Committee Reports
106th Congress (1999-2000)
House Report 106-180
|
Committee Reports for the 106th Congress | |
| House Report 106-180 | 1 of 1 | |
|
|
|
57-162
1st Session
106-180
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2000
| June 9, 1999- Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union and ordered to be printed | |
| Mr. WOLF, from the Committee on Appropriations, submitted the following | |
| REPORT | |
| [To accompany H.R. 2084] |
The Committee on Appropriations submits the following report in explanation of the accompanying bill making appropriations for the Department of Transportation and related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2000.
| INDEX TO BILL AND REPORT | Page number | |
| Bill | Report | |
| Narrative summary of Committee action | 2 | |
| Program, project, and activity | 4 | |
| Title I--Department of Transportation: | ||
| Office of the Secretary | 2 | 5 |
| Coast Guard | 6 | 19 |
| Federal Aviation Administration | 10 | 30 |
| Federal Highway Administration | 16 | 72 |
| National Highway Traffic Safety Administration | 18 | 94 |
| Federal Railroad Administration | 21 | 102 |
| Federal Transit Administration | 23 | 114 |
| Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation | 32 | 179 |
| Research and Special Programs Administration | 33 | 180 |
| Office of Inspector General | 35 | 185 |
| Surface Transportation Board | 35 | 186 |
| Title II--Related Agencies: | ||
| Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board | 36 | 187 |
| National Transportation Safety Board | 36 | 188 |
| Title III--General Provisions | 37 | 189 |
| House Report Requirements: | ||
| Appropriations not authorized by law | 199 | |
| Changes in existing law | 194 | |
| Comparison with budget resolution | 200 | |
| Constitutional authority | 191 | |
| Financial assistance to state and local governments | 201 | |
| Five-year projections of outlays | 200 | |
| Ramseyer | 192 | |
| Transfers of funds | 192 | |
| Tabular summary of the bill | 202 |
SUMMARY AND MAJOR RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE BILL
The accompanying bill would provide $13,420,575,000 in new budget (obligational) authority for the programs of the Department of Transportation and related agencies, $60,245,000 less than the $13,480,820,000 requested in the budget. In total, the bill includes obligational authority (new budget authority, guaranteed obligations contained in the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA21), limitations on obligations, and exempt obligations) of $50,699,141,000. This is $3,475,285,000 more than the comparable fiscal year 1999 enacted level and $541,055,000 more than the budget request.
Selected major recommendations in the accompanying bill are:
- (1) An appropriation of $8,298,000,000 for the Federal Aviation Administration, an increase of $685,442,000 above the fiscal year 1999 level;
- (2) A limitation of $2,250,000,000 for grants-in-aid for airports, an increase of $300,000,000 above the fiscal year 1999 level and $650,000,000 above the budget request;
- (3) An appropriation of $2,791,000,000 for operating expenses of the Coast Guard, including $521,000,000 for drug interdiction activities, a forty percent increase over last year's level;
- (4) An appropriation of $571,000,000 for grants to the National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak), to cover capital expenses;
- (5) A total of $60,602,000 for the office of the secretary, $1,975,000 below the budget request;
- (6) Highway program obligation limitations of $27,701,350,000, consistent with provisions of TEA21, and $2,190,350,000 over fiscal year 1999;
- (7) Transit program obligations of $5,797,000,000, consistent with provisions of TEA21, and $824,000,000 over fiscal year 1999; and
- (8) A total of $181,884,000 for motor carrier safety operations, research, and grants, an increase of $22,109,000 above fiscal year 1999.
THE EFFECT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TRANSPORTATION EQUITY ACT FOR THE 21ST CENTURY
Last year, over the objections of the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations and the House and Senate Budget Committees, the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA21) amended the Budget Enforcement Act to provide two new additional spending categories or `firewalls', the highway category and the mass transit category. The highway category is comprised of all funding for federal-aid highways, motor carrier safety programs, highway safety grants, and highway safety research and development programs. The highway category obligations are capped at $28,085,150,000 and outlays (adjusted) are capped at $24,574,000,000 in fiscal year 2000. If appropriations action forces highway obligations or outlays to exceed these levels, the difference is charged against the non-defense discretionary spending category. Likewise, the transit category is comprised of funding for transit formula grants, transit capital projects, Federal Transit Administration administrative expenses, transit planning and research programs, and university transportation research. The mass transit category obligations are capped at $5,797,000,000 and outlays are capped at $4,117,000,000 in fiscal year 2000. Any additional appropriated funding above the levels specified as guaranteed for each transit program in TEA21 (that which could be appropriated from general funds authorized under section 5338(h) of TEA21) is charged to the non-defense discretionary category.
These `firewalls' make it virtually impossible for the Appropriations Committee to make downward adjustments to those funding levels in the annual appropriations process over the next four years. This Committee argued that providing large increases for those programs, and guaranteeing those amounts through firewall mechanisms and points of order in the House, essentially created mandatory appropriations within the discretionary caps, which would undermine Congressional flexibility to fund other equally important programs. As a result, of the $50,699,141,000 of budgetary resources provided in this bill, nearly 70 percent, is not controlled by annual appropriations Acts but is predetermined by TEA21. The remaining $12,700,000,000 includes appropriations and budgetary resources principally for the National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak), the U.S. Coast Guard, the Federal Aviation Administration, the offices of the secretary, the Research and Special Programs Administration, and a number of smaller independent agencies. These appropriations are currently controlled by annual appropriations action.
The Committee has worked hard in this new environment to produce a balanced bill, which provides adequately for all modes of transportation. The transportation subcommittee has been allocated an 8.5 percent increase ($3.5 billion) in outlays for the coming fiscal year, while the non-defense discretionary budget as a whole is at a hard freeze. Clearly, this increase will cause non-transportation programs all across the government to be under more severe budget pressures, in order to keep the overall budget in balance. However, the effect of the firewalls also leaves its mark on those transportation programs and activities not covered within the surface transportation guarantees--most notably the Coast Guard and the Federal Aviation Administration. Since the highway and transit guarantees consume three-quarters of the increase provided to the Subcommittee, other agencies in the bill must compete for leftover funding, which is essentially at a hard freeze. The FAA and the Coast Guard together requested an increase of almost $800,000,000 in fiscal year 2000 outlays. Although reasonable, this level of funding is simply not possible because of the firewalls, resulting in a Committee bill approximately $270,000,000 below the request for these safety-related agencies. Since the Subcommittee is required to allocate the majority of its increased resources to firewalled programs, these other agencies will continue to feel the budgetary pressures.
The Committee has done the best it can considering the new firewalls. However, the Committee is concerned that TEA21 continues to skew transportation priorities inappropriately, by providing a banquet of increases to highway and transit spending while leaving safety-related agencies such as the Coast Guard and FAA to scramble for the remaining crumbs. The Committee continues to believe that safety should remain the Federal Government's highest responsibility in the transportation area. Were it not for the firewalls, a portion of the generous 8.5 percent increase could have been allocated to improvements in aviation or maritime safety, and more could have been done to fight the menace of illegal drug trafficking, while still providing significant increases in highway and transit programs. The Committee has also been unable to consider increases above the guaranteed levels for highways and transit programs, because it would have required even further reductions in critical FAA and Coast Guard programs.
TABULAR SUMMARY
A table summarizing the amounts provided for fiscal year 1999 and the amounts recommended in the bill for fiscal year 2000 compared with the budget estimates is included at the end of this report.
COMMITTEE HEARINGS
The Committee has conducted extensive hearings on the programs and projects provided for in the Department of Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill for fiscal year 2000. These hearings are contained in seven published volumes. The Committee received testimony from officials of the executive branch, Members of Congress, officials of the General Accounting Office, officials of state and local governments, and private citizens.
The bill recommendations for fiscal year 2000 have been developed after careful consideration of all the information available to the Committee.
PROGRAM, PROJECT, AND ACTIVITY
During fiscal year 2000, for the purposes of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (Public Law 99-177), as amended, with respect to appropriations contained in the accompanying bill, the terms `program, project, and activity' shall mean any item for which a dollar amount is contained in an appropriations Act (including joint resolutions providing continuing appropriations) or accompanying reports of the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations, or accompanying conference reports and joint explanatory statements of the committee of conference. This definition shall apply to all programs for which new budget (obligational) authority is provided, as well as to capital investment grants, Federal Transit Administration. In addition, the percentage reductions made pursuant to a sequestration order to funds appropriated for facilities and equipment, Federal Aviation Administration, and for acquisition, construction, and improvements, Coast Guard, shall be applied equally to each `budget item' that is listed under said accounts in the budget justifications submitted to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations as modified by subsequent appropriations Acts and accompanying committee reports, conference reports, or joint explanatory statements of the committee of conference.
SAFETY PROGRAMS
In this bill, the Committee has worked hard to protect funding for essential safety-related programs of the Department of Transportation and the independent agencies. This has been difficult, but not impossible, given the budget constraints faced by the Federal Government this year. In some cases, funds have been added to the administration's request for safety-related activities. However, if, in the judgment of departmental officials any of the Committee's recommendations would significantly harm transportation safety, or if unanticipated safety needs arise during the course of the appropriations process, the Committee welcomes discussions with the administration to adjust individual funding levels and provide the funding needed. The bill also allows significant flexibility through the reprogramming process, which requires no further legislative action. The Committee will work with administration officials to reprogram funds for safety programs if that should be required.
TITLE I
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
--------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 1 ($60,490,000)
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 2 62,577,000
Recommended in the bill 1 (60,602,000)
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 +112,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 -1,975,000
--------------------------------------------------
The bill provides a total program level of $60,602,000 for the salaries and expenses of the various offices comprising the Office of the Secretary. The Committee has not approved the consolidated appropriations request for the various offices within the office of the secretary and has continued to provide appropriations for each office within the office of the secretary. Specific program recommendations are discussed in this report under the individual appropriations accounts.
Congressional justifications.--The Committee appreciates the timely submission of the department's fiscal year 2000 congressional justifications. The Committee again directs the department to submit all of the department's fiscal year congressional justifications on the first Monday in February, concurrent with the official submission of the President's budget to Congress.
The department is also directed to submit its fiscal year 2001 congressional justification materials for the salaries and expenses of the office of the secretary at the same level of detail provided in the congressional justifications presented in fiscal year 2000.
Staffing levels.--The offices comprising the office of the secretary are directed not to fill any positions in fiscal year 1999 that are currently vacant if such vacancies are proposed in this Act for elimination in fiscal year 2000.
Assessments.--The Committee directs that assessments charged by the office of the secretary to the modal administrations shall be for administrative activities, not policy initiatives.
GENERAL PROVISIONS
Limitation on political and Presidential appointees.--The Committee has included a provision in the bill (sec. 305), similar to provisions in past Department of Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriations Acts, which limits the number of political and Presidential appointees within the Department of Transportation. The ceiling for fiscal year 2000 is 100 personnel, which is the same level as enacted in fiscal year 1999. The bill specifies that no political or presidential appointee may be detailed outside the Department of Transportation.
Transfer authority- The bill contains a general provision (sec. 331) that authorizes the Secretary of Transportation to transfer funds appropriated to any office of the Office of the Secretary to any other office of the Office of the Secretary, provided that no appropriation shall be increased or decreased by more than 12 percent by all such transfers. In addition, any transfer shall be submitted for approval to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations.
IMMEDIATE OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY
------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 $1,624,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 1 (1,967,000)
Recommended in the bill 1,867,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 +243,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 -100,000
------------------------------------------------
The Immediate Office of the Secretary has the primary responsibility to provide overall planning, direction, and control of departmental affairs. The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,867,000 for expenses of the immediate office of the secretary, which represents an increase of $243,000 above the fiscal year 1999 enacted level and $100,000 below the level assumed in the budget request. The recommendation assumes the elimination of the new counselor to the secretary position (-$100,000).
Eliminate counselor to the secretary.--The Committee recommendation assumes the elimination of the counselor to the secretary position, a new position proposed in fiscal year 2000. The Committee believes that current staffing levels in the immediate office of the secretary and the resources provided in the bill are sufficient to enable the secretary to carry out his legislative agenda, formulate national transportation policy, and to promote and foster an intermodal transportation system, economic growth and trade.
IMMEDIATE OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY SECRETARY
----------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 $585,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 1 (612,000)
Recommended in the bill 612,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 +27,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2000
----------------------------------------------
The Immediate Office of the Deputy Secretary has the primary responsibility to assist the Secretary in the overall planning, direction and control of departmental affairs. The Committee recommends an appropriation of $612,000 for expenses of the office of the deputy secretary, which represents an increase of $27,000 above the fiscal year 1999 enacted level and the same level assumed in the budget request.
OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL
------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 $8,750,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 1 (9,150,000)
Recommended in the bill 9,000,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 +250,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 -150,000
------------------------------------------------
The Office of the General Counsel provides legal services to the Office of the Secretary and coordinates and reviews the legal work of the chief counsels' offices of the operating administrations.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $9,000,000 for expenses of the office of general counsel, which represents an increase of $250,000 above the fiscal year 1999 enacted level and $150,000 below the level assumed in the budget request. The recommendation assumes the elimination of 1 attorney advisor (-$150,000).
OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR POLICY
------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 $2,808,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 1 (2,924,000)
Recommended in the bill
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 -2,808,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 -2,924,000
------------------------------------------------
The Committee recommendation deletes the appropriation for the office of the assistant secretary for policy. Funding to support the activities of this office are contained in an appropriation for a new office, the office of the assistant secretary for transportation policy and intermodalism, which is discussed later in this report.
OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR AVIATION AND INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS
------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 $7,650,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 1 (7,732,000)
Recommended in the bill 7,632,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 -18,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 -100,000
------------------------------------------------
The Assistant Secretary for Aviation and International Affairs is responsible for administering economic regulatory functions regarding the airline industry and provides departmental leadership and coordination on international transportation policy issues relating to maritime, trade, technical assistance and cooperative programs.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $7,632,000 for expenses of the office of the assistant secretary for aviation and international affairs, which represents a reduction of $18,000 from the fiscal year 1999 enacted level, and $100,000 below the level assumed in the budget request. The recommendation assumes the elimination of one international transportation specialist. The bill includes a provision that permits the collection and crediting to this appropriation of up to $1,250,000 in user fees, as requested in the budget.
OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR BUDGET AND PROGRAMS
------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 $6,349,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 1 (6,790,000)
Recommended in the bill 6,770,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 +421,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 -20,000
------------------------------------------------
The Assistant Secretary for Budget and Programs is responsible for developing, reviewing and presenting budget resource requirements for the department to the Secretary, Congress and the Office of Management and Budget.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $6,770,000 for expenses of the office of the assistant secretary for budget and programs, which represents an increase of $421,000 above the fiscal year 1999 enacted level, and $20,000 below the level assumed in the budget request. The recommendation also disallows increases in reception and representation costs (-$20,000).
Reception and representation costs- The Committee has not provided an increase of $20,000 for additional representation and reception activities. This request has been rejected for the past several years. In light of staffing reductions and budget constraints, approving additional appropriations for reception and representation cannot be justified.
OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 $1,941,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 1 (2,039,000)
Recommended in the bill 2,039,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 +98,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2000
------------------------------------------------
The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Governmental Affairs is responsible for coordinating all Congressional, intergovernmental, and consumer activities of the department.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,039,000 for this office, which represents an increase of $98,000 above the fiscal year 1999 enacted level, and the same as the level assumed in the budget request.
The Committee directs the department to notify the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations not less than three business days before any discretionary grant award, letter of intent, or full funding grant agreement in excess of $1,000,000 is announced by the department or its modal administrations from: (1) any discretionary program of the Federal Highway Administration other than the emergency relief program; (2) the airport improvement program of the Federal Aviation Administration; and (3) any program of the Federal Transit Administration other than the formula grants and fixed guideway modernization programs. Such notification shall include the date on which the official announcement of the grant is to be made.
OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR ADMINISTRATION
-------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 $19,722,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 1 (18,847,000)
Recommended in the bill 17,767,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 -1,955,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 -1,080,000
-------------------------------------------------
The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration is responsible for coordinating, overseeing and conducting various accounting, procurement, personnel management, and ADP operations of the department.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $17,767,000 for expenses of the office of the assistant secretary for administration, which represents a reduction of $1,955,000 from the fiscal year 1999 enacted level, and $1,080,000 below the level assumed in the budget request. The recommendation assumes the following reductions:
------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------
Eliminate funding for human resource information system -$250,000
Eliminate 2 personnel management specialists -150,000
Eliminate 3 program analysts -180,000
General reduction due to budget constraints -500,000
------------------------------------------------------------------
Human resource information system (HRIS)- The Committee recommendation deletes funding for the human resource information system and directs that none of the funds contained in this Act shall be available for the implementation of the system. By the department's own admission, HRIS is still in its very preliminary concept exploration phase and a total cost estimate and schedule for delivery cannot be developed until completion of certain decision points, which are not expected until the middle of fiscal year 2000. Any further funding for this activity is premature and unjustified at this time.
Personnel reductions- The Committee recommendation deletes funding requested for several positions, including two personnel management specialists and three program analysts. These positions are currently vacant.
General reduction- Due to budget constraints, the Committee recommendation reduces the budget request for the office of administration by $500,000. The Committee directs that such reductions be taken from non-personnel activities, such as contractor support, overhead and other related activities, to avoid personnel reductions not otherwise directed by the Committee.
OFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS
------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 $1,565,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 1 (1,836,000)
Recommended in the bill 1,836,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 +271,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2000
------------------------------------------------
The Office of Public Affairs is responsible for news releases, articles, fact sheets, briefing materials, publications, and audio-visual materials of the department.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,836,000 for expenses of the office of public affairs, which represents an increase of $271,000 over the fiscal year 1999 enacted level, and the same level assumed in the budget request.
EXECUTIVE SECRETARIAT
------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 $1,047,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 1 (1,102,000)
Recommended in the bill 1,102,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 +55,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2000
------------------------------------------------
The Executive Secretariat assists the Secretary and Deputy Secretary in carrying out their management functions and responsibilities by controlling and coordinating internal and external written materials.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,102,000 for expenses of the office of the executive secretariat, which represents an increase of $55,000 over the fiscal year 1999 enacted level, and the same level as assumed in the budget request.
BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS
----------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 $561,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 1 (520,000)
Recommended in the bill 520,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 -41,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2000
----------------------------------------------
The Board of Contract Appeals provides an independent forum for considering all contract-related claims by or against a contractor involving any element of the department.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $520,000 for expenses of the board of contract appeals, which represents a decrease of $41,000 from the fiscal year 1999 enacted level, and the same level assumed in the budget request.
OFFICE OF SMALL AND DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS UTILIZATION
------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 $1,020,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 1 (1,222,000)
Recommended in the bill 1,222,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 +202,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2000
------------------------------------------------
The Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization is responsible for promoting small and disadvantaged business participation in the department's procurement and grants programs. The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,222,000 for expenses of the office of small and disadvantaged business utilization, which represents an increase of $202,000 over the fiscal year 1999 enacted level, and the same level assumed in the budget request.
The Committee understands that there are many qualified, willing and able minority-owned businesses, women-owned businesses, and small businesses that design and place advertising and advertising campaigns, which can assist the department in its efforts to better target ethnic and general audiences in the print, electronic, and radio media. The Committee urges the department to utilize those qualified minority-owned, women-owned, and small businesses in the initiation, design and placement of its advertising in the print, radio, and electronic media.
OFFICE OF INTELLIGENCE AND SECURITY
------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 $1,036,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 1 (1,574,000)
Recommended in the bill 1,454,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 +418,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 -120,000
------------------------------------------------
The Office of Intelligence and Security was created during fiscal year 1990 to address transportation intelligence and security issues. The primary purposes of the office are to provide intelligence and security oversight of the operating administrations to increase the safety and security of the traveling public, and to provide the Secretary and Deputy Secretary with current intelligence and security information, with special emphasis on potential or actual terrorist threats to transportation interests.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,454,000 for expenses of the office of intelligence and security, which represents an increase of $418,000 over the fiscal year 1999 enacted level, and a decrease of $120,000 from the levels assumed in the budget request. The recommendation disallows funding for CIA support reimbursement (-$120,000).
CIA support reimbursement.--The Committee recommendation deletes funds requested to reimburse the Department of Defense for a full-time liaison with elements of the intelligence community. The Committee expects that such support currently provided in fiscal year 1999 by the Department of Defense shall continue into fiscal year 2000.
OFFICE OF THE CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER
------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 $4,875,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 1 (5,075,000)
Recommended in the bill 5,000,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 +125,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 -75,000
------------------------------------------------
The Office of the Chief Information Officer serves as the principle advisor to the Secretary on matters involving information resources and information systems management, including responsibility over the Federal Aviation Administration's Year 2000 compliance efforts.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $5,000,000 for expenses of the office of the chief information officer, which represents an increase of $125,000 over the fiscal year 1999 enacted level, and $75,000 below the level assumed in the budget request. The recommendation assumes a staffing level of 20 full time equivalent positions. The recommendation includes $50,000 for information systems security activities. These funds are also supplemented by funds provided to the department's modal administrations for similar activities.
OFFICE OF INTERMODALISM
------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 $957,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 1 (1,187,000)
Recommended in the bill
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 -957,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 -1,187,000
------------------------------------------------
The Committee recommendation deletes the appropriation for the office of intermodalism. Funding to support the activities of this office are contained in an appropriation for a new office, the office of the assistant secretary for transportation policy and intermodalism, which is discussed later in this report.
OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR TRANSPORTATION POLICY AND INTERMODALISM
----------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999
Budget request, fiscal year 2000
Recommended in the bill $3,781,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 +3,781,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 +3,781,000
----------------------------------------------
The Committee recommends $3,781,000 for the office of the assistant secretary of transportation policy and intermodalism. This office is to encompass the activities previously performed by the office of the assistant secretary for policy and the office of intermodalism. The office shall be the chief domestic policy office for the department and shall be responsible for analysis, development, communication and review of policy and plans for domestic transportation issues, including intermodal initiatives involving the department's multiple operating administrations.
To satisfy the requirement of Title V of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991, the Committee directs that there be established within the office of the assistant secretary for transportation policy and intermodalism an office of intermodalism, of which the assistant secretary for transportation policy and intermodalism shall serve as the director. The recommendation assumes the following reductions from the budget requests for the office of the assistant secretary of policy and the office of intermodalism:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eliminate associate deputy secretary and director, office of intermodalism position -$150,000
Reduce funds for website development -80,000
Delete funds for radio navigation staff position -50,000
Delete funds for transportation industry analyst -50,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Intermodal trade.--The Committee recognizes that intermodal trade is increasingly dependent on air freight. As reliance on air cargo continues to grow in the years ahead, the impact of this burgeoning trade on the aviation system will increase as well. While significant resources have been expended to improve the connectivity of the truck and rail modes of freight movement, little attention has been paid to the growing need for better intermodal connections between air and surface modes of freight transportation. The Committee encourages the department to examine what steps should be undertaken to facilitate the seamless movement of goods between the air and surface modes: including infrastructure improvements at freight and reliever airports, that would improve connectivity among rail, truck, and air freight; reduce congestion at the borders and other international ports of entry; and facilitate the development of inland ports. These recommendations should support ongoing efforts by the Department of the Treasury to develop the automated commercial environment and international trade processing centers.
OFFICE OF CIVIL RIGHTS
----------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 $6,966,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 7,742,000
Recommended in the bill 7,742,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 +776,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2000
----------------------------------------------
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $7,742,000 for expenses of the office of civil rights, which represents an increase of $776,000 above fiscal year 1999 enacted level and the same level as the budget request.
The Office of Civil Rights is responsible for advising the Secretary on civil rights and equal opportunity matters and ensuring full implementation of civil rights opportunity precepts in all of the department's official actions and programs. This office is responsible for enforcing laws and regulations that prohibit discrimination in federally operated and federally assisted transportation programs. This office also handles all civil rights cases related to Department of Transportation employees.
TRANSPORTATION PLANNING, RESEARCH, AND DEVELOPMENT
----------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 $9,000,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 6,275,000
Recommended in the bill 2,950,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 -6,050,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 -3,325,000
----------------------------------------------
This appropriation finances those research activities and studies concerned with planning, analysis, and information development needed to support the Secretary's responsibilities in the formulation of national transportation policies. The overall program is carried out primarily through contracts with other federal agencies, educational institutions, nonprofit research organizations, and private firms.
The Committee recommends $2,950,000 for this appropriation, which represents a decrease of $6,030,000 below the fiscal year 1999 enacted level and $3,325,000 below the budget request. The following table summarizes the Committee's recommendation for activities funded within this account:
| Transportation policy and planning: | |
| Environmental, energy and safety policy | $100,000 |
| Transportation economic policy | 164,000 |
| Radionavigation and positioning | 920,000 |
| Aviation and international policy | 200,000 |
| Salaries and administrative costs: | |
| Personnel compensation and benefits | 1,216,000 |
| Other administrative costs | 97,000 |
| TASC | 153,000 |
| Systems development | 100,000 |
| Total, transportation, planning, research, and development | 2,950,000 |
The Committee recommendation deletes funding for several new non-critical studies and initiatives, including funding for (1) the center on environmental analysis and forecasting; (2) an interagency personnel agreement for an engineer on the radio navigation and position staff; (3) modernization of aviation data systems; and (4) a freight tagging technology study. Funding of $750,000 is provided for hazard, threat and detection monitoring and shall be available to supplement funding provided elsewhere in the office of the secretary and the department's operating administrations for similar activities. Funding of $100,000 is provided for continuation activities of the electronic grants project, but funding is deferred for new automated rulemaking activities due to budget constraints. In addition, $100,000 is included within the funds provided for transportation economic policy studies to conduct a study of telecommuting (teleWork), clean air, and energy conservation in transportation policy, in conjunction with representatives from the high-technology business community, state and local governments, and relevant federal agencies.
TRANSPORTATION ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICE CENTER
---------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 19991 ($124,124,000)
Budget request, fiscal year 20002 (229,953,000)
Recommended in the bill3 (157,965,000)
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 (+33,841,000)
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 (-71,988,000)
---------------------------------------------------
The transportation administrative service center was created in fiscal year 1997 to provide common administrative services to the various modes and outside entities that desire those services for economy and efficiency. The fund is financed through negotiated agreements with the department's operating administrations and other governmental elements requiring the center's capabilities.
The Committee agreed to create the transportation administrative service center in fiscal year 1997 at the department's request. In agreeing to that request, the Committee limited (1) the activities that can be transferred to the transportation administrative service center to only those approved by the agency administrator, and (2) special assessments or reimbursable agreements levied against any program, project or activity funded in this Act to only those assessments or reimbursable agreements and the basis for them are presented to and approved by the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations. These limitations are continued in fiscal year 2000.
The Committee recommends a limitation of $157,965,000, an increase of $33,841,000 above the fiscal year 1999 enacted level and $71,988,000 below the request. The recommended reductions from the budget request reflect the following adjustments:
| Eliminate the transportation computer center | -$15,600,000 |
| Disallow transfer of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Office of Aeronautical Charting and Cartography to the TASC | -55,055,000 |
| Disallow request for additional staffing increases | -1,333,000 |
Transportation computer center.--Last year in the House-reported fiscal year 1999 Department of Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, the House proposed to eliminate the transportation computer center. The Committee based its recommendation on an Inspector General (IG) report that found that several services offered by the transportation administrative service center raised substantive cost effectiveness issues. Based upon an evaluation by a DOT consultant and its own audit, the IG concluded that the `justification for continued operation of the computer center is in doubt.' The House agreed at that time and proposed to eliminate the transportation computer center in fiscal year 1999.
In the conference agreement accompanying the fiscal year 1999 Department of Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, the conferees restored funding for the transportation computer center, noting that the IG's findings may have been based on an out-dated analysis. At that time, the conferees directed the IG to review again the transportation computer center's cost effectiveness, utility and value added to the department. That new audit showed that the center is not competitive in the market place and that current rates for data processing and storage are approximately two and six times higher, respectively, than those quoted by another Government center providing comparable data processing and storage services. Moreover, the center was 31 percent less efficient than the average industry data processing center when compared to benchmarking data for 168 Government and commercial centers. Another February 1999 independent assessment of the center showed that its fiscal year 1998 costs were approximately 11 percent higher than comparable Government computer centers, and 15 percent higher than comparable industry computer centers. Finally, the IG audit recommended to the deputy secretary that the computer center discontinue offering its current services within two years.
Consistent with the IG's report, the Committee's recommendation eliminates the transportation computer center in fiscal year 2000 within the transportation administrative service center and permits the operating administrations to procure similar services from other governmental or private providers.
Disallow transfer of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Office of Aeronautical Charting and Cartography to the TASC.--The budget proposed that the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Office of Aeronautical Charting and Cartography (AC&C) be transferred from the Department of Commerce and placed within the TASC. While the department believes that the AC&C product offerings are closely aligned with the services provided by TASC, the Committee asserts that the aeronautical charting services ultimately support aviation safety missions within the FAA, and it is more logical that these services be performed within the FAA. The Committee recommendation includes funding for this activity within the FAA's appropriation for fiscal year 2000. Accordingly, the TASC obligation limitation has been reduced by $55,055,000 and staff reduced by 378 FTEs.
General provision.--The Committee has included a general provision (sec. 318) which provides that amounts budgeted for the transportation administrative service center in this bill are reduced, on a pro-rata, basis to a limitation of $147,965,000. The Committee believes that this reduction is justified given the significant personnel reductions that have occurred within the department over the past several years. Common administrative expenses like copying, supplies, computer services, motor pool, parking and transit benefits, and telecommunications services should be declining and can be accommodated within the levels provided in this Act. Moreover, the Committee's recommendation for the program operating level of the transportation administrative service center in fiscal year 2000 represents an increase of over 35 percent compared to the fiscal year 1999 enacted level, well in excess of the rate of inflation for non-personnel activities.
The Committee remains concerned that previous reductions in obligation authority have not been reflected in reduced billings to the modal administrations. As such, over the past several years, TASC charges have not been reduced to correspond to Congressional reductions and each year the modal administrations have had to absorb sizable shortfalls in TASC funding.
Last year the Committee directed the administrator of the TASC to develop a mechanism to ensure that the budget approved for the TASC in the accompanying Act corresponded to the appropriations provided for the modes in the Act. The Committee is unaware of such a mechanism and therefore directs the director of the transportation administrative service center to submit to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations a plan to ensure that Congressionally-imposed reductions in obligation authority are reflected in reduced billings to the modes by December 1, 1999. In allocating the reductions recommended in this Act for the TASC, the administrator of the TASC shall not reduce funding provided to the modes for the transportation service center as these services are to be acquired from other sources in fiscal year 2000.
PAYMENTS TO AIR CARRIERS
(AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)
The essential air service program was originally created by the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978 as a temporary measure to continue air service to communities that had received federally mandated air service prior to deregulation. The program currently provides subsidies to air carriers serving small communities that meet certain criteria. Subsidies, ranging from $5 to $320, currently support air service to 82 communities and serve about 700,000 passengers annually. This program was established to provide a smooth phaseout of federal subsidies to airlines that serve small airports.
The Federal Aviation Reauthorization Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-264) authorized the collection of user fees for services provided by the Federal Aviation Administration to aircraft that neither take off from, nor land in the United States, commonly known as overflight fees. In addition, the Act permanently appropriated these fees for authorized expenses of the FAA.
Consistent with the FAA reauthorization legislation enacted in 1996, this program became a mandatory program in fiscal year 1998.
General provision.--Over the years, Congress and the department have worked to streamline the essential air service program and to increase its efficiency by eliminating communities that are within an easy drive of a major hub airport or where the costs clearly outweigh the benefits. The bill includes a limitation (sec. 327), as requested by the administration, that continues the existing eligibility standards and will help preserve those efficiencies. Specifically, this limitation continues appropriations language that limits the number of communities that receive essential air service funding by excluding points in the 48 contiguous United States that are located fewer than seventy highway miles from the nearest large or medium hub airport, or that require a subsidy in excess of $200 per passenger, unless such point is more than 210 miles from the nearest large or medium airport.
MINORITY BUSINESS RESOURCE CENTER PROGRAM
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriation Limitation on direct loans
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 $1,900,000 $13,775,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 1,900,000 13,775,000
Recommended in the bill 1,900,000 13,775,000
Bill compared to:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999
Budget request, fiscal year 2000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
The minority business resource center of the office of small and disadvantaged business utilization provides assistance in obtaining short-term working capital and bonding for disadvantaged, minority, and women-owned businesses. The program enables qualified businesses to obtain loans at prime interest rates for transportation-related projects.
Prior to fiscal year 1993, loans under this program were funded by the office of small and disadvantaged business utilization without a limitation. Reflecting the changes made by the Credit Reform Act of 1990, beginning in fiscal year 1993, a separate appropriation is provided only for the subsidy inherently assumed in those loans and the cost to administer the loan program.
The recommendation fully funds the budget request, which provides a limitation on direct loans of $13,775,000 and subsidy and administrative costs totaling $1,900,000.
MINORITY BUSINESS OUTREACH
----------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 $2,900,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 2,900,000
Recommended in the bill 2,900,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999
Budget request, fiscal year 2000
----------------------------------------------
This appropriation provides contractual support to assist minority business firms, entrepreneurs, and venture groups in securing contracts and subcontracts arising out of projects that involve Federal spending. It also provides grants and contract assistance that serves DOT-wide goals and not just OST purposes. The Committee has provided $2,900,000, the same level as provided in fiscal year 1999 and included in the budget request.
COAST GUARD
SUMMARY OF FISCAL YEAR 2000 PROGRAM
The Coast Guard, as it is known today, was established on January 28, 1915, through the merger of the Revenue Cutter Service and the Lifesaving Service. This was followed by transfers to the Coast Guard of the United States Lighthouse Service in 1939 and the Bureau of Marine Inspection and Navigation in 1942. The Coast Guard has as its primary responsibilities enforcing all applicable federal laws on the high seas and waters subject to the jurisdiction of the United States; promoting safety of life and property at sea; aiding navigation; protecting the marine environment; and maintaining a state of readiness to function as a specialized service of the Navy in time of war.
Including funds for national security activities and retired pay accounts, the Committee recommends a total program level of $4,048,039,000 for activities of the Coast Guard in fiscal year 2000. This is $152,574,000 above the fiscal year 1999 program level.
