field Hearing
Date: March 14, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony on the local transportation
challenges facing Florida, and the greater Orlando area. The
hearing was conducted pursuant to the Committee's plan for
oversight of surface transportation program management and
Clause 2(d)(1) of House Rule X on elimination of duplicative
programs.
Title: Improving and Reforming the Nation's Surface
Transportation Programs.
Date: March 29, 2011 and March 30, 2011
Purpose: Received stakeholder testimony related to the
reauthorization of the Federal surface transportation programs.
The hearing was conducted pursuant to the Subcommittee's plan
for oversight of surface transportation program management and
Clause 2(d)(1) of House Rule X on elimination of duplicative
programs.
Title: Policy Proposals from Members of Congress to Reform
the Nation's Surface transportation Programs
Date: April 5, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony from Members of Congress on
their policy proposals for the reauthorization of the Federal
surface transportation programs. The hearing was conducted
pursuant to the Subcommittee's plan for oversight of surface
transportation program management and Clause 2(d)(1) of House
Rule X on elimination of duplicative programs.
Title: How to Best Improve Bus Safety on Our Nation's
Highways
Date: June 13, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony related to improving the
existing laws and regulations governing bus safety. The hearing
was part of the Committee's effort to reauthorize Federal
surface transportation programs under SAFETEA-LU, which expired
on September 30, 2009, but was extended through September 30,
2011.
Title: National Infrastructure Bank: More Bureaucracy and
More Red Tape
Date: October 12, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony related to the Administration's
national infrastructure bank proposal that is part of the
American Jobs Act of 2011 (H.R. 12). The hearing was conducted
pursuant to the Subcommittee's plan for oversight of surface
transportation program management and Clause 2(d)(1) of House
Rule X on elimination of duplicative programs.
Railroads, Pipelines and Hazardous Materials
Pursuant to the Committee-approved Oversight Plan for the
112th Congress, the Subcommittee held hearings addressing
important issues such as railroad infrastructure, Amtrak, and
rail and hazardous materials safety. With respect to railroad
infrastructure, the Subcommittee held an oversight hearing on
improving the RRIF direct and guaranteed loan program and an
oversight hearing on passenger rail capital programs authorized
under the PRIIA. The Subcommittee also held or had jurisdiction
over three hearings on Amtrak, specifically on improving
passenger rail service on the NEC and authorizing it for
private competition, and on improving intercity passenger rail
throughout the country by fully implementing PRIIA requirements
and allowing private competition for passenger rail service.
There was also one hearing on railroad safety, providing
oversight on the implementation of the Rail Safety Improvement
Act of 2008. The Subcommittee also held an oversight hearing on
the implementation of the Federal Railroad Administration's
high-speed and intercity passenger rail program. Lastly, the
Subcommittee held two hearings discussing the safe
transportation of hazardous materials and possible ways to
reduce regulatory burdens on the hazardous materials and
railroad transportation industries.
Chairman John Mica, along with the Majority Whip Kevin
McCarthy, Chairman Darrell Issa (Oversight and Government
Reform Committee), and Subcommittee Chairman Bill Shuster, also
submitted a request to the Government Accountability Office
(GAO) on December 19, 2011 to conduct a study on the viability
of the California High Speed Rail project. As the cost of high
speed rail in California skyrockets, serious concerns regarding
about the viability of the project have been raised, including
questions on project construction and operating cost estimates,
as well as potential ridership and anticipated economic impacts
of the project. The California High Speed Rail project is the
largest single rail grant ever made by the U.S. Department of
Transportation, and the Committee takes very seriously its
oversight responsibility over these federal funds.
Specifically, in accordance with the Committee's Oversight
Plan, the Subcommittee held or had jurisdiction over the
following hearings:
Title: Developing True High-Speed Rail in the Northeast
Corridor: Stop Sitting on our Federal Assets: Grand Central
Station, Northeast Balcony, New York, New York
Date: January 27, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony regarding the potential and
development of high-speed rail in the Northeast Corridor,
highlighting the importance of economic development,
opportunities and incentives for private sector investment, and
the need for competition and public-private partnerships.