The following table summarizes the fiscal year 1999 program levels, the fiscal year 2000 program requests, and the Committee's recommendations:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Program Fiscal year-- Committee recommended
1999 enacted 2000 estimate
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Operating expenses1 $3,048,073,000 $2,941,039,000 $2,791,000,000
Acquisition, construction and improvements2 625,465,000 350,326,000 410,000,000
Environmental compliance and restoration 21,000,000 19,500,000 18,000,000
Alteration of bridges 14,000,000 15,000,000
Retired pay 684,000,000 721,000,000 721,000,000
Reserve training3 74,000,000 72,000,000 72,000,000
Research, development, test and evaluation4 17,000,000 21,709,000 21,039,000
Total 4,483,538,000 4,125,574,000 $4,048,039,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OPERATING EXPENSES
----------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 19991 $ 3,048,073,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 20002 2,941,039,000
Recommended in the bill3 2,791,000,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 -257,073,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2000 -150,039,000
----------------------------------------------------
Including $300,000,000 for national security activities, the Committee recommends a total of $2,791,000,000 for operating activities of the Coast Guard in fiscal year 2000, a decrease of $257,073,000 below the fiscal year 1999 appropriation and $150,039,000 below the budget request. The reduced amount is possible without harming Coast Guard readiness due to $200,000,000 in supplemental funding provided for fiscal year 1999 which will be available for obligation into fiscal year 2000. The following table compares the fiscal year 1999 enacted level, the fiscal year 2000 estimate, and the recommended level by program, project and activity:
[In thousands of dollars]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Program, project and activity Fiscal year--
1999 enacted 2000 estimate Recommended in the bill
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Personnel Resources $1,757,945 $1,879,381 $1,879,381
A. Military pay & allowances 1,285,598 1,359,891 1,359,891
B. Civilian pay & benefits 202,972 220,631 220,631
C. Military health care 123,395 139,070 139,070
D. Permanent change of station 63,160 66,028 66,028
E. Training & education 65,634 71,793 71,793
F. Recruiting 6,095 10,877 10,877
G. FECA/UCX 11,091 11,091 11,091
II. Operating Funds and Unit Level Maintenance 623,149 655,472 655,472
A. Atlantic area command 109,646 109,616 109,616
B. Pacific area command 110,057 117,990 117,990
C. District commands:
1. 1st district (Boston) 40,401 40,429 40,429
2. 7th district (Miami) 44,555 45,454 45,454
3. 8th district (New Orleans) 28,020 28,483 28,483
4. 9th district (Cleveland) 17,580 17,418 17,418
5. 13th district (Seattle) 13,165 13,721 13,721
6. 14th district (Honolulu) 8,435 7,332 7,332
7. 17th district (Juneau) 20,402 20,174 20,174
D. Headquarters offices 184,674 205,871 205,871
E. Headquarters-managed units 39,360 42,096 42,096
F. Other activities 6,854 6,888 6,888
III. Depot-Level Maintenance 390,611 406,186 406,186
A. Aircraft maintenance 150,337 156,862 156,862
B. Electronic maintenance 35,783 38,079 38,079
C. Shore maintenance 101,478 102,792 102,792
D. Vessel maintenance 103,013 108,453 108,453
IV. Account-Wide Adjustments --- --- -150,039
A. Funding previously provided --- --- -150,039
Total base appropriation 2,771,705 2,941,039 2,791,000
Military readiness supplemental 28,295 --- ---
Military readiness supplemental 200,000 --- ---
Drug interdiction supplemental 16,300 --- ---
Y2K supplemental funding 31,773 --- ---
Total appropriations 3,048,073 2,941,039 2,791,000
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In Public Law 106-31, the Coast Guard received an additional $200,000,000 in supplemental appropriations for fiscal year 1999, the majority of which will be carried forward and made available by the service to offset fiscal year 2000 budget requirements such as the military pay raise, pay parity, and readiness initiatives. The change to the budget estimate is recommended as a general reduction, to provide the service maximum operational flexibility in blending these funds with those provided in previous Acts.
Drug interdiction funding.--The bill provides $521,000,000, as requested, for drug interdiction activities. This is an increase of $148,800,000 (40 percent) over the estimated expenses for fiscal year 1999.
Ballast water management program.--Of the funds provided, $4,000,000 is only to continue and broaden the national ballast water management program. The current program allows Coast Guard boarding officers to monitor industry compliance with voluntary guidelines regarding the management of ballast water. The inadequate attention to proper ballast water handling procedures leads to the propagation of invasive aquatic species.
Air facilities.--Of the funds provided, $3,133,000 is only to continue operations of the air facilities in Long Island, New York and Muskegon, Michigan, and $5,505,000 is only for operations of a new air facility to support Southern Lake Michigan. In fiscal year 1999, Congress directed the Coast Guard to establish an additional search and rescue facility on Southern Lake Michigan and to conduct a study recommending the optimal site for this new station. The Committee understands that the Coast Guard's analysis will recommend Waukegan, Illinois as the preferred site, and funds are provided based on this assumption.
Commercial fishing vessel safety program.--Of the funds provided, $1,500,000 is only to support an expanded commercial fishing vessel safety program.
St. Clair Shores Coast Guard Station, Michigan.--Of the funds provided in this bill, $100,000 is only for acquisition of rescue equipment, including airboats if determined to be necessary, at the St. Clair Shores Coast Guard Station in Michigan.
BILL LANGUAGE
Defense-related activities.--The bill specifies that $300,000,000 of the total amount provided is for defense-related activities, the same as enacted for fiscal year 1999, and $34,000,000 below the budget estimate.
Executive order 12839.--The bill specifies that the Commandant shall reduce both military and civilian employment for the purpose of complying with executive order 12839. This provision has been included in the bill for several years without change.
User fees.--The Committee continues the provision, first enacted in fiscal year 1999, precluding the Coast Guard from using funds to plan, finalize, or implement any new user fees unless legislation signed into law after the date of enactment of this Act specifically authorizes them.
GENERAL PROVISION
Vessel traffic safety fairway, Santa Barbara/San Francisco.--The bill continues as a general provision (sec. 312) language that would prohibit funds to plan, finalize, or implement regulations that would establish a vessel traffic safety fairway less than five miles wide between the Santa Barbara traffic separation scheme and the San Francisco traffic separation scheme. On April 27, 1989, the department published a notice of proposed rulemaking that would narrow the originally proposed five-mile-wide fairway to two one-mile-wide fairways separated by a two-mile-wide area where offshore oil rigs could be built if Lease Sale 119 goes forward. Under this revised proposal, vessels would be routed in close proximity to oil rigs because the two-mile-wide non-fairway corridor could contain drilling rigs at the edge of the fairways. The Committee is concerned that this rule, if implemented, could increase the threat of offshore oil accidents off the California coast. Accordingly, the bill continues the language prohibiting the implementation of this regulation.
ACQUISITION, CONSTRUCTION, AND IMPROVEMENTS
-------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 1 $625,465,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2000 350,326,000
Recommended in the bill 410,000,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 -215,465,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2000 +59,674,000
-------------------------------------------------
The bill includes $410,000,000 for the capital acquisition, construction, and improvement programs of the Coast Guard for vessels, aircraft, other equipment, shore facilities, and related administrative expenses, of which $25,000,000 is to be derived from the oil spill liability trust fund.
Consistent with past practice, the bill also includes language distributing the total appropriation by budget activity and providing separate obligation availabilities appropriate for the type of activity being performed. The Committee continues to believe that these obligation availabilities provide fiscal discipline and reduce long-term unobligated balances.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The following table compares the fiscal year 1999 enacted level, the fiscal year 2000 estimate, and the recommended level by program, project and activity:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Program name Fiscal year-- Change from estimate
1999 enacted 2000 estimate 2000 House
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vessels $338,823,000 $165,760,000 $205,560,000 $39,800,000
Survey and design--cutters and boats 500,000 500,000 500,000 ---
Seagoing buoy tender (WLB) replacement 72,600,000 77,000,000 108,000,000 +31,000,000
Coastal buoy tender (WLM) replacement 27,000,000 --- --- ---
47-foot motor lifeboat (MLB) replacement project 20,800,000 24,360,000 24,360,000 ---
Buoy boat replacement project (BUSL) 11,773,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 ---
Polar icebreaker--USCGC Healy 2,100,000 1,900,000 1,900,000 ---
Configuration management 3,800,000 3,700,000 3,700,000 ---
Surface search radar replacement project 8,450,000 4,000,000 4,000,000 ---
Polar class icebreaker reliability improvement program --- 4,100,000 4,100,000 ---
Barracuda coastal patrol boat (CPB) 37,600,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 ---
Mackinaw replacement 5,300,000 --- 13,000,000 +13,000,000
Deepwater capability concept exploration 20,000,000 44,200,000 40,000,000 -4,200,000
ATS-1 conversion 10,000,000 --- --- ---
Drug interdiction support platforms (emergency) 20,000,000 --- --- ---
Deployable pursuit boats (emergency) 3,500,000 --- --- ---
Barracuda coastal patrol boats (emergency) 66,100,000 --- --- ---
Cutter sensors and communications (emergency) 29,300,000 --- --- ---
Aircraft 134,200,000 22,110,000 38,310,000 +16,200,000
HC-130 engine conversion 4,100,000 --- --- ---
HH-65A helicopter kapton rewiring 4,500,000 3,360,000 3,360,000 ---
HH-65A helicopter mission computer replacement 3,000,000 3,650,000 3,650,000 ---
HH-65A engine control program 6,000,000 --- --- ---
HH-65 conversion, AIRFAC Southern Lake Michigan --- --- 8,000,000 +8,000,000
Long range search aircraft capability and preservation --- 5,900,000 5,900,000 ---
HC-130 aircraft sensor upgrade 11,000,000 --- --- ---
HU-25 SLAR radar upgrade 2,500,000 --- --- ---
HU-25 A avionics improvements 3,500,000 2,900,000 2,900,000 ---
HH-60J navigation upgrade 1,100,000 3,800,000 3,800,000 ---
Maritime patrol aircraft (emergency) 44,500,000 --- --- ---
HU-25 jet reactivation (emergency) 7,500,000 --- --- ---
Operational test, use of force from aircraft (emergency) 2,500,000 --- --- ---
Aircraft sensors & C-130 engine upgrade (emergency) 44,000,000 --- --- ---
SLAR upgrade --- 2,500,000 2,500,000 ---
C-130H oil debris detection/burnoff technology --- --- 1,200,000 +1,200,000
HU-25 re-engining --- --- 7,000,000 +7,000,000
Other Equipment 36,569,000 53,726,000 59,400,000 +5,674,000
Fleet logistics system 4,669,000 6,000,000 6,000,000 ---
Ports and waterways safety system (PAWSS) 6,600,000 4,500,000 4,500,000 ---
Marine information for safety and law enforcement (MISLE) 4,100,000 10,500,000 10,274,000 -226,000
Aviation logistics management information system (ALMIS) 1,000,000 2,700,000 2,700,000 ---
National distress system modernization 3,000,000 16,000,000 18,000,000 +2,000,000
Communication systems 2000 2,000,000 --- --- ---
Personnel MIS/Jt uniform military pay system 1,900,000 4,400,000 4,400,000 ---
Local notice to mariners automation 1,000,000 --- --- ---
Defense message system implementation 800,000 3,477,000 3,477,000 ---
Differential GPS 7,500,000 --- --- ---
Commercial satellite communications 4,000,000 4,049,000 4,049,000 ---
Human resources information system --- 1,100,000 --- -1,100,000
Loran-C continuation --- 1,000,000 6,000,000 +5,000,000
Shore Facilities and Aids to Navigation 67,423,000 55,800,000 55,800,000 ---
Survey and design--shore projects 5,000,000 6,000,000 6,000,000 ---
Minor AC&I shore construction projects 6,000,000 6,000,000 6,000,000 ---
Housing 9,000,000 7,800,000 7,800,000 ---
Waterways ATON projects 4,073,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 ---
Group/Station New Orleans, LA--relocation 4,000,000, --- --- ---
Air Station Cape Cod, MA--replace electric distribution system 1,500,000 --- --- ---
Air Station Miami, FL--renovate fixed wing hanger 3,600,000 --- --- ---
ISC Boston, MA--waterfront rehabilitation 2,100,000 --- --- ---
Station Oswego--47' MLB improvements 1,450,000 --- --- ---
Station Neah Bay--waterfront renovation 3,000,000 --- --- ---
Station Cape Disappointment--47' MLB improvements 1,700,000 --- --- ---
Coast Guard training infrastructure--optimize 2,200,000 --- --- ---
Capitalizable projects 8,000,000 --- --- ---
Station Dauphin Island 3,200,000 --- --- ---
Hurricane Georges disaster supp (emergency) 12,600,000 --- --- ---
Air Station Kodiak, AK--renovate hanger --- 8,300,000 8,300,000 ---
Air Station Elizabeth City, NC--ramp improvements --- 3,800,000 3,800,000 ---
Air Station Miami, FL--renovate fixed wing hanger --- 3,500,000 3,500,000 ---
Coast Guard Academy, New London, CT--educ. facilities --- 5,000,000 5,000,000 ---
Base San Juan, PR--patrol boat maintenance facility --- 3,100,000 3,100,000 ---
Station Shinnecock, NY--modernize --- 3,500,000 3,500,000 ---
MSO/Station Cleveland, OH--relocate --- 1,000,000 1,000,000 ---
Drug interdiction assets--homeporting --- 2,800,000 2,800,000 ---
Personnel and Related Support 48,450,000 52,930,000 50,930,000 -2,000,000
Direct personnel costs 47,700,000 51,180,000 50,180,000 -1,000,000
Core acquisition costs 750,000 1,750,000 750,000 -1,000,000
Total appropriation 625,465,000 350,326,000 410,000,000 59,674,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VESSELS
The Committee recommends $205,560,000 for vessels, a reduction of $133,263,000 below the amount provided for fiscal year 1999 and $39,800,000 above the administration's request. Specific adjustments to the budget estimate are explained below.
Seagoing buoy tender replacement.--The Committee recommendation provides $108,000,000 for the seagoing buoy tender (WLB) replacement program, an increase of $35,400,000 above the fiscal year 1999 enacted level and $31,000,000 above the budget estimate. The Committee bill provides funding for acquisition of three WLBs compared to two in the budget estimate. The Coast Guard advises the Committee that the additional funding can be obligated in fiscal year 2000. The Committee believes this program should proceed at a faster pace given the age of the current vessels.
Mackinaw replacement.--The Committee recommendation provides $13,000,000 for further design and acquisition of a replacement vessel for the cutter Mackinaw, which performs icebreaking missions on the Great Lakes. Funding of $5,300,000 was provided for this program in fiscal year 1999. No funding was requested in fiscal year 2000.
A general provision has been included (sec. 345) which specifies that $10,000,000 of this funding is to support a portion of the acquisition cost, and is available for obligation until September 30, 2005.
Deepwater capability concept exploration.--The Committee recommends $40,000,000, an increase of 100 percent above the $20,000,000 appropriated in fiscal year 1999. The budget estimate requested $44,200,000 for this project. The Committee believes this 9.5 percent reduction to the request will not cause harm to the deepwater program, given its early stage of development.
AIRCRAFT
The Committee recommends $38,310,000 for aircraft, a reduction of $95,890,000 below the amount provided for fiscal year 1999 and $16,200,000 above the administration's request. Specific adjustments to the budget estimate are explained below.
HH-65 conversion, Air Facility Southern Lake Michigan.--The Committee recommends $8,000,000 for establishment of a seasonal air facility to serve Southern Lake Michigan, pursuant to direction provided in last year's appropriations conference report. The Coast Guard has recently determined that this facility is most cost-effectively sited at Waukegan, Illinois, and that approximately $8,000,000 in capital funding is required in fiscal year 2000. The House has authorized $8,100,000 for this project. The majority of these funds will be used to repair and rebuild two existing HH-65 helicopters and to construct an additional hanger facility to house these assets.
C-130H oil debris detection and burnoff technology.--The Committee bill includes $1,200,000 for oil debris detection and burnoff technology. This project is expected to improve HC-130H aircrew and aircraft safety by automatically monitoring the aircraft's reduction gearbox assemblies for impending failure. The system provides early in-flight warning of excessive wear and tear in the gearbox, allowing the crew to take action to prevent catastrophic failure, which could otherwise result in loss of life or airframe.
HU-25 re-engining.--In fiscal year 1999, the Coast Guard identified as a high priority for additional counter-drug funding the re-engining of their existing HU-25 (`Falcon') jet aircraft. The service used $15,000,000 of the counter-drug funding for this purpose in fiscal year 1999, and has identified $25,000,000 in fiscal year 2001 and $15,000,000 in 2002 to complete the project. Congress intended that the fiscal year 1999 counter-drug funding be focused on activities which could provide a near-term impact in the war on drugs. The Coast Guard's proposed one year gap in a project the agency requested funding for, and has already initiated, seems to undermine that goal. The Committee believes it makes little sense to begin a program in one year, discontinue it in the next, then initiate it again. For this reason, $7,000,000 is provided to fill the gap in funding for this program.
OTHER EQUIPMENT
The Committee recommends $59,400,000 for other equipment, an increase of $22,831,000 above the amount provided for fiscal year 1999 and $5,674,000 above the administration's request. Specific adjustments to the budget estimate are explained below.
Marine information for safety and law enforcement (MISLE)- The Committee recommends $10,274,000, a reduction of $226,000 below the budget estimate. The reduction is due to budget constraints and the need to fund higher priority initiatives.
National distress system modernization.--The Committee recommends $18,000,000, an increase of $2,000,000 above the budget estimate. The Committee believes this is an urgently-needed upgrade. The additional funding is to accelerate the project.
Human resources information system.--The Committee recommendation defers the $1,100,000 requested for this project. This is a department-wide initiative which does not appear to be justified at the present time. A more detailed discussion is found in this report under Office of the Secretary, `Office of the assistant secretary for administration'.
Loran-C upgrade.--The Committee recommends $6,000,000 for continued upgrade of the Loran-C navigation system. Although originally scheduled for decommissioning, due to delays in development of satellite navigation capability in the FAA, the most recent Loran-C schedule maintains its operational use for many more years. Upgrades of the system are necessary to maintain its effectiveness. The President's budget requested $1,000,000 for this effort, which is too little to be of meaningful use.
SHORE FACILITIES AND AIDS TO NAVIGATION
The Committee recommends $55,800,000 for shore facilities and aids to navigation, a decrease of $11,623,000 below the amount provided for fiscal year 1999 and the same as the administration's request.
PERSONNEL AND RELATED SUPPORT
The Committee recommends $50,930,000 for personnel and related support, an increase of $2,480,000 (5.1 percent) above the amount provided for fiscal year 1999 and $2,000,000 below the administration's request.
Semiannual acquisition reports.--The Coast Guard is directed to continue submission of semiannual acquisition reports to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations. The Coast Guard is to continue including with each such report an up-to-date listing of unobligated balances by acquisition project and by fiscal year, a Congressional direction first implemented in fiscal year 1996. In 1998, the reporting requirement was adjusted from quarterly to semiannually to reduce paperwork requirements on the agency.
BILL LANGUAGE
Capital investment plan.--The Committee was disturbed this year to receive testimony from the General Accounting Office and the Coast Guard concerning outyear capital requirements which appear to be far in excess of the funding expected to be available. At the same time, the Coast Guard has not developed a long-range capital plan which sets priorities among those competing requirements and is restrained to the likely or historic level of funding. Given the Coast Guard's statements of an impending tidal wave of capital requirements and the advanced age of most of its ships and aircraft, it seems irresponsible for the service to continue to operate from a one-year plan. Likewise, Congress needs to see how all the pieces fit together in the Coast Guard's budget requests, and how they tie to future year funding requirements. The Committee believes the Coast Guard must have a credible, funding constrained, multiyear capital plan, and that this should be updated each year with submission of the President's budget. Therefore, the bill includes language requiring the Coast Guard to develop and submit to the Congressional appropriations and authorization committees a five-year capital investment plan which is constrained to the outyear funding levels provided by the Office of Management and Budget. The Committee intends to carry this language each year if necessary, requiring annual submission of an updated plan with the President's budget request. Similar language has been included for the Federal Aviation Administration, which also lacks such a plan.