Title: Sitting on our Assets: Rehabilitating and Improving
our Nation's Rail Infrastructure
Date: February 17, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony on the Railroad Rehabilitation
& Improvement Financing (RRIF) program, highlighting its
importance in helping railroads, States and other public
authorities to finance the development of railroad
infrastructure, which in turn creates new jobs and drives
economic benefits.
Title: Finding Ways to Encourage and Increase Private
Sector Participation in Passenger Rail Service
Date: March 11, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony on intercity passenger rail in
the U.S. and how to make it more effective and less expensive,
specifically through private competition and to examine the FRA
and Amtrak's implementation of the Passenger Rail Investment
and Improvement Act of 2008 (PRIIA).
Title: Federal Regulatory Overreach in the Railroad
Industry: Implementing the Rail Safety Improvement Act
Date: March 17, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony on implementation of the Rail
Safety Improvement Act of 2008 (RSIA), focusing on the FRA's
rule implementing requirements for freight and passenger
railroads to install positive train control systems by December
31, 2015.
Title: Railroad and Hazardous Materials Transportation
Programs: Reforms and Improvements to Reduce Regulatory Burdens
Date: April 7, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony from stakeholders in the rail
and hazardous materials safety areas regarding legislative
priorities for changes or reforms to current law authorizations
and administrative regulatory policies at the FRA and the
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA)
and to focus on the areas of intercity passenger rail, high-
speed rail, rail safety, and rail financing along with
hazardous materials transportation safety.
Title: Reducing Regulatory Burdens and Ensuring Safe
Transportation of Hazardous Materials
Date: April 12, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony on the reauthorization of the
hazardous materials safety programs of the PHMSA, which expired
in 2008, focusing on how to reduce the regulatory burdens, and
how to transport hazardous materials safely and efficiently.
Title: Opening the Northeast Corridor to Private
Competition for Development of High-Speed Rail
Date: May 26, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony regarding the development of
high-speed rail in the NEC through private competition using a
public-private partnership.
Title: Silvertip Pipeline Oil Spill in Yellowstone County,
Montana
Date: July 14, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony related to the July 1, 2011
release of crude oil from the Silvertip Pipeline in Yellowstone
County, Montana.
Title: The Federal Railroad Administration's High-Speed and
Intercity Passenger Program: Mistakes and Lessons Learned
Date: December 6, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony on the Federal Railroad
Administration's High-Speed and Intercity Passenger Rail
(HSIPR) Program which was launched in 2009, but not funded by
Congress in FY 11 and 12.
Title: California's High-Speed Rail Plan: Skyrocketing
Costs and Project Concerns
Date: December 15, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony related to the constant
increasing cost of building a high-speed rail system in
California. While the project was originally estimated to be
$43 billion in 2008, the total cost estimate has more than
doubled to $98.5 billion and the project completion date has
been extended 13 years.
Water Resources and Environment
The activities of the Subcommittee demonstrated its
commitment to the Oversight Plan approved by the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure. In regards to the
jurisdiction of the Subcommittee, the plan included a focus on
implementing better oversight of the EPA Clean Water Act
program, including the development of regulations for ballast
water discharges, effluent limitations guidelines and issues
with local compliance. Pursuant to the Oversight Plan, the
Subcommittee considered ways of streamlining the civil works
activities of the Corps, specifically the permitting,
scheduling, and allocation of projects, as well as operation
and maintenance of both inland and coastal navigation channels.
Additionally, the Subcommittee held an oversight hearing
regarding Corps actions during the Missouri River Flood of
2011. The Subcommittee remains committed to reining in job
killing regulatory overreach.
The Subcommittee has also held the following hearings to
carry out the Committee-approved Oversight Plan:
Title: To Consider Reducing the Regulatory Burden Posed by
the Case National Cotton Council v. EPA (6th Circuit 2009) and
to Consider Related Draft Legislation.
Date: February 16, 2011
Purpose: Joint meeting of the Subcommittee on Water
Resources and Environment and the Committee on Agriculture
Subcommittee on Nutrition and Horticulture to review court
decisions and regulatory actions taken by the Environmental
Protection Agency regarding the use of pesticides in or near
navigable waters. Hearing led to introduction and House-passage
of H.R. 872, the ``Reducing Regulatory Burdens Act of 2011''.