Disposal of real property.--The bill includes a provision first enacted in fiscal year 1996 crediting to this appropriation proceeds from the sale or lease of the Coast Guard's surplus real property. This provision is included as requested in the President's budget.
HU-25 asset sales.--The Committee bill deletes language pertaining to possible sales of HU-25 aircraft. Due to additional drug interdiction funding in fiscal year 1999 and in this bill, the Coast Guard will be re-activating the HU-25 aircraft rather than selling them, making this language unnecessary.
Navigation user fees.--The bill does not include proposed bill language regarding $41,000,000 in offsetting collections from new navigation user fees, contingent upon authorization by the Congress. These fees have not been authorized.
Icebreaker support for arctic research- As requested in the budget, the Committee bill includes language (sec. 333) amending the Arctic Research and Policy Act of 1984 and the Arctic Marine Living Resources Convention Act of 1984 regarding the coordination and review of budget requests for icebreaker-related costs needed to support Arctic and Antarctic research.
ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE AND RESTORATION
------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 $21,000,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2000 19,500,000
Recommended in the bill 18,000,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 -3,000,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2000 -1,500,000
------------------------------------------------
This appropriation assists in bringing Coast Guard facilities into compliance with applicable federal, state and environmental regulations; conducting facilities response plans; developing pollution and hazardous waste minimization strategies; conducting environmental assessments; and conducting necessary program support. These funds permit the continuation of a service-wide program to correct environmental problems, such as major improvements of storage tanks containing petroleum and regulated substances. The program focuses mainly on Coast Guard facilities, but also includes third party sites where Coast Guard activities have contributed to environmental problems.
The Committee is pleased that the Coast Guard has made significant progress in reducing the backlog of environmental restoration projects. The estimated total cost to clean up the backlog of identified sites has decreased from $132,000,000 in fiscal year 1993 to $60,000,000 at the end of fiscal year 1998. Coast Guard currently estimates that the restoration backlog will decrease by about $11,000,000 each year. The Committee believes a lower level of funding reflects the good progress made in this area.
The recommended funding level of $18,000,000 is a reduction of $1,500,000 below the budget request and $3,000,000 below the fiscal year 1999 enacted level. The reduction is due to budget constraints and should be allocated to general training and education activities, not site-specific cleanup activities.
With the funds provided, the Coast Guard should give consideration to a project for remediation of lead-contaminated soil at the former Coast Guard lighthouse facility in Cape May, New Jersey.
ALTERATION OF BRIDGES
------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 $14,000,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2000 .........................
Recommended in the bill 15,000,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 +1,000,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2000 +15,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------
The bill includes funding for alteration of bridges deemed a hazard to marine navigation pursuant to the Truman-Hobbs Act. The Committee does not agree with the approach of the administration that obstructive highway bridges and combination rail/highway bridges should be funded out of the Federal Highway Administration's discretionary bridge account, and notes that this proposal was not included in the TEA21 conference report. The purpose of altering these bridges is to improve the safety of marine navigation under the bridge, not to improve surface transportation on the bridge itself. Since in some cases, there are unsafe conditions on the waterway beneath a bridge which has an adequate surface or structural condition, Federal-aid highways funding is not appropriate to address the purpose of the Truman-Hobbs program.
The Committee recommends $15,000,000 for four bridges. The Committee directs that, of the funds provided, $8,000,000 shall be allocated to the Sidney Lanier highway bridge in Brunswick, Georgia; $2,000,000 shall be allocated to the Fourteen Mile Bridge over the Mobile River in Mobile, Alabama; $2,000,000 shall be allocated to the Elgin, Joliet, and Eastern Bridge in Morris, Illinois; and $3,000,000 shall be allocated to the Florida Avenue railroad/highway combination bridge in New Orleans, Louisiana.
RETIRED PAY
-------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 $684,000,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 20001 721,000,000
Recommended in the bill 721,000,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 +37,000,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2000
-------------------------------------------------
This appropriation provides for the retired pay of military personnel of the Coast Guard and the Coast Guard Reserve. Also included are payments to members of the former Lighthouse Service and beneficiaries pursuant to the retired serviceman's family protection plan and survivor benefit plan, as well as payments for medical care of retired personnel and their dependents under the Dependents Medical Care Act.
The Committee does not agree to insert the requested appropriation of `such sums as may be necessary', because it is unclear why this appropriation should pose inherent and unresolvable difficulties in accurately estimating program requirements. The bill provides $721,000,000 which was CBO's estimate at the time the fiscal year 2000 budget was submitted. This compares to an appropriation of $684,000,000 for fiscal year 1999, an increase of 5.4 percent. This is scored as a mandatory appropriation in the Congressional budget process.
RESERVE TRAINING
------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 1 $74,000,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2000 72,000,000
Recommended in the bill 72,000,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 -2,000,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2000
------------------------------------------------
This appropriation provides for the training of qualified individuals who are available for active duty in time of war or national emergency or to augment regular Coast Guard forces in the performance of peacetime missions. Program activities fall into the following categories:
1. Initial training.--The direct costs of initial training for three categories of non-prior service trainees.
2. Continued training.--The training of officer and enlisted personnel.
3. Operation and maintenance of training facilities.--The day-to-day operation and maintenance of reserve training facilities.
4. Administration.--All administrative costs of the reserve forces program.
The bill includes $72,000,000 for reserve training, a decrease of $2,000,000 (2.7 percent) below the fiscal year 1999 level and the same as the budget request.
Reimbursement to `Operating expenses'.--The recommendation continues, with modification, a provision which limits the amount of `Reserve training' funds which may be transferred to `Operating expenses'. Given the small size of the reserve training appropriation, and the declining size of the selected reserve, the Committee wants to ensure the reserves are not assessed excessive charge-backs to the Coast Guard operating budget. Much progress has been made over the past year in resolving this issue, and the Committee is pleased to hear of the cooperation extended by the Coast Guard and the Reserve community to find a compromise. The Committee continues to believe that, absent any provision, the proposed level of reimbursement might be too high, given the substantial amount of augmentation workhours provided by the reserves. However, the Committee understands that raising the limitation from $20,000,000 to $23,000,000 will address the main concerns of the Coast Guard and will be satisfactory to the reserves. Therefore, the bill includes a limitation of $23,000,000, an increase of $3,000,000 above the fiscal year 1999 enacted level. The bill maintains the provision relating to the assessment of `direct charges' which were not in effect during fiscal year 1997.
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION
------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 1 $17,000,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2000 21,709,000
Recommended in the bill 21,039,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 +4,039,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2000 -670,000
------------------------------------------------
The bill includes $21,039,000 for applied scientific research and development, test and evaluation projects necessary to maintain and expand the technology required for the Coast Guard's operational and regulatory missions. Of this amount, $3,500,000 is to be derived from the oil spill liability trust fund, as requested in the budget estimate. This is $670,000 (3.1 percent) below the budget request but $4,039,000 (23.8 percent) above the amount provided for fiscal year 1999. The reduction is due to budget constraints.
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION
SUMMARY OF FISCAL YEAR 2000 PROGRAM
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is responsible for the safety and development of civil aviation and the evolution of a national system of airports. Most of the activities of the FAA will be funded with direct appropriations in fiscal year 2000. The grants-in-aid for airports program, however, will be financed under contract authority with the program level established by a limitation on obligations contained in the accompanying bill. The bill assumes continuation of the aviation ticket tax and other related aviation excise taxes throughout fiscal year 2000 and assumes no new user fees.
The recommended program level for the FAA for fiscal year 2000 totals $10,548,000,000, including a $2,250,000,000 limitation on the use of contract authority. Excluding emergency funds, this is $985,442,000 (10.3 percent) above the fiscal year 1999 enacted level and $417,000,000 (4.1 percent) above the President's request. The following table summarizes the fiscal year 1999 program levels, the fiscal year 2000 program requests, and the Committee's recommendations:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Program Fiscal year--
1999 enacted 2000 estimate 2000 recommended
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Operations 1 $5,562,558,000 $6,039,000,000 $5,925,000,000
Facilities and equipment 2 1,900,000,000 2,319,000,000 2,200,000,000
Research, engineering and development 150,000,000 173,000,000 173,000,000
Grants-in-aid for airports (AIP) 3 1,950,000,000 1,600,000,000 2,250,000,000
Total 9,562,558,000 10,131,000,000 10,548,000,000
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OPERATIONS
(AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)
---------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 1 $5,591,356,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2000 6,039,000,000
Recommended in the bill 5,925,000,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 +333,644,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2000 -114,000,000
---------------------------------------------------
This appropriation provides funds for the operation, maintenance, communications, and logistical support of the air traffic control and air navigation systems. It also covers administrative and managerial costs for the FAA's regulatory, airports, medical, engineering and development programs.
The operations appropriation includes the following major activities: (1) operation on a 24-hour daily basis of a national air traffic system; (2) establishment and maintenance of a national system of aids to navigation; (3) establishment and surveillance of civil air regulations to assure safety in aviation; (4) development of standards, rules and regulations governing the physical fitness of airmen as well as the administration of an aviation medical research program; (5) administration of the acquisition, research and development programs; (6) administration of the civil aviation security program; (7) headquarters, administration and other staff offices; (8) publication and distribution of aeronautical charts; and (9) administration of the federal grants-in-aid program for airport construction.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends $5,925,000,000 for FAA operations, an increase of $333,644,000 (6.5 percent) above the level provided for fiscal year 1999. Despite the severe budget constraints this year, the percentage increase in this bill is 45 percent higher than that recommended by the Committee last year. The recommended level compares to $6,039,000 in the President's budget request.
A breakdown of the fiscal year 1999 enacted level, the fiscal year 2000 budget estimate, and the Committee recommendation by budget activity is as follows:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Budget activity Fiscal year--
1999 enacted 2000 estimate 2000 recommended
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air traffic services $4,353,191,000 $4,696,487,000 $4,660,892,000
Aviation regulation & certification 630,418,000 667,631,000 667,416,000
Civil aviation security 122,641,000 144,642,000 144,642,000
Administration of airports 48,554,000 50,608,000 50,608,000
Research and acquisition 92,340,000 183,740,000 181,535,000
Commercial space transportation 6,168,000 6,838,000 6,838,000
Administration 257,514,000 --- ---
Regional coordination --- --- 95,831,000
Human resources --- --- 47,436,000
Financial services --- --- 35,790,000
Staff offices 76,193,000 289,054,000 77,669,000
Account-wide adjustments -24,461,000 --- -43,657,000
Total base appropriation 5,562,558,000 6,039,000,000 5,925,000,000
Y2K supplemental appropriations 28,798,000 --- ---
Total available funding 5,591,356,000 6,039,000,000 5,925,000,000
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Committee recommendation includes the following adjustments to the budget estimate:
| Budget activity | Change |
| Air Traffic Services: | |
| Runway incursion program enhancement | +$2,500,000 |
| Host maintenance--reflect HOCSR deployment | -1,000,000 |
| Interim incentive pay--begin phaseout | -12,190,000 |
| Overtime--reflect new agreement's commitment to savings | -5,000,000 |
| Controller in charge--defer | -5,600,000 |
| Supervisors--add FTEs in lieu of controller in charge positions | +1,800,000 |
| Sick leave savings--reflect new agreement's `buyback' provisions | -1,000,000 |
| WIGs/grade-to-grade increases (ATS) | -4,425,000 |
| Airspace redesign | -3,000,000 |
| RTCA support--allow $300,000 versus $435,000 | -135,000 |
| Federal contract tower cost-sharing--maintain fiscal year 1999 level | +5,000,000 |
| Flight service station staffing--maintain fiscal year 1999 level | +3,967,000 |
| NAS handoff | -12,122,000 |
| Terminal leave savings (extended from fiscal year 1999) | -2,000,000 |
| Performance awards (extended from fiscal year 1999) | -770,000 |
| Air traffic travel (extended from fiscal year 1999) | -3,620,000 |
| Mid-America Aviation Resource Consortium | +2,000,000 |
| Aviation Regulation and Certification: | |
| Aviation safety program--maintain fiscal year 1999 level | +500,000 |
| Rulemaking--hold to fiscal year 1999 level | -715,000 |
| Research and Acquisition: | |
| ARA--delete `human capital management' project | -2,205,000 |
| Regional Coordination: | |
| Transfer from `staff offices' | +97,831,000 |
| FOB 10B--reflect slip in occupancy schedule | -2,000,000 |
| Human Resources: | |
| Transfer from `staff offices' | +48,736,000 |
| Human resource management--reflect personnel reform | -1,300,000 |
| Financial Services: | |
| Transfer from `staff offices' | +42,054,000 |
| IPPS--defer pending stronger justification/alternatives analysis | -6,264,000 |
| Staff Offices: | |
| Resources maintained in other lines of business | -208,244,000 |
| Personnel compensation and benefits reduction | -1,500,000 |
| Public affairs--streamlining | -120,000 |
| AGC--allow 4 percent instead of 11 percent increase | -2,021,000 |
| English language proficiency--maintain fiscal year 1999 level | +500,000 |
| Account-wide Adjustments: | |
| Fiscal year 1999 reductions extended into fiscal year 2000: | |
| Freeze staffing for non-safety positions in fiscal year 1999 levels | -3,400,000 |
| Administrative contracts--IRM planning and maintenance | -3,100,000 |
| Administrative travel | -4,200,000 |
| Computer-aided engineering graphics | -600,000 |
| Resources management contract | -410,000 |
| Conpuretix conferencing/voice switch improvements | -1,100,000 |
| Reduce teleconferencing/videoconferencing | -2,000,000 |
| Y2K program savings--reduction from base | -8,960,000 |
| TASC--freeze at fiscal year 1999 level | -10,200,000 |
| GSA rent--allow 8 percent instead of 16.8 percent increase | -6,600,000 |
| Contractual studies--hold to FY98/99 average | -1,500,000 |
| TSC general working agreement--hold to 5 percent instead of 21.1 percent increase | -1,587,000 |
| Total | -114,000,000 |
FAA FUNDING SITUATION
Over the past few years, the Department of Transportation and the FAA have suggested that the Congressional budget process will be unable to provide funding for the FAA's true needs in the future. In response to this and other concerns, Congress established the National Civil Aviation Review Commission and called for an independent assessment of FAA's long-term finances. In 1997, the independent assessment concluded that significant opportunities for cost savings and efficiencies exist in the FAA, and should be taken advantage of. The independent assessment made a number of cost-saving recommendations, some of which were echoed by the National Civil Aviation Review Commission. In recommending increases in the agency's budget last year, the Committee encouraged the FAA to `leverage this increase by making structural and process changes in the agency to improve productivity and reduce waste, as suggested in the independent assessment'.
However, despite these warnings that the agency needs to get its operating costs under control, the FAA has implemented very few of these recommendations, and last year signed new employee pay agreements which provide even more upward pressure on the budget. In fiscal year 2000, the FAA's average budgeted staffyear cost is approximately $100,000, up 20 percent in the past three years alone. At the same time, productivity among the air traffic controller workforce declined in 1998 for the third year in a row.
Furthermore, these increases are not limited to air traffic control. The fiscal year 2000 budget requests significant increases in most administrative accounts as well. In total, the agency requested operating increases of approximately $491,000,000 for the next fiscal year offset with less than $20,000,000 in savings from the implementation of new technology or management efficiencies.
The Committee continues to believe that the federal budget process is inherently and structurally capable of providing adequate resources for the FAA. The resources in this bill confirm that fact by providing increases above fiscal year 1999 in each of the four appropriations--and double digit increases in three. However, the agency must do more internally to control its rapidly increasing operating budget. As the Inspector General testified this year, these escalating increases threaten to choke off needed funding in capital programs for air traffic control modernization and airport development.
SPECIAL BUDGETARY TREATMENT FOR FAA
The Committee continues to be strongly opposed to special budgetary treatment for the FAA. Such a change would undermine the unified federal budget process, where tradeoffs are made annually among all federal programs. This year, the General Accounting Office testified before the Subcommittee that `when the [transportation] trust funds were created, Congress did not create them as automatic spending trust funds. It chose to retain annual oversight and control of spending from those funds in the appropriations committees.' This is made clear by a statement on the Senate floor when the conference report establishing the aviation trust fund was considered in 1970. In addressing a concern of the Nixon administration that the new trust fund might establish funding priorities outside the annual budget process, the manager of the bill in the Senate (Senator Norris H. Cotton of New Hampshire) clarified `the use of trust fund moneys is subject to annual appropriations by the Congress. It, therefore, is for the Appropriations Committees of the respective Houses to review this program and through appropriations acts establish the necessary priorities.' The Congress created the aviation trust fund based on this understanding. Special budgetary treatment, whether through off-budget accounting, firewalls, guarantees, or other mechanisms, fundamentally changes that principle to the detriment of the federal budget process.
Secondly, such proposals unnecessarily shower billions of additional dollars on one federal agency while other agencies with equally important missions continue to feel severe pressure from government-wide budget caps. The introduced version of H.R. 1000 would raise FAA's funding by 57.4 percent over the five year period 1999 through 2004--from $9.8 billion to $15.4 billion. While the Committee remains supportive of the FAA's important programs, reckless funding increases should not be granted to one agency in isolation of the funding needs of other agencies. The accompanying bill represents a 10-percent increase for the FAA in fiscal year 2000, which is clearly sufficient for an agency with annual workload increases of 1 to 3 percent. Within the total amount available, the Committee bill raises airport construction spending to the highest level in history, an increase of 15 percent over fiscal year 1999. The Department of Transportation advised the Committee this year that `according to our airport master records, the condition of airport runways has improved slightly over the past decade. These records show that about 95 percent of the nation's runways are in good to fair condition.' In air traffic control modernization, FAA accounting data indicate that the agency is having difficulty obligating even the current level of funding. For example, the President's budget proposal would raise budget authority by $212,388,000 in fiscal year 2000. However, at year's end, two-thirds of that funding would remain unobligated. This argues for cost control, annual Congressional oversight in the budget process and reasonable increases, which special budgetary treatment would destroy.
Finally, the Committee reiterates that aviation users are actually getting more from the Federal Government than they are paying in taxes, due to a high rate of spending and the existence of large aviation subsidies from the general fund taxpayer. The FAA testified the following this year: `In fact, since 1971 trust fund spending has exceeded trust fund receipts, and the balances primarily result from interest, including that on funds appropriated but not yet outlayed.' In most years, the general fund taxpayer picks up about $3 billion of the FAA's expenses due to a cap on trust fund expenses historically mandated by the Congressional authorizing committees. In addition, at least $1 billion in other general fund appropriations are made solely for the benefit of aviation users. The Federal Government has more than kept faith with aviation system taxpayers. The citizens who have been shortchanged are general fund taxpayers, and this should be corrected.
GENERAL FUND SUBSIDY OF FAA'S BUDGET
The Appropriations Committee has long opposed the trust fund cap and the associated general fund subsidy. The `historic' general fund share has been provided in the Appropriations process only because the authorization process has compelled it, resulting in a buildup of the trust fund balance. This has perpetuated a fraud on the general fund taxpayer which has gone on for many years. As the Inspector General testified this year, `an important reason why that balance is where it is today, and it is about $4.3 billion, is because the general fund, or non-aviation taxes, have covered an average of about 30 percent of FAA's budget.'
The Committee continues to believe that the taxes paid by aviation users should be spent, and not allowed to build up in the trust fund. The Assistant Secretary of Transportation for Budget and Programs testified this year that the best way to lower the cash balance in the trust fund is `to increase the share of operations that comes from the trust fund.' In order to spend down the trust fund balance and keep faith with the general fund taxpayer, the bill reported by the Committee finances the FAA's operations entirely from the aviation trust fund--paid for by the users of FAA services. This is consistent with current law and supported by the President's budget request.
USER FEES
The bill assumes the collection of no additional user fees in fiscal year 2000 that were not Congressionally authorized for collection during fiscal year 1999 and includes a provision prohibiting funds in this Act from being used to plan or promulgate any regulation to institute any new user fee not specifically authorized by law after the date of enactment of this Act. The Committee interprets this prohibition to include the proposed `fees for providing production certification-related services outside the United States', promulgated by final rule on October 27, 1997. Although FAA issued a final rule on this matter days before enactment of the user fee prohibition, most of these fees have not been imposed or collected. The Committee believes that `implementation' of a new fee relates most directly to the charging and collection of the fee, and not the administrative requirement of issuing a final rule. Furthermore, unless fees have been routinely collected on a systematic, industry-wide basis, fee programs promulgated by the FAA shall not be deemed to have been implemented for purposes of satisfying the provisions in this Act.
AVIATION SAFETY INITIATIVES
The Committee recommendation includes $61,363,000 in safety initiatives above the administration's budget request. The Committee continues to believe that aviation safety must be the agency's top priority, and should not fall behind capacity enhancement programs such as free flight phase one in the competition for limited budget resources. In several instances, the Committee has found safety programs which have lost needed funds in the agency's internal budget process, and others which are not deemed a top priority because they support general aviation. The Committee bill includes the following funds above those in the budget estimate:
| Activity | Increase |
| Operations: | $13,267,000 |
| Runway incursion program | 2,500,000 |
| Air traffic supervisors | 800,000 |
| Contract tower cost sharing | 5,000,000 |
| Flight service station staffing | 3,967,000 |
| Aviation safety program | 500,000 |
| English language proficiency | 500,000 |
| Facilities and Equipment: | 35,642,000 |
| Weather and radar processor | 2,128,000 |
| Low-cost ASDE systems | 7,000,000 |
| AMASS systems | 3,900,000 |
| OASIS system | 20,614,000 |
| Low level windshear alert system | 2,000,000 |
| Research and Development: | 17,454,000 |
| Explosives and weapons detection | 5,182,000 |
| Human factors research | 1,622,000 |
| Hazardous weather research | 5,650,000 |
| Total | 61,363,00 |
FRANCHISE FUND
The Committee does not approve FAA's proposal to significantly expand the range of activities performed by the agency's franchise fund, including the majority of the FAA's logistics activities. The Committee continues to believe that activities financed through the franchise fund lose visibility in the annual budget process and are not subject to the same scrutiny and budgetary competition as other activities within the agency. Until the agency can clearly show significant savings from this approach, the Committee believes the status quo should be maintained.
AIR TRAFFIC SERVICES
The Committee recommends $4,660,892,000 for air traffic services, an increase of $307,701,000 (7.1 percent) above the fiscal year 1999 enacted level. As the following chart indicates, this percentage increase is far above the anticipated workload indicators for fiscal year 2000. This is similar to past years.
Adjustments to the budget estimate are as follows:
Runway incursion program enhancement.--Despite the FAA's activity in this area, the problem of runway incursions continues to worsen. Runway incursions rose in 1998 for the fifth year in a row, and now occur at the rate of almost one per day. Although the agency has developed an action plan, in testimony this year the Inspector General said, `The challenge now, in our opinion, is to set aside the funds and to follow through on the plan * * * what we found * * * was that there was no specific set-aside funding to carry out the activities. As a result, FAA has made limited progress and milestones have been missed'. When this problem was brought to light eighteen months ago, the agency announced the establishment of airport-specific `runway incursion action teams' to make recommendations at individual airports. At the time of the Committee's aviation safety hearing this year, only 5 of the 20 teams had completed their work. The administrator testified that the implementation plan was still `working through the process' in the agency. The Committee does not intend to watch FAA repeat its actions of the early 1990's, where a runway incursion plan was developed but never implemented due to lack of resources and low management priority. The Committee recommendation provides an additional $2,500,000 for a more aggressive runway incursion program.
Host maintenance.--The Committee recommendation reduces funding for maintenance of the Host computer system from $31,751,000 to $30,751,000 to reflect deployment of new technology in the Host and Oceanic System Capability Replacement (HOCSR) project. The fiscal year 2000 budget requested an increase over the previous year, failing to reflect the deployment of upgraded systems.
Interim incentive pay (IIP).--Although the FAA's budget proposal includes $19,942,000 to continue interim incentive pay, the Committee believes this pay is no longer necessary due to provisions of the new controller pay agreement. When Congress mandated a phase-out of the original `pay demonstration' program a few years ago, the FAA administratively established an interim pay program to replace it on a temporary basis. The IIP was designed to provide additional funds for hard-to-staff facilities until positions could be `reclassified' as part of a new pay deal. Reclassification raises the base pay rates of controllers at difficult, hard-to-staff facilities by raising the grade levels in those facilities. Reclassification was included in the 1998 NATCA pay agreement, making interim incentive pay obsolete and duplicative of the higher base pay. The recommendation begins a multiyear phaseout of these funds by reducing IIP from $19,142,000 to $6,952,000.
Air traffic overtime.--The Committee recommendation allows approximately the same funding level for air traffic overtime as provided in fiscal year 1999. This level is 61.8 percent above the funding of two years ago. The Committee is pleased that the new controller contract contains provisions which are expected to reduce air traffic overtime. However, it does not appear that these productivity improvements have been appropriately reflected in the fiscal year 2000 budget request. FAA did not use all of the appropriated overtime amounts in fiscal year 1999, reprogramming them to other purposes. The recommendation provides $49,000,000 compared to $54,000,000 in the budget request.
Controller-in-charge.--The Committee recommendation defers further implementation of the new controller-in-charge (CIC) position. Although FAA's 1992 study found that operational errors rose when the number of air traffic supervisors was decreased, the agency believes that, with adequate training and planning, this problem can be overcome. For this reason the agency began a phaseout of supervisors in fiscal year 1999, and the fiscal year 2000 budget assumes a further reduction in supervisors next year. However, the Inspector General has stated that certain steps must be taken before this transition can be safely accomplished, and the agency has not completed those steps. For example, the agency says that the selection process for determining which controllers are suitable to assume the role of CIC `is being developed'. Likewise, the FAA has offered no schedule for implementing the four steps required under this program, even though they have already initiated the transition. Operational error rates were up across the board in 1998. Now is not the time to move too quickly in removing supervisors. The Committee recommendation freezes the number of new CIC positions at the fiscal year 1999 level, and defers further expansion. This also requires restoration of the supervisor positions which were proposed for elimination in the budget request.
Air traffic supervisor staffing.--This restores the air traffic supervisor positions which were proposed for elimination in the President's budget, as discussed above.
Air traffic sick leave.--The new controller contract includes an innovative sick leave `buy back' provision which is expected to result in less sick leave over the coming years. Under this program, the FAA agrees to compensate a retiring controller for a portion of their accrued sick leave. In the private sector, such flexibility has resulted in program savings in the early years, when retirement buy backs are small and employees are `banking' their sick leave hours. In fiscal year 2000, this should result in less overtime requirements. However, the fiscal year 2000 budget request assumes no savings from the buyback provision. The Committee recommendation assumes savings of $1,000,000 from this improvement to the sick leave benefit.
Within-grade and grade-to-grade increases.--The administration's budget requested $44,697,000 for within-grade and grade-to-grade increases in the air traffic services organization. However, the new pay agreement eliminated these automatic increases for air traffic controllers and replaced them with new `organizational success increases' (OSIs) and `quality step increases' (QSIs). Since the new OSIs and QSIs are not automatic but based instead on superior performance, it seems certain that the FAA's costs will be reduced in this area. The Committee's recommendation assumes a reduction in budgeted funds, reflecting program savings from the new agreement.
Airspace redesign.--The Committee recommends $6,622,000 for airspace redesign efforts, compared to $3,000,000 enacted for fiscal year 1999 and $9,622,000 in the budget estimate. The Committee believes a 121 percent increase in one year is sufficient to address high priority issues, especially since the FAA has been unable to explain how much funding would be utilized for each geographic location. Of the funds provided, $6,000,000 is to be allocated to redesign efforts in the New York/New Jersey metropolitan area.
RTCA support.--A review of FAA's recent use of the Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics (RTCA, Inc.) indicates the agency is now using this advisory committee in some roles which go far beyond that of a traditional advisory committee. RTCA was established in 1935 to ensure coordination in the technical development of aeronautical radio aids. Over the past few years, however, RTCA has come more and more to be used as the FAA's `consensus builder' with industry--an activity more aligned with strategic planning or investment analysis than with a traditional advisory committee. FAA officially describes RTCA's advisory committee role as `seeking solutions to problems involving the application of technology (e.g., electronics, computers, and telecommunications) to aeronautical operations that impact the future air traffic management system'. This objective is so broad as to encompass virtually all of the FAA's modernization program and many of its operating activities as well. Furthermore, given membership in this organization by firms in the electronics, aerospace, and airline industries, conflict of interest questions argue for a more limited role. For example, FAA is using this organization to set standards and specifications for new NAS systems, and to define tradeoffs among competing systems. Although the Committee values the work of RTCA, the FAA and Congress should maintain an appropriate relationship and not use RTCA simply out of convenience. In some instances, there are numerous consulting firms without a financial stake in particular NAS modernization programs which can perform these activities on a competitive basis. The Committee recommendation allows $300,000 for RTCA support, a reduction of $135,000 from the budget estimate and 10 percent below the fiscal year 1999 level. This funding level is consistent with FAA Order 1110.77M, which estimated annual RTCA annual support at $300,000. The Committee passes no judgment about the work being performed by RTCA, Incorporated, but believes that RTCA should have a more limited role, and that a portion of the work should either be conducted in-house by the agency or solicited under a competitive procurement.
General aviation safety initiative.--According to FAA statistics and projections, general aviation activity is increasing at a faster rate than commercial aviation, and accounts for many of the disturbing increases in aviation safety problems such as operational errors, pilot deviations, and runway incursions. Near mid-air collisions are remaining constant, but still occur in this country on a rate of one every other day. FAA explains that the inability to reduce near mid-air collisions is largely due to rising general aviation activity. Despite these trends, however, FAA budget initiatives for next year are inadequate to address the problem, and may worsen it. The Committee remains very supportive of general aviation, and therefore recommends additional funding for a new initiative to improve safety. These projects are described below:
Contract tower cost-sharing program.--The recommendation provides $5,000,000 to continue the contract tower cost-sharing program, which provides a federal cost share to establish new contract towers. This program was initiated at Congressional direction in fiscal year 1999. According to the FAA, the agency did request funding to continue this program; however, this funding was deleted at a later stage in the administrative budget process. The recommended amount is $1,000,000 below the level provided last year.
Aviation safety program.--The bill provides an additional $500,000 to the $150,000 requested for this important safety program, which is funded under `Aviation regulation and certification'. This program provides educational materials for general aviation pilots. This is similar to the recommendation made by the Committee in fiscal year 1999.
Flight service station staffing.--FAA's budget proposal to eliminate 90 flight service station positions is predicated on increased voluntary use of the direct user access terminal service (DUATS). However, use of this service has remained nearly level over the past four years. While towers and centers will experience only slight increases in workload in fiscal year 2000, the FAA is projecting a 25 percent increase in workload at the flight service stations. The Committee finds it highly unlikely that use of DUATS will go up enough next year to handle the projected volume, based on past history. Furthermore, DUATS is being incorporated into the new OASIS system, which is experiencing developmental delays. While the Committee has been supportive in past years of consolidating the flight service stations, the closing of stations was completed in 1997. Since the number of stations has been stable since that time and newer technology has not yet been fielded, the Committee believes it would be unsafe to contemplate further reductions. The Committee recommendation restores the $3,967,000 proposed for elimination.
OASIS.--An additional $20,614,000 above the budget estimate is provided under `Facilities and equipment' to maintain the schedule for the OASIS computer project for the flight service stations. The current Model One Full Capability system was obsolete when it was first deployed in the early 1990s and must be replaced by OASIS as soon as possible. In order to satisfy human factors issues raised by air traffic controllers, additional funding is required next year. The FAA must keep this program on track to maintain the current level of service and safety to general aviation pilots.
NAS handoff.--The National Airspace System (NAS) handoff program provides operating and maintenance money for new NAS systems. Since development of the budget estimate, schedules for several new systems have slipped, and the recommendations in this bill will require adjustment in other schedules as well. Because the budget assumption is no longer valid, the recommendation reduces the $85,500,000 request for NAS handoff funding by $12,122,000.
Reductions from fiscal year 1999 extended into 2000.--In fiscal year 1999, the FAA implemented a number of efficiencies in their operating account with no adverse effect on safety. Although the agency budgeted funds to restore 100 percent of those reductions in the coming year, the Committee believes that some of the administrative reductions can be extended into fiscal year 2000 with little or no effect on the agency's ability to carry out its missions. This is necessary given the huge increases in the agency's budget proposal and the inability to control costs in other areas. The Committee recommendation extends $20,430,000 of the fiscal year 1999 reduction, or approximately 8 percent of the total. The specific reductions are shown in the table below.
| Terminal leave savings | -$2,000,000 |
| Performance awards | -770,000 |
| Air traffic travel | -3,620,000 |
| Freeze staffing for non-safety positions at fiscal year 1999 levels | -3,400,000 |
| Administrative contracts--IRM planning/maintenance | -3,100,000 |
| Administrative travel | -4,200,000 |
| Computer-aided engineering graphics | -600,000 |
| Resource management contract | -410,000 |
| Conpuretix conferencing/voice switch improvements | -1,100,000 |
| Reduce teleconferencing/videoconferencing | -2,000,000 |
Administrative travel.--The Committee is especially concerned about one item shown in the above list. Despite the Committee's attempts to hold down administrative travel costs, FAA accounting data indicate those costs continue to rise. For example, in 1998 costs for site visits within the United States were up by 9.4 percent; costs of travel to deliver speeches in foreign countries were up 11.9 percent; and `other travel' within the United States was up 13.1 percent. To encourage stronger control, the Committee extends into fiscal year 2000 a reduction of $4,200,000 in administrative travel. If the agency cannot hold down these costs, deeper reductions will be considered in future years.
MARC.--The recommendation includes $2,000,000 to continue operating support for the Mid-America Aviation Resource Consortium (MARC) in Minnesota. This program has been funded for many years.
AVIATION REGULATION AND CERTIFICATION
The Committee recommends $667,416,000 for aviation regulation and certification, $215,000 below the budget request and an increase of $36,998,000 (5.9 percent) above the fiscal year 1999 enacted level.
Aviation safety program.--FAA's flight standards service conducts a program known as the aviation safety program (ASP), which produces and distributes safety educational programs and materials for general aviation pilots. Since the large majority of aviation accidents in this country are general aviation accidents, the Committee believes that a small increase in this area could result in a large payoff. The bill includes an increase of $500,000 above the budget estimate.
Rulemaking.--Given the `Challenge 2000' study and National Civil Aviation Review Commission recommendations that FAA's rulemaking process should be streamlined, as well as the view in Congress that regulations should be held at the minimum level necessary, the Committee does not find it justified to increase the rulemaking budget by 21.7 percent, as the fiscal year 2000 budget assumes. The Committee recommendation holds these costs to the fiscal year 1999 level, a reduction of $715,000 below the budget estimate. The recommendation includes a deletion of $632,000 for three new staffyears requested (two for the office of general counsel and one for the office of policy and international aviation) to review new rulemaking actions.
Ground tracking and reporting system.--Between 1993 and 1997, runway incursions in this country increased nearly 72 percent. The most common cause of incursion is a situation where pilots fail to hold short of the active runway, turn onto the wrong taxiway, and cross a runway without clearance. One of the emerging technologies to address this problem is based on in-pavement inductive loop sensors, a technology which this Committee has funded for several years. The ground tracking and reporting system (GSTARS) incorporates this type of loop technology and provides aircraft and ground vehicle detection, classification, and tracking in all weather and visibility conditions. GSTARS provides increased situational awareness and tracking of ground traffic to air traffic controllers and alerts controllers to potential runway and taxiway incursions. The Committee directs FAA to conduct the evaluations necessary to initiate the certification review process for the GSTARS inductive loop system. The Committee bill includes a 6 percent increase for certification and regulation activities, which is sufficient for the FAA to move this program forward in an aggressive manner.