Title: Review of the FY 12 Budget and Priorities of the
Environmental Protection Agency: Impacts on Jobs, Liberty, and
the Economy
Date: March 2, 2011
Purpose: To hear justification of the Agency's proposed FY
12 budget, including extra-regulatory activities such as the
promulgation of guidance, the use of numerical nutrient
standards throughout the country and other expansions of the
Agency's regulations.
Title: Review of the FY 12 Budget and Priorities of the
Army Corps of Engineers, Tennessee Valley Authority, and the
Natural Resources Conservation Service: Finding Ways To Do More
With Less
Date: March 8, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony from respective agencies
regarding their proposed budget to the Subcommittee.
Title: EPA Mining Policies: Assault on Appalachian Jobs
Parts I and II
Dates: May 5, 2011 and May 11, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony from State regulators, the
mining industry, impacted organizations, economists, and Nancy
Stoner, Assistant Administrator at the Office of Water at the
EPA regarding the EPA's policies and actions toward Appalachian
Mining. The hearing was conducted pursuant to the Committee's
plan for oversight of Clean Water Act, specifically the
permitting process and water quality standards. H.R. 2018, the
Clean Water Cooperative Federalism Act of 2011, was introduced
as a result of this hearing.
Title: Running Roughshod Over States and Stakeholders:
EPA's Nutrients Policies
Date: June 24, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony pursuant to the Committee-
approved Oversight Plan to provide oversight of the EPA's
nutrients policies and quest for States to adopt numerical
nutrient water quality standards under the Clean Water Act.
Title: H.R. 104, the Realize America's Maritime Promise
(RAMP) Act
Date: July 8, 2011
Purpose: Legislative hearing to review the competitiveness
of the nation's ports and review legislation to ensure federal
navigation channels are at their authorized widths and depths.
Title: Reducing Regulatory Burdens, Ensuring the Flow of
Commerce, and Protecting Jobs: A Common Sense Approach to
Ballast Water Regulation
Date: July 13, 2011
Purpose: Joint meeting of the Subcommittee on Water
Resources and Environment and the Subcommittee on Coast Guard
and Maritime Transportation on the feasibility of regulating
ballast water discharges and explore opportunities to improve
these regulations to ensure the free flow of commerce, promote
job growth, and ensure environmental protection.
Title: Hearing on ``The Economic Importance and Financial
Challenges of Recapitalizing the Nation's Inland Waterways
Transportation System''
Date: September 21, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony from Corps, former chair of the
Inland Waterways User Board, economists, special interest
representatives, and impacted industry representatives
regarding the Inland Waterways system, funding challenges and
Administration mismanagement of the Inland Waterways Users
Board
Title: The Economic Importance of Seaports: Is the United
States Prepared for 21st Century Trade Realities?
Date: October 26, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony from federal witnesses,
shipping interests, unions, and ports to review the
competitiveness of the nation's ports, the economic benefits of
maritime trade, and future trends.
Title: Hearing on ``Hydraulic Fracturing of Shale Beds:
Ensuring Regulatory Approaches that Will Help Protect Jobs and
Domestic Energy Production''
Date: Wednesday, November 16, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony from federal and state
regulators and industry representatives on regulatory
approaches to the hydraulic fracturing of shale beds. This
hearing provided oversight to forthcoming EPA-issued national
effluent guidelines specifically created for the hydraulic
fracturing of shale gas.
Title: Hearing on ``The Missouri River Flood: An Assessment
of River Management in 2011 and Operational Plans for the
Future''
Date: November 30, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony from Member of Congress
representing Missouri River Valley districts, local officials,
and residents impacted by the catastrophic Missouri River flood
of 2011. This hearing provided oversight of Corps activities
related to Missouri River management.
Title: Hearing on ``Integrated Planning and Permitting: An
Opportunity for EPA to Provide Communities with Flexibility to
Make Smart Investments in Water Quality''
Date: December 14, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony from city mayors, the
commissioner of a city's department of environmental
protection, a municipal wastewater utility director, a state
water quality program director, an environmental activist
advocate, and the EPA on the Agency's proposed integrated
planning and permitting regulatory prioritization effort under
the Clean Water Act.
Title: Review of Innovative Financing Approaches for
Community Water Infrastructure Projects--Parts I & II
Dates: February 28 and March 21, 2012
Purpose: Received testimony from city mayors, municipal and
private water utility directors, experts in municipal and
private capital project finance, associations of water quality
professionals and contractors, and a State infrastructure
financing authority on potential innovative financing tools,
including public or private funding and investment mechanisms,
to better enable local communities to finance wastewater and
drinking water facilities mandated by State and Federal
environmental laws and regulations.
Title: A Review of the President's Fiscal Year 2013 Budget
Request for the Army Corps of Engineers
Date: March 27, 2012
Purpose: Received testimony from the Army Corps of
Engineers on their proposed budget and program priorities for
FY 2013 and provided Members with an opportunity to review the
FY 2013 budget requests, as well as Administration priorities
for consideration in the Subcommittee's legislative and
oversight agenda for the Second Session of the 112th Congress.
Title: A Review of the President's Fiscal Year 2013 Budget
Request for the Environmental Protection Agency
Date: March 28, 2012
Purpose: Received testimony from the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) on their proposed budget and program
priorities for FY 2013 and provided Members with an opportunity
to review the agency's FY 2013 budget requests, as well as
Administration priorities for consideration in the
Subcommittee's legislative and oversight agenda for the Second
Session of the 112th Congress.
Title: How Reliability of the Inland Waterway System
Impacts Economic Competitiveness
Date: April 18, 2012
Purpose: Received testimony from U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers and industry as to the challenges maintaining the
nation's antiquated inland waterway transportation system and
its impacts on the nation's competitiveness and job creation.
Summary of Any Additional Oversight Activities Undertaken by Committee
or Recommendations or Actions
HEARINGS
Title: Biometric IDs for Pilots and Transportation Workers:
Diary of Failures.
Date: April 14, 2011.
Summary: See summary section above.
Title: How to Best Improve Bus Safety on Our Nation's
Highways
Date: June 13, 2011
Summary: See summary section above.
Title: TSA Oversight Part III: Effective Security or
Security Theater?
Date: March 26, 2012
Summary: See summary section above.
Title: TSA Oversight Part IV: Is TSA Effectively Procuring,
Deploying, and Storing Aviation Security Equipment and
Technology?
Date: May 9, 2012
Summary: See summary section above.
INVESTIGATIONS AND OTHER ACTIVITIES
Report Title: TSA Ignores More Cost-Effective Screening
Model.
Date: June 3, 2011.
Summary: See summary section above
Report Title: A Decade Later: A Call for TSA Reform.
Date: November 16, 2011.
Summary: See summary section above.
Report Title: Airport Insecurity: TSA's Failure to Cost-
Effectively Procure, Deploy, and Warehouse its Screening
Technology
Date: May 9, 2012
Summary: See summary section above.
Summary of Oversight Hearings Pursuant to Clauses 2(n), (o), and (p) of
Rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives
In the 112th Congress, Rule XI of the Rules of the House of
Representatives requires each standing Committee, or a
Subcommittee thereof, to hold at least one hearing during each
120-day period following the establishment of the Committee on
the topic of waste, fraud, abuse, or mismanagement in
government programs as documented by any report from an
Inspector General or the Comptroller General. Further, the
Committee shall hold at least one hearing on disclaimers of
agency financial statements from auditors and one hearing on
issues raised by reports issued by the Comptroller General
indicating that Federal programs under the Committee's
jurisdiction are at high risk for waste, fraud, and
mismanagement, known as the ``high-risk list.'' The Committee
complied with the requirements of Rule XI by conducting the
following hearings:
Full Committee
Title: Stimulus Status: Two Years and Counting
Date: May 4, 2011
Purpose: The Full Committee met on May 4, 2011, pursuant to
House Rule XI, clause 2(n), to examine the audit work performed
by the General Accountability Office (GAO), DOT IG, and the
Environmental Protection Agency Inspector General (EPA IG) on
implementation of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.
GAO and the two IGs performed extensive audit work on the
implementation of funded programs from the DOT, including the
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the Federal Transit
Administration (FTA), the Federal Aviation Administration
(FAA), and the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), and the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The audits uncovered
significant lapses in oversight by the implementing agencies,
mismanagement of grants and funds, and lack of transparency.
See full summary in summary section above.