Helicopter noise, New York City, NY.--Residents in New York City and in other large urban districts have raised safety and noise concerns due to increased helicopter traffic. Since 1991, the volume of helicopter traffic in New York City has increased by 23 percent. Currently, there are between 200 and 400 flights, mostly over Manhattan, every day. The FAA estimates that 50 percent of those flights are tourist-related. New York City had laws to restrict flights from heliports, but those laws were struck down by a federal court judge as unconstitutional. The court ruled that the Federal Government has sole power to regulate air traffic. However, the FAA believes Congress has never enacted a statute giving it the ability to regulate helicopter traffic for any reason other than safety. The Committee recommends that FAA develop plans to deal with public complaints regarding helicopter noise, traffic, and safety issues.
CIVIL AVIATION SECURITY
The Committee recommends $144,642,000 for civil aviation security, the same as the budget estimate and an increase of $22,001,000 (17.9 percent) above the fiscal year 1999 enacted level.
Certification of baggage screening firms.--The Committee is disturbed to learn that FAA's proposed rule regarding certification of baggage screening firms has been delayed by nine months over the past year, and is currently scheduled for issuance of a final rule in December 2000. The FAA testified this year that `these standards and requirements are important because they would compel screening companies to hire and compensate qualified, skilled employees, train them effectively, and accept more responsibility for the effectiveness of their operations'. The Subcommittee held a special hearing this year on airport security operations, and discovered several holes in the security net--mostly relating to screener performance. FAA data indicate the turnover rate among screeners is much too high (110 percent a year, with some airports as high as 430 percent), and the wages remain too low to retain the best people. As FAA testified, `there has to be a much greater concentration on retaining people and training them; and in order to retain them, they are going to have to be compensated better'. Particularly in light of the recent test results, the Committee believes the FAA needs to give this area urgent attention. Consequently, the Committee directs FAA to take all actions necessary to accelerate the screening company certification rulemaking in order to issue a final rule no later than March 31, 2000.
Utilization of explosive detection systems.--The DOT and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 1999 required the FAA to certify that air carriers had substantially increased the usage of bulk explosive detection systems procured for them by the Federal Government. This certification was provided by the FAA earlier this year. The Committee was disturbed to learn, however, that usage of the machines dropped significantly right after the certification was provided. The FAA's certification was based upon data between April and June 1998, which showed usage of 2,151 bags per machine per week. According to the DOT Inspector General, usage dropped in the third quarter of 1998 and even further in the fourth quarter. In January and February 1999, the usage rate was down to 1,630, negating the gains the Committee hoped to see sustained. The Inspector General testified: `CAPS [computer assisted profiling system] . . . should not stand alone . . . The explosive detection equipment has demonstrated a capacity to screen significantly more bags per day than are being offered to it, and should be used more often'. The Committee reiterates its firm beliefs that these systems are not of much security value unless they are used, and that the taxpayers should not continue federal support for acquisition of these systems unless such support is predicated on maximum usage. The FAA is directed to work more effectively than it has to date with the airlines to ensure immediate improvements in the per system utilization rate. The Committee notes that one simple method of achieving this result is to raise the percentage of random selectees chosen by the CAPS system. The Committee intends to monitor this issue closely over the coming months.
ADMINISTRATION OF AIRPORTS
The Committee recommends $50,608,000 for the administration of airports program, no change from the budget estimate and $2,054,000 (4.2 percent) above the fiscal year 1999 enacted level.
RESEARCH AND ACQUISITION
The Committee recommends $181,535,000 for research and acquisition, a reduction of $2,205,000 below the budget request. This activity finances the planning, management, and coordination of FAA's research and acquisition programs.
`Human capital management' project.--The recommendation deletes funding for the proposed `human capital management' project, a reduction of $2,205,000 from the budget estimate. When the Committee approved personnel and procurement reform in 1995, it was assumed that these initiatives would result in cost savings and efficiencies in the agency. In this case, the FAA has established a new, costly administrative process which is only vaguely described in justification material. The Committee encourages the FAA to find ways to implement personnel management improvements out of existing funding levels, rather than requesting additional funds.
COMMERCIAL SPACE TRANSPORTATION
The Committee recommends $6,838,000 for the Office of Commercial Space Transportation (OCST), the same as the budget request and $670,000 (10.9 percent) above the fiscal year 1999 enacted level.
ADMINISTRATION
Due to elimination of the organization for the Associate Administrator for Administration in July 1998, FAA is proposing to distribute all their administrative costs, to other parts of the budget. Although the Committee supports the elimination of an unnecessary layer of management in the agency, it is still useful for budgetary purposes to differentiate between administrative and non-administrative costs. For this reason, the Committee recommends the replacement of the larger `administration' budget activity with three new budget activities, for regional coordination, human resources, and financial services. This budget structure aligns appropriately with organizational elements established in 1998.
In total, the FAA's fiscal year 2000 budget requested increases totaling 11 percent in administrative activities. Given budget constraints and the need to preserve large increases for other parts of FAA's organization, the Committee recommendation allows a 1.5 percent increase. This results in reductions from the budget estimate totaling $32,328,000. The Committee believes the agency can and should do more to find cost efficiencies in the administrative area, but leaves it to the management attention of the agency to determine the most cost-effective areas for restraint.
REGIONAL COORDINATION
The Committee recommends $95,831,000 for regional coordination, an increase of $4,563,000 (5 percent) above the fiscal year 1999 enacted level. The President's budget included $101,441,000 under `staff offices' for these activities. A reduction of $2,000,000 from the budget estimate reflects a slip in the occupancy schedule for Federal Office Building 10-B since submission of the fiscal year 2000 budget.
HUMAN RESOURCES
The Committee recommends $47,436,000 for human resources, an increase of $2,258,000 (5 percent) above the fiscal year 1999 enacted level. The President's budget included $55,877,000 under `staff offices' for these activities. The recommendation includes reduction of $1,300,000 in the budget estimate for `operationalizing the flexibilities of personnel reform'. The Committee believes these flexibilities inherently provide resources to offset any new procedures through paperwork reduction, streamlining and other initiatives.
Sexual harassment cases.--The Committee recognizes the FAA Administrator's prompt response to concerns regarding sexual harassment within the FAA in creating the FAA Sexual Harassment Accountability Board. The Committee expects that the FAA Administrator will investigate and resolve expeditiously the significant backlog of cases that are still pending. The Committee urges that this backlog of cases be eliminated by September 30, 2000.
Safety-related training activities.--The Committee urges the FAA to fund implementation of the air safety and security training program developed by the George Washington University/Virginia Campus Aviation Institute and the George Mason University Institute for Public Policy. The program will prepare the workforce for careers in aviation safety and security management and will train civil aviation personnel in category II and category III countries, as rated by FAA's International Aviation Safety Assessment (IASA) program, to assist in raising the country's safety level to category I.
FINANCIAL SERVICES
The Committee recommends $35,790,000 for financial services, an increase of $1,705,000 (5 percent) above the fiscal year 1999 enacted level. The President's budget included $50,926,000 under `staff offices' for these activities. Included in the recommendation is a deletion of the $6,264,000 for development of the integrated personnel and payroll system (IPPS), pending further justification and evaluation of alternatives. The FAA has advised the Committee that an agency decision on the acquisition approach and evaluation of alternatives will be completed in July 1999. The Committee defers these funds until this important information can be reviewed.
The Committee notes that the budget request for this activity included a 43.4 percent increase in personnel compensation and benefits, even though, at the time of this year's budget hearing, there were 11 vacant positions.
STAFF OFFICES
The Committee recommends $77,669,000 for certain headquarters staff offices funded in this budget activity, a reduction of $3,141,000 below the budget estimate.
Resources maintained in other lines of business.--The recommendation does not agree with the budget proposal to transfer and raise funding from the now-defunct `administration' budget activity to this location. The recommendation deletes the $208,244,000 included in the President's budget, and transfers funding for those activities, at reduced levels, to the three new budget activities discussed above.
Personnel compensation and benefits reduction.--The Committee believes the requested funding for personnel compensation and benefits for staff offices is excessive given the staffing increases proposed for certain offices and the large number of current vacancies. The Committee recommends a reduction of $1,500,000 in this area. None of the reduction shall be allocated to the Office of International Aviation, including overseas offices, due to the importance of these offices in improving aviation safety, as discussed below.
International aviation oversight- The Committee is concerned over the growing number of fatalities of United States citizens traveling on foreign air carriers. Although travelers on domestic carriers enjoyed one of their safest years in 1998, fatalities of U.S. citizens on foreign airlines rose for the fourth consecutive year, from 2 in 1994 to 109 in 1998. The magnitude of these fatalities appears to be rising as our airlines become more economically entwined with their foreign counterparts. Over the past ten years, 25 percent of the U.S. fatalities in commercial aviation accidents were on non-U.S. carriers, and approximately half of the people flying to and from this country now travel on foreign carriers. The economic success of code sharing and global airline alliances may push these numbers higher in future years unless action is taken. The Chairman of the National Transportation Safety Board testified this year: `Several years ago, the FAA acted on Safety Board recommendations regarding one level of safety between small commuter airlines and large air carriers. As code sharing agreements continue to increase, we plan to monitor this situation very closely.'
In addition, since the hull loss accident rate in this country is many times lower than the worldwide average, the greatest leverage for improving aviation safety lies in improving regulatory oversight and infrastructure investment not in the U.S., but in foreign nations. The FAA can play a vital role in advising and assisting foreign governments and aviation authorities on how to improve their safety programs. Especially given internal budget decisions being made by the agency, the Committee is concerned that the safety trend could worsen unless the FAA steps up its safety oversight of foreign air carriers. The Committee directs the FAA to submit, not later than February 15, 2000, a report to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations which describes the actions being taken by the agency to improve international aviation safety, the resources allocated to those efforts over the preceding five years, and a detailed plan for future activities over the next five years.
Public affairs streamlining.--The President's budget assumes staffing levels in fiscal year 2000 which are 1 staffyear above the fiscal year 1999 level and 2 staffyears above the 1998 level. The Committee believes these administrative costs should be held to the lowest amount possible, and consequently recommends a reduction of $120,000, reflecting a reduction of 2 staffyears.
Office of general counsel.--The FAA states that because this office has taken on more responsibilities than its budget will allow, the budget of the office must be raised--by 11 percent in fiscal year 2000. The Committee believes this type of circular logic provides insufficient justification for a large budgetary increase, and demonstrates the lack of cost control at the FAA. The bill includes a 4 percent increase, which results in a reduction from the budget estimate of $2,021,000.
English language proficiency.--The recommendation provides an additional $500,000 for the office of policy and international affairs to continue its important activities in the assessment and promotion of English language proficiency in air traffic control systems of foreign nations around the world. The Committee continues to support this work, which was initiated by the Committee two years ago. Funding of $350,000 was appropriated for this activity in fiscal year 1999.
Congressional reports.--Last July, the Committee directed FAA to submit, no later than December 31, 1998, a report detailing the costs of the new air traffic controller pay agreement and the extent to which those costs are offset by productivity improvements. This three page report was submitted on May 18, 1999--ten months after the request was made and almost five months late. The Committee does not ask for frivolous reports or set casually the reporting dates. The Committee expects the agency and the administration to take these requirements more seriously in the future. If not, the Committee will consider putting report requirements in bill language with penalties for noncompliance.
ACCOUNTWIDE ADJUSTMENTS
The Committee recommends accountwide adjustments resulting in a net decrease of $43,657,000 below the budget estimate. These adjustments are discussed below.
Y2K program savings.--Through February 1999, the FAA received $14,946,000 in emergency supplemental appropriations to address the Year 2000 (Y2K) problem. Only $5,986,000 has been removed from the FAA's operating budget base in its fiscal year 2000 budget. Although other one-time costs were identified and subtracted, the Committee cannot identify the reduction of other Y2K funds from the budget base. These were one-time funds and will not be needed in fiscal year 2000. The recommendation deletes these funds, a reduction of $8,960,000 below the budget estimate.
Transportation administrative service center.--The fiscal year 2000 budget requested $38,912,000 for FAA's contribution to the Transportation Administrative Service Center, which is managed by the office of the secretary. This is clearly excessive, given the need to control administrative costs department-wide. The Committee recommendation freezes these costs at the fiscal year 1999 level, and includes bill language limiting funding to this level. This results in a savings of $10,200,000 from the budget estimate.
GSA rental payments.--The Committee bill provides an increase of 8 percent for GSA rental payments instead of the 16.8 percent requested due to budget constraints and the need to restrain cost growth in administrative accounts. This results in a reduction of $6,600,000 below the budget estimate.
Contractual studies.--Funding for contract studies rose in fiscal year 1999, despite the Committee's reduction last year, and is budgeted for another increase in fiscal year 2000. The Committee recommends $3,466,000, the average cost experienced over the two previous fiscal years, and a reduction of $1,500,000 from the budget estimate.
General working agreement, Transportation Systems Center.--Due to budget constraints, the Committee recommends holding costs for the general working agreement with the Volpe National Transportation Systems Center to a 5 percent increase instead of the 21.1 percent increase requested. This reduction is without prejudice to the work being done at that facility.
Nassif building rental costs.--The Committee directs FAA to work with the Transportation Administrative Services Center and GSA to ensure that, during the transition of FAA employees out of the Nassif building, the FAA's GSA rental costs are reduced in a fair manner reflecting the reduced usage of that space. The Committee does not believe FAA should be charged for space which the agency no longer occupies.
Senior executive service bonuses and workers compensation program costs.--The Committee encourages the FAA, especially in these tight budgetary times, to monitor carefully the agency's rising costs for the workers' compensation program and for bonuses paid to members of the senior executive service (SES). In 1998, workers' compensation costs were up 7.4 percent, after six years of virtually zero growth. This occurred with a caseload growth of only 1 percent, and with government-wide cost growth of only 2.9 percent. In particular, medical costs were up 20.3 percent compared to growth of 5.6 percent government-wide. In the case of SES bonuses, the agency's costs and number of awards have more than doubled over the past five years. The agency currently has approximatel1y 180 SES positions and a budget for SES bonuses of almost $400,000. The Committee encourages FAA to monitor this area carefully.
BILL LANGUAGE
Manned auxiliary flight service stations.--The Committee bill includes the limitation requested in the President's budget prohibiting funds from being used to operate a manned auxiliary flight service station in the contiguous United States. The FAA budget includes no funding to operate such stations during fiscal year 2000.
Second career training program.--Once again this year, the Committee bill includes a prohibition on the use of funds for the second career training program. This prohibition has been in annual appropriations Acts for many years, and is included in the President's budget request.
Sunday premium pay.--The bill retains a provision begun in fiscal year 1995 which prohibits the FAA from paying Sunday premium pay except in those cases where the individual actually worked on a Sunday. The statute governing Sunday premium pay (5 U.S.C. 5546(a)) is very clear: `An employee who performs work during a regularly scheduled 8-hour period of service which is not overtime work as defined by section 5542(a) of this title a part of which is performed on Sunday is entitled to * * * premium pay at a rate equal to 25 percent of his rate of basic pay.' Disregarding the plain meaning of the statute and previous Comptroller General decisions, however, in Armitage v. United States, the Federal Circuit Court held in 1993 that employees need not actually perform work on a Sunday to receive premium pay. The FAA was required immediately to provide back pay totaling $37,000,000 for time scheduled but not actually worked between November 1986 and July 1993. Without this provision, the FAA would be liable for significant unfunded liabilities, to be financed by the agency's annual operating budget. This provision is identical to that in effect for fiscal years 1995 through 1999, and as requested by the administration in the fiscal year 2000 President's budget.
O'Hare Airport slot management.--The bill maintains the general provision (sec. 326) enacted beginning in fiscal year 1995 which prohibits funding to implement or enforce regulations that would result in slot allocations for international operations to any carrier at O'Hare Airport in excess of the number of slots allocated to and scheduled by that carrier as of the first day of the 1993-1994 winter season, if that international slot is withdrawn from an air carrier under existing regulations for slot withdrawals.
Restrictions on leases.--The bill maintains restrictions on multiyear leases and for satellite service leases for the wide area augmentation system, as enacted in fiscal year 1999.
User fees.--The bill maintains a limitation on funds for activities to plan, develop, or implement new user fees not specifically authorized by the Congress after the date of enactment of this Act. This provision is identical to that enacted for fiscal year 1999. The Committee is concerned over FAA's statements that the User Fee Statute might provide blanket legislative authority to impose new fees. The Committee does not believe the Constitution envisions that agencies will augment their appropriations administratively using general statements of the Congress regarding fees. Such action, if adopted on a widescale basis, could seriously undermine the Constitutional `power of the purse' vested in the Congress. The Committee believes that any new fee not currently being imposed and collected should be reviewed on a case-by-case basis by the Congress and specifically authorized.
Aeronautical charting and cartography.--The bill includes a provision which prohibits funds in this Act from being used to conduct aeronautical charting and cartography (AC&C) activities through the transportation administrative services center (TASC). The administration has proposed that these activities be transferred from FAA to the TASC, despite the wishes and recommendations of this Committee. The Committee believes this would be detrimental to the efficient conduct of the AC&C program and cannot fathom how TASC would perform this work more effectively than the FAA, which interacts regularly with the general aviation community and has responsibilities for oversight of general aviation safety.
Centennial of Flight Commission.--The bill specifies that, out of the funds provided, $600,000 shall be for activities of the Centennial of Flight Commission. This compares to $250,000 enacted for fiscal year 1999.
FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT
(AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)
---------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 19991 $2,122,133,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2000 2,319,000,000
Recommended in the bill 2,200,000,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 +77,867,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2000 -119,000,000
---------------------------------------------------
The Facilities and Equipment (F&E) account is the principal means for modernizing and improving air traffic control and airway facilities. The appropriation also finances major capital investments required by other agency programs, experimental research and development facilities, and other improvements to enhance the safety and capacity of the airspace system.
ATC CAPITAL NEEDS AND THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET PROCESS
The Committee does not agree with those who suggest that the federal budget process will be unable to provide for the high-priority air traffic control modernization needs of the FAA. To the contrary, the current budget process does not impose fixed or immutable budget limits. As the GAO and the DOT Inspector General have repeatedly stated, FAA's modernization problems have not been the result of inadequate funding, but instead by weak management at the FAA and lack of priority-setting. When additional needs are justified, they are provided in the current process--with a prime example being the increased funding provided in this bill. The 4.5 percent increase recommended is greater than the government-wide spending increases for next year under the discretionary caps, and greater than what will be approved for capital programs in many other federal agencies.