Aviation
Title: Comprehensive Review of FAA's NextGen Program:
Costs, Benefits, Progress, and Management
Date: October 5, 2011
Purpose: Pursuant to House Rule XI, clause 2(n), this
hearing examined the audit work performed by the GAO and DOT IG
on implementation of the FAA's Next Gen Program. While the
benefits from the NextGen project were not disputed, the
problems in executing such a large program were highlighted,
including poor management by the FAA. See full summary in
summary section above.
Title: Review of Aviation Safety in the United States
Date: April 25, 2012
Purpose: Pursuant to House Rule XI, clause 2(n), this
hearing examined the audit work performed by the GAO and DOT IG
on aviation system safety issues, including the recent rise in
operational errors and runway incursions, and potential causes
and remedies of them. See full summary in summary section
above.
Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation
Title: Improving and Streamlining the Coast Guard's
Acquisition Program
Date: April 13, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony, pursuant to House Rule XI,
clause 2(n), as a result of a report issued by the GAO on the
Coast Guard's acquisition process. In the report, the GAO made
several recommendations to reduce bureaucratic inefficiencies
within the Coast Guard's acquisition directorate to reduce cost
overruns and delays. See full summary in summary section above.
Title: What Will It Cost?: Protecting the Taxpayer from an
Unachievable Coast Guard Acquisition Program
Date: October 4, 2011
Purpose: Subcommittee met to examine Coast Guard
Acquisitions programs. This hearing was a follow-up to the
April 13, 2011 Subcommittee hearing on the same. This hearing
reviewed issues raised in the July 2011 Government
Accountability Office (GAO) report entitled ``Action Needed as
Approved Deepwater Program Remains Unachievable.'' See full
summary in summary section above.
Title: Creating American Jobs and Assuring the Safety and
Security of America's Waterways: A Review of the Coast Guard's
5-year Capital Improvement Plan
Date: May 16, 2012
Purpose: The Subcommittee met to review the status of the
Coast Guard's current acquisition program and examine the
program's sustainability. This was the third hearing the
Subcommittee has held this Congress to review the Service's
acquisition program. The last hearing was held on October 4,
2011.
Economic Development, Public Buildings and Emergency Management
Title: Sitting on Our Assets: Cutting Spending and Private
Redevelopment of Underperforming Buildings
Date: February 10, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony on the costs to the taxpayer of
underperforming or vacant assets, models for their
redevelopment or reuse, and how spending can be reduced through
private redevelopment of underperforming assets. The hearing
was conducted pursuant to the Committee's plan for oversight of
real property management and Clause 2(n) of House Rule XI on
waste, fraud, abuse or mismanagement of government programs and
Clause 2(p) on a management area designated by the GAO as a
high-risk management issue. See full summary in summary section
above.
Title: Can a Civilian BRAC Commission Consolidate Federal
Office Space and Save Taxpayers Billions?
Date: April 6, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony on whether a civilian BRAC
process can effectively consolidate federal office space,
maximize value to the taxpayer, and save taxpayers billions.
The hearing was conducted pursuant to the Committee's plan for
oversight of real property management and Clause 2(n) of House
Rule XI and Clause 2(p) on a management area designated by the
GAO as a high-risk management issue. See full summary in
summary section above
Title: The Securities and Exchange Commission's $500
Million Fleecing of America
Date: June 16, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony on the SEC's management of its
independent authority to lease space and the May 16, 2011 SEC
IG report related to SEC's lease procurement of 900,000 square
feet of space under a 10-year lease worth over $500 million.
The hearing was conducted pursuant to the Committee's plan for
oversight of agencies with independent leasing authority and
Clause 2(n) of House Rule XI on waste, fraud, abuse or
mismanagement of government programs and Clause 2(p) on a
management area designated by the GAO as a high-risk management
issue. See full summary in summary section above.
Title: The Securities and Exchange Commission's $500
Million Fleecing of America: Part Two
Date: July 6, 2011
Purpose: The Subcommittee held a second hearing to receive
testimony on the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission's
(SEC) mismanagement of its independent authority to lease space
and the May 16, 2011 SEC IG report related to SEC's lease
procurement of 900,000 square feet of space under a 10-year
lease of Constitution Center in Washington, DC worth over $500
million. The hearing was conducted pursuant to the Committee's
plan for oversight of agencies with independent leasing
authority, Clause 2(n) of House Rule XI on waste, fraud, abuse
or mismanagement of government programs, and Clause 2(p) on a
management area designated by the GAO as a high-risk management
issue. See full summary in summary section above.