FUNDING RESPONSIBILITY FOR NAVIGATION SYSTEMS
For several years, the Committee has directed FAA not to shift funding responsibility for air traffic control equipment items which have historically been acquired and maintained by the Federal Government. The Committee reiterates that the procurement and maintenance of navigational aids, landing aids, and approach lighting systems are generally the responsibility of the government, as part of the `contract' that aviation passengers and general aviation pilots enter into through the payment of aviation excise taxes. The FAA has the responsibility to provide a national system of air traffic control equipment and services. The Committee believes that proposals to shift a subset of these responsibilities to airports is inappropriate and could result in the diminution of aviation safety, since airports are neither staffed nor funded to assume ownership, operation, or maintenance of such equipment. The procurement and maintenance of such equipment should remain a financial responsibility of the FAA, and the agency should not move forward on any proposal to transfer this responsibility without specific Congressional authorization.
CAPITAL INVESTMENT PLAN
The bill includes a new provision requiring the FAA to submit a long-range capital plan which sets priorities among competing requirements and is restrained to the likely or historic level of funding. Although the FAA has both an `Aviation Capital Investment Plan' and a `NAS Architecture Plan', neither of these documents show how the pieces of the modernization effort fit together in the FAA's budget requests, or how they fit into likely future year budgets. FAA's accounting of the costs of these approved projects are far in excess of likely budgets, indicating that the agency has done an inadequate job of setting priorities among the broad range of valid programs. Although these documents provide a starting point, the Committee believes the FAA must take the next step and develop a credible, funding constrained, multiyear capital plan which lists funding by each project. This could be developed as an annex to the existing planning documents, but it should be updated each year with submission of the President's budget. Therefore, the bill includes language requiring the FAA to develop and submit to the Congressional appropriations and authorization committees a five year capital investment plan which is constrained to the outyear funding levels provided by the Office of Management and Budget. The Committee intends to carry this language each year if necessary, requiring annual submission of an updated plan with the President's budget request. Similar language has been included for the U.S. Coast Guard, which also lacks such a plan.
ACQUISITION REFORM
In March 1996, the FAA announced that three programs had been selected, in the agency's words, to `lead the fleet' of acquisition reform. Subsequently, a fourth program was added. The FAA said that each team would be `responsible for a program that has been specifically selected to demonstrate the benefits expected from acquisition reform over the next three years.' According to the director of acquisition, the specific programs included to lead the fleet were chosen `because we wanted to start carefully and make sure we got off on the right foot.' These programs were OASIS, the Integrated Terminal Weather System (ITWS), the Oceanic Automation System, and the NAS Infrastructure Management System (NIMS). After the three years specified in the `lead the fleet' announcement, the Committee is disappointed that three of the programs have been restructured due to severe cost growth and schedule delay, and the fourth has also experienced difficulties. The Committee continues to encourage FAA to use acquisition reform principles to ensure that programs can be delivered on time and within the budgeted cost.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,200,000,000 for this program, an increase of $77,867,000 (3.7 percent) above the level provided for fiscal year 1999 and $119,000,000 below the budget estimate. The bill provides that of the total amount recommended, $1,917,000,000 is available for obligation until September 30, 2000, and $283,000,000 (the amount for personnel and related expenses) is available until September 30, 2000. These obligation availabilities are consistent with past appropriations Acts and the same as the budget request. The bill does not include the requested advance appropriations, because the administration has done little to justify the requirement and because many of the systems are still in development, where advance appropriations are inappropriate.
TOP PRIORITY PROGRAMS
The recommended bill supports FAA's highest priority modernization programs, providing 92.2 percent of the amount requested. According to the FAA, the agency's five most important F&E programs are shown below, with the associated funding levels in this bill:
-------------------------------------------------------------
Program Request Provided
-------------------------------------------------------------
Free flight phase one $184,800,000 $179,625,000
Wide area augmentation system 108,100,000 102,700,000
Display system replacement 95,800,000 95,800,000
STARS 195,240,000 158,900,000
Electric power systems sustainment 17,500,000 17,500,000
Total 601,440,000 554,525,000
-------------------------------------------------------------
The bill also provides $49.3 million in new or expanded safety-related programs, above the budget request, as shown below:
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Program Request Provided
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Low cost ASDE acquisition $7,000,000
AMASS safety system $11,700,000 15,600,000
Weather and radar processor 12,872,000 15,000,000
DBRITE 1,400,000
OASIS 21,486,000 42,100,000
Low level windshear alert system 2,200,000 4,200,000
Runway visual range (RVR) 2,000,000 6,300,000
Approach lighting system improvement (ALSIP) 2,700,000 7,700,000
Distance Measuring Equipment 1,200,000 4,200,000
Total 54,158,000 103,500,000
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Committee believes that shifting 8 percent of the funding for FAA's top modernization programs--which are mostly oriented to capacity enhancement--to new safety initiatives is a good investment. These modest changes address some of the National Transportation Safety Board's concerns in areas such as runway incursion and hazardous weather without causing serious delay to existing modernization efforts.
The following chart shows the fiscal year 1999 enacted level, the fiscal year 2000 budget estimate and the Committee recommendation for each of the projects funded by this appropriation:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Title Fiscal year-- Recommended in the bill
1999 enacted 2000 estimated
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Engineering Development, Test and Evaluation:
Advanced technology development & prototyping $52,566,000 $33,166,100 $33,166,100
Safe flight 21 16,000,000
Subtotal--Adv Dev/Prototyping 52,566,000 33,166,100 49,166,100
Aviation weather services improvements 26,300,000 23,862,000 23,862,000
En route automation 10,055,000
Oceanic automation system 10,000,000 5,000,000
Aeronautical data link (ADL) applications 39,000,000 27,855,000 27,855,000
Next generation VHF A/G communication system 9,640,000 9,640,000
Air Traffic Management (ATM) 51,200,000
Conflict probe 41,000,000
Host replacement 20,000,000
NAS Information Systems 500,000
Free Flight Phase One 184,800,000 179,625,000
Subtotal--En route programs 177,500,000 266,712,000 245,982,000
Terminal Automation (STARS) 99,200,000 58,900,000 158,900,000
Subtotal--Terminal programs 99,200,000 58,900,000 158,900,000
AFSS voice switch replacement 3,000,000 3,000,000
Local Area Augmentation System for GPS (LAAS) 4,000,000 2,000,000
Wide Area Augmentation System (WAAS) 65,200,000 59,800,000
Next Generation Navigation Systems 92,000,000
Next Generation Landing Systems 34,175,000
Subtotal--Landing/NAVAIDS 126,175,000 72,200,000 64,800,000
FAA Technical Center Facility--building lease 5,290,000 1,322,500 1,322,500
NAS improvement of System Support Laboratory 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000
Technical Center facilities 7,000,000 7,000,000 7,000,000
Independent operational test support 3,500,000 3,500,000 3,500,000
Utility plant modifications 2,477,500 2,477,500
Subtotal, RDT&E equipment and facilities 17,790,000 16,300,000 16,300,000
Total Activity 1 473,231,000 447,278,100 535,148,100
Air Traffic Control Facilities and Equipment:
Long Range Radar (LRR) Program--replace/establish 5,700,000
En route automation 194,692,400 198,055,000 196,055,000
Next Generation Weather Radar (NEXRAD) 4,900,000 6,900,000 6,900,000
Air Traffic Operations Management 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000
Weather and Radar Processor (WARP) 20,000,000 12,872,000 15,000,000
Aeronautical Data Link (ADL) applications 600,000 1,000,000 1,000,000
ARTCC building improvement/plant improvements 54,000,000 54,000,000 39,400,000
Vocie Switching and Control System (VSCS) 10,000,000 17,500,000 17,500,000
Air traffic management 35,000,000 42,000,000 42,000,000
Critical communications support 1,850,000 2,000,000 2,000,000
DOD base closure--facility transfer 1,000,000 3,900,000 3,900,000
Back-up emergency communications (BUEC) 8,500,000 4,500,000 4,500,000
Air/ground communication RFI elimination 1,600,000 1,700,000 1,700,000
Volcano monitor 2,000,000
ATC beacon interrogator (ATCBI) replacement 14,800,000 45,400,000 36,806,600
ATC en route radar facilities 4,100,000 3,700,000 3,700,000
En route comms and control facilities improvement 2,000,000 3,230,400 3,230,400
RCF facilities--expand/relocate 6,700,000 6,700,000
FAA telecommunications infrastructure 6,100,000 6,100,000
Subtotal--en route programs 361,742,400 410,557,400 387,492,000
Terminal Doppler Weather Radar (TDWR)--provide 4,300,000 9,300,000 9,300,000
Terminal automation (STARS) 100,000,000 136,340,000
Terminal air traffic control facilities--replace 63,625,000 76,000,000 64,346,000
Control tower/tracon facilities--improve 17,722,200 21,982,700 27,082,500
Terminal voice switch replacement (TVSR)/ETVS 10,300,000 9,900,000 9,900,000
Employee safety/OSHA and environmental compliance 22,000,000 29,700,000 29,700,000
Chicago Metroplex 1,500,000 1,500,000
New Austin Airport at Bergstrom 2,500,000 1,500,000 1,500,000
Potomac Metroplex 17,100,000 17,100,000
Northern California Metroplex 17,900,000 31,000,000 31,000,000
Atlanta Metroplex 15,000,000 13,000,000 13,000,000
NAS Infrastructure Management System (NIMS) 20,000,000 8,900,000 1,539,500
Airport Surveillance Radar (ASR-9) 5,000,000 2,200,000
Airport surface detection equipment 5,600,000 2,400,000 9,400,000
Airport Movement Area Safety System (AMASS) 9,800,000 11,700,000 15,600,000
Voice Recorder Replacement Program 3,000,000 3,000,000 3,000,000
Terminal Digital Radar (ASR-11) 62,200,000 136,070,000 90,000,000
Weather Systems Processor 11,900,000 24,000,000 24,000,000
DOD/FAA ATC facilities transfer 1,000,000 1,000,000 3,900,000
Precision runway monitors 3,300,000 3,300,000 3,300,000
Terminal radar (ASR)--improve 2,773,400 3,838,800 3,838,800
Terminal communications improvements 1,119,800 1,124,000 1,124,000
RCE Equipment 3,400,000 3,400,000
DBRITE 1,400,000
Subtotal--Terminal Programs 379,040,400 546,055,500 367,130,800
Automated Surface Observing System (ASOS) 9,900,000 8,080,000 8,080,000
Oasis 19,250,000 21,486,000 42,100,000
Flight service facilities improvement 1,364,400 1,577,300 1,577,300
Flight Service Station modernization 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000
Subtotal--flight service programs 32,514,400 33,143,300 53,757,300
VOR 4,700,000 2,000,000 2,000,000
Instrument Landing System (ILS)--establish/upgrade 8,200,000 20,000,000
ILS--replace mark 1A, 1B, and 1C 2,100,000 1,000,000 1,000,000
Low Level Windshear Alert System (LLWAS) 3,000,000 2,200,000 4,200,000
Runway visual range (RVR) 2,000,000 2,000,000 6,300,000
Gulf of Mexico Offshore Program 2,400,000
Wide Area Augmentation System (WAAS) 42,900,000 42,900,000
NDB sustain 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000
Navigational and landing aids--improve 2,761,800 3,146,800 3,146,800
Approach lighting system improvement (ALSIP) 5,000,000 2,700,000 7,700,000
Precision approach path indicators (PAPI) 2,500,000 1,000,000 3,500,000
Distance measuring equipment (DME) 1,200,000 1,200,000 4,200,000
Visual NAVAIDS 400,000 1,000,000 1,000,000
Transponder Landing Systems 3,000,000 3,000,000
Instrument approach procedures automation (IAPA) 900,000 900,000
GPS aeronautical band 17,000,000
Subtotal--landing and navigational aids 30,061,800 86,246,800 100,846,800
Alaskan NAS Interfacility Comm. System (ANICS) 3,500,000 3,600,000 3,600,000
Fuel storage tank replacement and monitoring 10,600,000 10,500,000 10,500,000
FAA buildings and equipment--improve/modernize 4,000,000 4,000,000 4,000,000
Electrical Power Systems--sustain/support 17,500,000 17,500,000 17,500,000
Air NAVAIDS and ATC facilities (local projects) 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000
Aircraft Related Equipment Program 2,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000
Computer aided eng graphics (CAEG) replacement 1,000,000 4,300,000 4,300,000
Airpot Cable Loop Systems--sustain 1,000,000 1,000,000
Subtotal--other ATC facilities 40,600,000 47,900,000 47,900,000
Total Activity 2 843,959,000 1,123,903,000 957,126,900
Non-ATC Facilities and Equipment:
NAS Management Automation Program (NASMAP) 800,000 1,100,000 1,100,000
Hazardous materials management 17,000,000 22,500,000 22,500,000
Aviation Safety Analysis System (ASAS) 11,600,000 16,400,000 16,400,000
Operational Data Management System (ODMS) 1,000,000 600,000 600,000
FAA employee housing--provide 8,000,000 8,000,000 8,000,000
Logistics support system and facilities 2,300,000 3,000,000 3,000,000
Test equipment--maintenance support 500,000 1,000,000 1,000,000
Intergrated flight quality assurance 3,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000
Safety Performance Analysis Subsystem (SPAS) 3,500,000 5,200,000 5,200,000
National Aviation Safety Data Center 1,800,000 1,500,000 1,500,000
Performance Enhancement System 9,700,000 5,000,000 5,000,000
Explosive Detection Systems 100,000,000 97,500,000 97,500,000
Facility Security Risk Management 1,000,000 11,500,000 11,500,000
Information Security 4,000,000 10,325,000 10,325,000
NAS Recovery Communications (RCOM) 1,000,000 1,000,000
Subtotal--Support Equipment 164,200,000 189,625,000 189,625,000
Aeronautical Center Training and Support Facilities 12,000,000 3,200,000 2,200,000
National Airspace System (NAS) Training Facilities 400,000 1,500,000 700,000
DSR Training Simulator (MARC) 4,000,000
Subtotal--Training Equipment & Facilities 16,400,000 4,700,000 3,900,000
Total Activity 3 180,600,000 194,325,000 193,525,000
Mission Support:
System Engineering and Development Support 28,960,000 27,300,000 27,300,000
Program Support Leases 27,500,000 31,100,000 31,100,000
Logistics Support Services 5,600,000 5,600,000 5,600,000
Mike Moroney Aeronautical Center--Lease 14,800,000 14,600,000 14,600,000
In-Plant NAS Contract Support Services 2,000,000 2,800,000 2,800,000
Transition Engineering Support 41,800,000 40,900,000 40,900,000
Frequency and Spectrum Engineering--Provide 1,500,000 3,000,000 3,000,000
Permanent Change of Station Moves 2,500,000 3,200,000
FAA System Architecture 1,000,000 2,500,000 1,000,000
Technical Services Support Contract (TSSC) 47,500,000 48,800,000 40,000,000
Resource Tracking Program 500,000 1,500,000 1,500,000
Center for Advanced Aviation System Dev. (MITRE) 57,000,000 63,400,000 63,400,000
Y2K Computer Issues 25,000,000
Y2K Computer Issues (Emergency) 122,133,000
Support Contracts--General -1,500,000
Total Activity 4 376,343,000 244,700,000 231,200,000
Personnel and Related Expenses:
Personnel and Related Expenses 248,000,000 308,793,900 283,000,000
Total Activity 5 248,000,000 308,793,900 283,000,000
Total 2,122,133,000 2,319,000,000 2,200,000,000
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ENGINEERING, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION
The Committee recommends $535,148,100 for engineering, development, test and evaluation, an increase of $61,917,100 (13.1 percent) above the fiscal year 1999 enacted level. Adjustments from the budget request are explained below.
Advanced technology development and prototyping.--Within the funds provided, the Committee expects FAA to continue evaluation of the phased array runway incursion radar at Norfolk International Airport. The Committee understands that FAA also intends to finance the continued evaluation of the pulse x-band radar in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Air traffic controllers in both locations support the continued use of these radar systems until the agency makes a production decision on further runway incursion technology.
Safe flight 21.--This program was funded in the F&E appropriation in fiscal year 1999. Although the President's budget requested a transfer to the research budget next year, the Committee believes the program is more appropriately maintained in the F&E budget. The recommendation fully funds the program at the requested level of $16,000,000.
En route automation.--FAA's budget request includes $10,100,000 for a new start project titled `Eunomia', which is designed to replace certain en route computer systems such as the Direct Access Radar Channel (DARC) and the Peripheral Adapter Module Replacement Item (PAMRI). According to the FAA, this project is still in the investment and analysis stage. Consequently, little is known about the specific equipment to be procured or the development work required in this $500,000,000 program. The Committee believes a few more details are needed before proceeding with such a substantial investment, and looks forward to receiving that information from the agency over the coming weeks. Until the program is sufficiently justified, the Committee believes funding should be deferred. This is without prejudice to the Eunomia program. If the agency can provide the necessary detail prior to conference action on this bill, the Committee will consider restoration of this funding.
Oceanic automation system.--As of March 31, 1999, the oceanic automation program had over $11,000,000 in fiscal year 1997 and fiscal year 1998 unobligated balances, and there was an additional balance from fiscal year 1999. The Committee now understands that the FAA has recently decided to complete this effort, which is likely to delay the program further. Although the Committee supports this development, given the unobligated balance, it appears that a lower level of new funding will be sufficient for next year. The Committee recommends $5,000,000, a reduction of $5,000,000 from the budget estimate. The Committee directs the FAA not to acquire this system through a lease, but to take the more traditional contracting approach, due to the developmental nature of the work being performed.
NAS information systems.--The Committee defers this minor new start project due to lack of justification, a reduction of $500,000 from the budget estimate. The Committee will reconsider funding when additional documentation is submitted about the need for the investment.