Title: A Review and Analysis of the Proposed $400 Million
Los Angeles, California Federal Courthouse Project
Date: November 4, 2011
Purpose: The Subcommittee held a hearing that focused on
the current justification of a third courthouse in Los Angeles,
California including the size, scope, compliance with courtroom
sharing guidelines, and cost implications of the entire
courthouse complex in Los Angeles.
Summary: Received testimony from the U.S. courts, the
General Services Administration (GSA) and the Government
Accountability Office (GAO). The hearing was conducted pursuant
to Clause 2(n) of House Rule XI on waste, fraud, abuse or
mismanagement of government programs and Clause 2(p) on a
management area designated by the GAO as a high-risk management
issue. See full summary in summary section above.
Title: One Year Later: Still Sitting on Our Assets
Date: February 9, 2012
Purpose: The Subcommittee held a field hearing at the Annex
of the Old Post Office Building (OPO) on Pennsylvania Avenue NW
in downtown Washington, District of Columbia to receive
testimony on progress made in redeveloping the property as well
as the status of other underperforming and vacant federal
properties throughout the country. The hearing was conducted
pursuant to the Committee's plan for oversight of real property
management and Clause 2(n) of House Rule XI on waste, fraud,
abuse or mismanagement of government programs and Clause 2(p)
on a management area designated by the GAO as a high-risk
management issue. See full summary in summary section above.
Title: Sitting on Our Assets: The Cotton Annex
Date: March 22, 2012
Purpose: The Subcommittee held a field hearing at the
Cotton Annex at 300 12th Street SW in downtown Washington,
District of Columbia to receive testimony on the costs to
taxpayers of underperforming or vacant federal properties,
models for their redevelopment or reuse, and how spending can
be reduced through private redevelopment of underperforming
assets. The hearing was conducted pursuant to the Committee's
plan for oversight of real property management and Clause 2(n)
of House Rule XI on waste, fraud, abuse or mismanagement of
government programs and Clause 2(p) on a management area
designated by the GAO as a high-risk management issue. See full
summary in summary section above.
Title: GSA's Squandering of Taxpayer Dollars: A Pattern of
Mismanagement, Excess, and Waste
Date: April 17, 2012
Purpose: The Subcommittee held a hearing to receive
testimony on GSA's waste of taxpayer dollars on a lavish 2010
Western Regional Conference (WRC), its ``Hats Off'' employee
rewards program, and other waste and abuse of taxpayer dollars.
The hearing was conducted pursuant to the Committee's plan for
oversight of real property management and Clause 2(n) of House
Rule XI on waste, fraud, abuse or mismanagement of government
programs and Clause 2(p) on a management area designated by the
GAO as a high-risk management issue. See full summary in
summary section above.
Title: Sitting on Our Assets: The Georgetown Heating Plant
Date: June 19, 2012
Purpose: The Subcommittee held a field hearing at the
Georgetown Heating Plant at 1051 29th Street NW in Washington,
D.C. to receive testimony on the costs to taxpayers of
underperforming or vacant assets and ensuring that the process
for the planned sale of the Georgetown Heating Plant provides
the highest return to the taxpayer. The hearing was conducted
pursuant to the Committee's plan for oversight of real property
management and Clause 2(n) of House Rule XI on waste, fraud,
abuse or mismanagement of government programs and Clause 2(p)
on a management area designated by the GAO as a high-risk
management issue. See full summary in summary section above.
Highways and Transit
Title: Improving and Reforming Our Nation's Surface
Transportation Programs: Beckley, West Virginia Field Hearing
Date: February 14, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony on the local transportation
challenges facing the State of West Virginia, and the local
area surrounding Beckley. This hearing addressed issues related
to ``Funding the Nation's Surface Transportation System,'' a
topic contained on GAO's 2011 High Risk Series. See full
summary in summary section above.
Title: Improving and Reforming Our Nation's Surface
Transportation Programs: Columbus, Ohio Field Hearing.
Date: February 19, 2011.
Purpose: Received testimony on the local transportation
challenges facing the State of Ohio, and the local area
surrounding Columbus. This hearing addressed issues related to
``Funding the Nation's Surface Transportation System,'' a topic
contained on GAO's 2011 High Risk Series. See full summary in
summary section above.
Title: Improving and Reforming Our Nation's Surface
Transportation Programs to Support Job Creation and the Economy
Date: February 23, 2011
Committee: Transportation and Infrastructure; Joint Hearing
with the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works
Purpose: Received testimony in a joint hearing in Los
Angeles, California with the U.S. Senate on the local
transportation challenges facing Southern California and the
State of California. This bicameral field hearing was part of
the Committee's effort to gather ideas and policy proposals to
prepare for the reauthorization of the Federal surface
transportation programs under SAFETEA-LU, which expired on
September 30, 2009, but was extended through September 30,
2011. This hearing addressed issues related to ``Funding the
Nation's Surface Transportation System,'' a topic contained on
GAO's 2011 High Risk Series. See full summary in summary
section above.
Title: Improving and Reforming Our Nation's Surface
Transportation Programs: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma Field Hearing
Date: February 24, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony on the local transportation
challenges facing the State of Oklahoma, and the local area
surrounding Oklahoma City. This hearing addressed issues
related to ``Funding the Nation's Surface Transportation
System,'' a topic contained on GAO's 2011 High Risk Series. See
full summary in summary section above.
Title: Improving and Reforming Our Nation's Surface
Transportation Programs: Maitland, Florida Field Hearing
Date: March 14, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony on the local transportation
challenges facing the State of Florida, and the greater Orlando
area. This hearing addressed issues related to ``Funding the
Nation's Surface Transportation System,'' a topic contained on
GAO's 2011 High Risk Series. See full summary in summary
section above.
Title: Improving and Reforming the Nation's Surface
Transportation Programs.
Date: March 29, 2011 and March 30, 2011
Purpose: Received stakeholder testimony related to the
reauthorization of the Federal surface transportation programs.
This hearing addressed issues related to ``Funding the Nation's
Surface Transportation System,'' a topic contained on GAO's
2011 High Risk Series. See full summary in summary section
above.
Title: Policy Proposals from Members of Congress to Reform
the Nation's Surface Transportation Programs
Date: April 5, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony from Members of Congress on
their policy proposals for the reauthorization of the Federal
surface transportation programs. This hearing addressed issues
related to ``Funding the Nation's Surface Transportation
System,'' a topic contained on GAO's 2011 High Risk Series. See
full summary in summary section above.
Title: How to Best Improve Bus Safety on Our Nation's
Highways
Date: June 13, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony related to improving the
existing laws and regulations governing bus safety. The hearing
was part of the Committee's effort to reauthorize Federal
surface transportation programs under SAFETEA-LU, which expired
on September 30, 2009, but was extended through September 30,
2011.
Title: National Infrastructure Bank: More Bureaucracy and
More Red Tape
Date: October 12, 2011
Purpose: Received testimony related to the Administration's
national infrastructure bank proposal that is part of the
American Jobs Act of 2011 (H.R. 12). This hearing addressed
issues related to ``Funding the Nation's Surface Transportation
System,'' a topic contained on GAO's 2011 High Risk Series. See
full summary in summary section above.
Oversight or Legislative Activity Conducted as Part of or as a Result
of the Inventory and Review of Existing, Pending, and Proposed
Regulations and Orders
Full Committee
Title: A Review of the Delays and Problems Associated with
TSA's Transportation Worker Identification Credentials
Date: June 28, 2012
Summary: See summary section above.
Aviation
Title: GPS Reliability: A Review of Aviation Industry
Performance, Safety Issues, and Avoiding Potential New and
Costly Government Burdens
Date: June 23, 2011
Summary: See summary section above.
Title: Comprehensive Review of FAA's NextGen Program:
Costs, Benefits, Progress, and Management
Date: October 5, 2011
Summary: An oversight hearing on the Next Generation Air
Traffic Control System (NextGen) by the Subcommittee on
Aviation to receive testimony on benefits, costs, and the
progress of NextGen implementation.
Title: Roundtable--Terminal Area Safety
Date: November 17, 2011
Summary: The Subcommittee met in an informal setting to
discuss the rise in terminal area air traffic control safety
incidents in which aircraft pass too close to one another.
Title: A Review of Issues Associated with Protecting and
Improving our Nation's Aviation Satellite-based Global
Positioning System Infrastructure
Date: February 8, 2012
Summary: An oversight hearing on the importance of the
Global Positioning System (GPS) as a critical part of
transportation infrastructure and how to protect it to ensure
the transportation safety and efficiencies provided by GPS
technologies and innovations.
Title: FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012
Public Law: P.L. 112-95
Bill Number: H.R. 658
Date: February 14, 2012
Summary: See summary section above.
Title: Roundtable--European Union's Emissions Trading
Scheme
Date: March 28, 2012
Summary: The Subcommittee met in an open, but informal
setting to discuss the European Union's (EU) Emissions Trading
Scheme (ETS) and its impact on the U.S. aviation industry,
international law, and global trade.
Title: Roundtable--NextGen Coalition Building
Date: April 18, 2012
Summary: The Subcommittee met in an informal setting to
discuss air traffic control modernization (NextGen) benefits
and coalition building.
Title: A Review of Aviation Safety in the United States
Date: April 25, 2012
Summary: An oversight hearing on the Federal Aviation
Administration's safety oversight of the aviation system, as
well as ways to improve our very safe system.
Title: Roundtable--FAA's Airport District Office
Reorganization Plans
Date: April 27, 2012
Summary: The Subcommittee, in conjunction with
Representative Howard Coble and the North Carolina
Congressional Delegation, met in an informal setting to discuss
the FAA's Airport District Office reorganization plans.
Title: A Review of FAA's efforts to reduce costs and ensure
safety and efficiency through Realignment and Facility
Consolidation
Date: May 31, 2012
Summary: An oversight hearing on the Federal Aviation
Administration's facility consolidation and realignment plans
and efforts.
Coast Guard
Title: Creating U.S. Maritime Industry Jobs by Reducing
Regulatory Burdens
Date: May 24, 2011
Summary: See summary section above.
Title: Creating Jobs and Increasing U.S. Exports by
Enhancing the Marine Transportation System
Date: June 14, 2011
Summary: See summary section above.
Title: Reducing Regulatory Burdens, Ensuring the Flow of
Commerce, and Protecting Jobs: A Common Sense Approach to
Ballast Water Regulation
Date: July 13, 2011
Summary: See summary section above.
Title: Assuring the Safety of Domestic Energy Production:
Lessons Learned from the DEEPWATER HORIZON Oil Spill
Date: November 2, 2011
Summary: See summary section above.
Title: Recent Regulation of the Maritime Industry: Ensuring
U.S. Job Growth While Improving Environmental and Worker Safety
Date: April 26, 2012
Summary: See summary section above.
Economic Development, Public Buildings and Emergency Management
Title: Improving the Nation's Response to Catastrophic
Disasters: How to Minimize Costs and Streamline our Emergency
Management Programs
Date: March 30, 2011
Summary: See summary section above.
Title: FEMA Reauthorization and Cutting the Red Tape in
Recovery
Date: July 14, 2011
Summary: See summary section above.
Title: Streamlining Emergency Management: Improving
Preparedness, Response, and Cutting Costs
Date: October 13, 2011
Summary: See summary section above.
Highways and Transit
Title: The American Energy and Infrastructure Jobs Act
Bill Number: H.R. 7
Date: Reported to the House on February 13, 2012
Summary: See summary section above.
Title: Surface Transportation Extension Act of 2012, Part
II
Bill Number: H.R. 4348
Date: Passed House on April 18, 2012
Summary: See summary section above.
Railroads, Pipelines and Hazardous Materials
Title: Federal Regulatory Overreach in the Railroad
Industry: Implementing the Rail Safety Improvement Act
Date: March 17, 2011
Summary: See summary section above.
Title: Reducing Regulatory Burdens and Ensuring Safe
Transportation of Hazardous Materials
Date: April 12, 2011
Summary: See summary section above.
Water Resources and the Environment
Title: Reducing Regulatory Burdens Act of 2011
Bill Number: H.R. 872
Summary: See summary section above.
Title: EPA Mining Policies: Assault on Appalachian Jobs
Parts I and II
Dates: May 5, 2011 and May 11, 2011
Summary: See summary section above.
Title: Clean Water Cooperative Federalism Act of 2011
Bill Number: H.R. 2018
Summary: See summary section above.