Free flight phase one.--The Committee recommends $179,625,000 for free flight phase one, which is 97.2 percent of the $184,800,000 requested. The Committee continues to support this program. The recommended funding is almost twice the level provided for fiscal year 1999. The reduction of $3,175,000 from the $83,175,000 budgeted for the user request evaluation tool (URET) is due to budget constraints and the need to fund other high priority initiatives. Given the size of this effort, the Committee believes this modest reduction will not slow the project down materially. The $80,000,000 provided is still a huge increase over the $5,800,000 provided in fiscal year 1999, and is 96 percent of the amount requested. The reduction of $2,000,000 from the budget estimate for the surface movement advisor is due to budget constraints and the need to fund other high priority initiatives. This is largely a capacity enhancement tool for aircraft on the airport surface. The Committee is placing a higher priority on aviation safety programs.
A comparison of the fiscal year 1999 enacted, the President's budget, and the recommended levels is as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Project Fiscal year 1999 enacted Fiscal year 2000 budget Recommended in the bill
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
User request evaluation tool (URET) $5,800,000 $83,175,000 $80,000,000
Conflict probe 41,000,000
Center/tracon automation system (CTAS) 3,700,000
Traffic management advisor (TMA)/passive final approach spacing tool (pFAST) 30,500,000 59,825,000 59,825,000
Collaborative decision-making 11,200,000 29,400,000 29,400,000
Surface movement advisor 6,000,000 4,000,000
Free flight phase one integration 6,400,000 6,400,000
Total 92,200,000 184,800,000 179,625,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In fiscal year 1999, Congress appropriated $92,200,000 for free flight phase one projects. The Committee is advised that FAA intends to execute below-threshold reprogrammings totaling $14,800,000 to augment this appropriation during fiscal year 1999. This includes $8,300,000 in fiscal year 1999 funding and $6,500,000 in fiscal year 1998 funding. These funds would be used to raise the appropriation for the passive final approach spacing tool by 27.9 percent and provide $2,396,000 for integration costs when none were appropriated. The Committee believes this violates the spirit of current reprogramming rules, particularly in the use of prior year funding. The guidelines for Congressional notification should apply to all reprogrammed sources planned during the year without regard to the year of appropriation. Further, the department is to interpret `items of Congressional interest' as those programs or projects mentioned in explanatory paragraphs of reports accompanying DOT and Related Agencies Appropriations Act.
Terminal automation (STARS).--In total, the bill includes $158,900,000 for the Standard terminal automation replacement system (STARS) program, all for further development. The Committee directs that the additional $100,000,000 in development funding be used to execute the new strategy employing ARTS color displays and the STARS early development capability (EDC) in El Paso, Texas and Syracuse, New York. Funds remaining after fully funding these efforts shall be used for other development and associated activities for the STARS program. The budget proposed $195,240,000 ($58,900,000 in development and $136,340,000 for procurement of 51 systems). Due to severe problems in requirements definition and software development, the FAA recently announced a restructuring of this program, including cost growth of approximately 50 percent, from $940,000,000 to $1,381,000,000. The agency conceded that the STARS system will not be ready for procurement next year, and has promised to submit revised estimates for next year's development program. At this time, however, the agency has not submitted these estimates for Congressional review. The Committee believes it would not be fiscally responsible to provide $136,340,000 for requirements which are clearly no longer valid, in the absence of detailed and verified substitute requirements. Therefore, the Committee defers a portion of these funds until the appropriate justification is submitted and reviewed.
Local area augmentation system (LAAS).--The President's budget requested $4,000,000 to initiate phase two, full-scale development of a category III local area augmentation system (LAAS). This `government-industry partnership' was initiated at Congressional direction in fiscal year 1997 with a government investment of $1,000,000 annually. The Committee is concerned about the cost increase, the unclear industry share, and the unusual nature of the financial instruments to execute this project. Given these concerns, the Committee recommends $2,000,000 for this program.
Wide area augmentation system (WAAS).--The Committee recommendation freezes funding for this program at the fiscal year 1999 enacted level due to the uncertain state of the program and lack of justification. In July 1997, the Committee encouraged FAA to look carefully at the cost and capability tradeoffs between WAAS and various other systems. In 1998, the Committee expressed serious reservation about the cost-effectiveness of the overall WAAS program, and suggested the FAA develop a comprehensive alternatives analysis for navigation and landing aids programs. Although this work was begun last year, the FAA is still working on the analysis, and it is unclear when this important justification material will be delivered to Congress for review. The Committee has little new information this year on which to base investment decisions except the 14 month schedule slip in phase one announced in January 1999. Until the agency can provide the necessary justification material, the Committee believes a slower pace for phase two is required. Likewise, the Committtee recommendation defers $17,000,000 funding for the GPS aeronautical band program for the same reason.
PROCUREMENT OF AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT
The bill includes $957,126,900 for the procurement of air traffic control facilities and equipment, an increase of $113,167,900 (13.4 percent) above the fiscal year 1999 enacted level.
En route automation.--The Committee understands that program savings from contract execution of the host and oceanic computer system replacement (HOCSR) program indicate less funding is needed in fiscal year 2000 than requested. The Committee recommends $196,055,000, a reduction of $2,000,000 from the budget estimate.
Weather and radar processor (WARP).--The Committee recommends $15,000,000, an increase of $2,128,000 above the budget estimate. According to the FAA, the additional funds are required due to budget re-estimates. The Committee continues to believe this is an important modernization program which potential to improve aviation safety.
ARTCC building improvements.--Funding of $39,400,000 is recommended for ARTCC building improvements, a decrease of $14,600,000 from the budget estimate. Two reductions were made. First, the Committee recommends $34,000,000 for ARTCC projects, a reduction of $5,000,000 from the budget request. Due to the large unobligated balance of prior year funding from fiscal years 1998 and 1999, the Committee believes this program can be sustained with less new funding in fiscal year 2000. For example, as of March 31, 1999, there is an unobligated balance of approximately $10,700,000 from fiscal year 1998 funding. Second, the Committee recommends no funding to continue the Honolulu combined en route approach control (CERAP) project. While the Congress has funded this program over the years, the current estimates to complete the project now show significant cost growth. Facility size requirements have increased by 15,000 square feet; construction bids exceeded the government cost estimates; ATC electronic and telecommunications equipment requirements have increased; and air traffic requirements for the number of controller consoles have increased. Total project costs are now estimated at $57,100,000. Given these cost problems, the Committee believes the project should either be rescoped to fit the original budget or terminated. The deferral of these funds results in a reduction of $9,600,000 from the budget estimate.
Weather observation equipment plan- The Committee remains concerned about the future of automated observation and reporting of aviation weather information to pilots. The FAA and National Weather Service ended their joint program for procurement of new weather observing and reporting systems in fiscal year 1998, yet the FAA has not defined a new program to address these critical requirements. Since the end of that program, existing and new requirements for such systems have gone unmet. Given the importance of timely and accurate weather information to preserving and improving aviation safety, the Committee directs FAA to develop a detailed plan for procuring, commissioning, and maintaining new, current generation weather observation and reporting systems. The plan should emphasize development of a cost effective program which uses commercial off the shelf equipment.
ATC beacon interrogator (ATCBI) replacement.--The Committee recommendation includes $36,806,600, a reduction of $8,593,400 for this new start acquisition project. Funding of $14,800,000 was enacted for this project in fiscal year 1999. The reduction is due to budget constraints and the need to provide funding for other high priority project.
Terminal automation (STARS).--The Committee believes the budget request of $136,340,000 to procure 51 STARS systems is premature due to development problems. The recommended bill would defer procurement funds, but provide a portion of those funds ($100,000,000) under engineering development to execute the new strategy employing ARTS color displays and the STARS early development capability (EDC) in El Paso, Texas and Syracuse, New York and for additional development work, as discussed earlier in this report.
Terminal air traffic control facilities replacement.--The Committee recommends $64,346,000 for this program, a reduction of $11,654,000 from the budget estimate. Changes to the budget estimate are as follows:
----------------------------------------------------
Location Change to request
----------------------------------------------------
Newark, NJ -$2,200,000
North Las Vegas, NV -2,354,000
Boston tracon, MA -17,600,000
Phoenix, AZ +5,000,000
Richmond, VA +3,500,000
Corpus Christi, TX +2,000,000
Net adjustment to budget estimate -11,654,000
----------------------------------------------------
Newark.--Due to delays in award of the construction contract, there is an unobligated balance of approximately $23,500,000 in this program from fiscal year 1998 funds. Due to the delay, the Committee believes there is ample funding to sustain this project throughout fiscal year 2000, and for this reason defers the additional $2,200,000 requested for this project.
North Las Vegas.--Due to delays in award of the construction contract, there is an unobligated balance of approximately $6,400,000 in fiscal year 1998 funding. These funds will not be obligated until October 1999. The Committee believes there is ample funding to sustain this project throughout fiscal year 2000, and for this reason defers the additional $2,354,000 requested for this project.
Boston Tracon relocation.--FAA has submitted little justification on the benefits of this $30,000,000 project. The Committee recommends deferral of these funds until stronger justification has been submitted and reviewed, a reduction of $17,600,000 from the budget estimate.
Phoenix.--Funding of $5,000,000 has been added for a replacement tower and tracon at Phoenix Sky Harbor Airport in Arizona.
Richmond.--Funding of $3,500,000 has been added for a replacement tower at Richmond International Airport, Virginia.
Corpus Christi.--Funding of $2,000,000 has been added for a replacement tower at Corpus Christi International Airport, Texas.
Control tower/tracon facilities improvement.--The Committee recommendation provides $27,082,500, an increase of $5,099,800 above the budget estimate. Of the funds provided, $2,500,000 is only for establishment of a final approach sector for runway 12 at Dulles International Airport in Virginia. The Dulles Tracon is in need of an additional operating position to provide air traffic services to runway 12. This service is currently provided as additional duties by another controller; however, the current rate of air traffic growth makes continuation of this situation untenable. In addition, $2,600,000 is for the ATCT/tracon cable loop relocation activity at St. Louis Lambert International Airport.
NAS infrastructure management system (NIMS)- Over the past year, the NAS infrastructure management system (NIMS) program has been restructured several times due to cost overruns and other problems. The contract was terminated last December and FAA decided to conduct the remaining work in-house. However, the program has continued to suffer delay and confusion within the agency. The recommendation allows $1,539,500 for further study by the FAA on how to meet NIMS requirements, a reduction of $7,360,500 below the budget estimate.
Airport surveillance radar (ASR-9)- The recommendation includes additional funding of $2,200,000 to relocate the existing ASR-9 at St. Louis Lambert International Airport, Missouri.
Airport surface detection equipment.--The Committee recommends $9,400,000, an increase of $7,000,000 above the budget estimate. The increase is specifically for acquisition of low-cost airport surface detection equipment (ASDE) systems, to be procured through competitive solicitation.
Automated movement area safety system (AMASS).--Due to slippage and delay in this program, there is a shortfall of $3,900,000 to finish development and meet FAA's current operational readiness date of August 2000. The Committee continues to believe that the AMASS system will provide important safety benefits, especially given the alarming rise in the number of runway incursions. The Committee does not believe that further delay is in the best interest of aviation safety. The Committee recommends $15,600,000, an increase of $3,900,000.
Terminal digital radar (ASR-11).--The budget request includes $136,070,000 for acquisition of 24 airport surveillance radar-11 (ASR-11) systems and associated costs. This digital radar is currently under development and acquisition by the Department of Defense for their needs and for the FAA. The timing of the acquisition is closely aligned with the schedule for the digital computer system STARS. Due to the uncertainty and significant delay in the STARS schedule, it is clear that the ASR-11 schedule can be slowed down as well. The recommendation provides $90,000,000, a reduction of $46,070,000 from the budget estimate, but a large increase over the $27,800,000 planned for fiscal year 1999.
DoD ATC facilities transfer.--The Committee recommends $3,900,000 for this program, an increase of $2,900,000 above the budget estimate. The recommended funding is needed to maintain effective air traffic control service at several military facilities across the country. According to FAA documents, the budgeted funds are insufficient for this program in fiscal year 2000 and would result in serious impact on air traffic management in certain geographic areas. Of the total, $1,300,000 is for operation of the Fort Sill Army radar approach control at the Henry Post Airfield, Lawton, Oklahoma. The additional funds will also maintain air traffic service and provide transition funding for Marine Corps Air Station El Toro, California; McClellan Air Force Base; and Naval Facility Skaggs Island.
DBRITE.--The Committee recommends $1,400,000 for digital bright radar indicator tower equipment (DBRITE), to fund installation of digital radar displays at the following locations: Gainesville Regional Airport, Florida; Sonoma County Airport, California; and Livermore Municipal Airport/Buchanan Field Airports, California.
Flight service automation system (FSAS) operational and supportability implementation system (OASIS).--The Committee recommends $42,100,000 for the OASIS program, an increase of $20,614,000 above the budget estimate. According to the FAA, the OASIS system was originally designed with inadequate regard for human factors requirements. Belatedly recognizing those requirements, the FAA has determined that cost increases will be necessary to address them, much like the STARS situation. Unlike STARS, however, the FAA has made no commitment to include the necessary funding in the budget request. The Committee believes this replacement for outmoded flight service station computer systems has gone on far too long, and further delays are not acceptable. The Committee recommendation fully funds the FAA estimated shortfall.
Instrument landing systems establishment.--The Committee recommends $20,000,000, to be distributed as follows:
------------------------------------------------
Location Amount
------------------------------------------------
Items included in President's budget $8,200,000
Baton Rouge, LA 1,362,000
Louisville, KY 3,500,000
St. Petersburg-Clearwater, FL 3,500,000
Dulles International, VA 3,438,000
Total 20,000,000
------------------------------------------------
St. Petersburg-Clearwater International Airport- Of the funds provided, $3,500,000 shall be to acquire and install a category I instrument landing system (ILS) for runway 35R and for upgrading the current category I ILS on runway 17L to category II status at the St. Petersburg-Clearwater International Airport in Florida.
Dulles International Airport- Of the funds provided, $3,438,000 shall be to install and commission a category III ILS for runway 19L at Dulles International Airport in Virginia.
Low level windshear alert system (LLWAS).--The Committee recommends $4,200,000 for the low-level windshear alert system (LLWAS), which provides important safety benefits for civil aviation. The budget request of $2,200,000 would result in a shortfall and schedule delays for installation of this system at the following high volume airports: Atlanta, Chicago O'Hare, Dallas-Fort Worth, Denver, New Orleans, New York LaGuardia, Orlando, St. Louis, and Tampa. The Committee believes it is important that this important safety equipment not be further delayed.
Runway visual range (RVR).--The Committee recommends $6,300,000, including $4,000,000 for continued acquisition of a next generation runway visual range system. FAA's fiscal year 2000 budget would terminate this project in the middle of the acquisition and close down the production line in December 1999, although the agency has plans to restart the program one year later. The Committee believes it would not be a good business decision to close down the line this year, only to pay additional costs to restart it next year. In addition, the recommendation includes $300,000 to complete installation of RVR equipment at Dulles International Airport. Although most of the equipment to support the RVR has been in place for two years, the project has gone uncompleted because FAA has not budgeted for a cable to tie the elements together. This final installation work is essential for reduced departure minima for that runway. The budget request included $2,000,000 for the RVR program.
Approach lighting system improvement program (ALSIP).--The recommendation of $7,700,000 includes an additional $5,000,000 for acquisition of additional approach lighting sequencing flasher-4 (ALSF-4) equipment.
Precision approach path indicators (PAPI).--The Committee recommends $3,500,000 for precision approach path indicators (PAPI), including $2,500,000 for acquisition of additional systems, the same amount as enacted for fiscal year 1999.
Distance measuring equipment (DME).--The Committee recommends $4,200,000 for distance measuring equipment (DME), including $3,000,000 for acquisition of additional systems.
Transponder landing systems (TLS).--The recommendation includes $3,000,000 for further acquisition of transponder landing systems. This is the same level as enacted for fiscal year 1999.
The Committee directs the Federal Aviation Administration to proceed immediately to install these systems, and is further directed to use the existing TLS system located in Watertown, WI, for it's in-service review validation and testing program, and to immediately develop protocols and approach procedures to be used by commercial and general aviation aircraft at TLS-equipped airports.
GPS aeronautical band.--The Committee recommends deferring FAA funding for development of additional frequencies for civil use of the global positioning system (GPS) due to uncertainties over the cost effectiveness of phases beyond phase one, and considering the current delay in reaching even the first phase. The Committee is not prejudicial to this project, but believes that these serious questions should be cleared up and experience gained from the phase one system prior to making such a huge investment in later phases. This results in a reduction of $17,000,000 from the budget estimate.
Terminal doppler weather radar (TDWR).--The Committee remains concerned that FAA has not installed a TDWR system or otherwise provided adequate windshear protection for the New York City metropolitan area. The record of decision to site a TDWR at the former Brooklyn Coast Guard Air Station was issued earlier this year, and FAA officials testified before the Subcommittee that the system would be commissioned by the end of the year. However, the Committee understands that FAA has done little to move this project forward since approval of the record of decision. The Committee has watched year after year of delay go by in this program, and insists that FAA adhere to the current commitment to have this long-awaited system operational by the end of this year.
PROCUREMENT OF NON-ATC FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT
The Committee recommends $193,525,000 for the acquisition of non-air traffic control facilities and equipment, an increase of $12,925,000 (7.2 percent) above the level enacted for fiscal year 1999. The Committee recommends a reduction of $800,000. The reduction would defer funds under `NAS training facilities' for refurbishment of classroom and simulation facilities due to low priority and budget constraints.
MISSION SUPPORT
The recommendation provides $231,200,000 for mission support activities. Funding of $376,343,000 was provided in fiscal year 1999, including $147,133,000 in funding for Year 2000 compliance issues. Adjustments to the budget estimate are explained below.
Permanent change of station moves.--As of March 31, 1999, this project had approximately $5,300,000 in unobligated funding from the fiscal year 1997 and 1998 appropriations. Some of this resulted from slippage in the contract tower program due to suspension of operations caused by a lawsuit filed by the air traffic controllers union. Given the plan to obligate most of these funds in fiscal year 2000, it is apparent that the additional funding in the fiscal year 2000 budget can be deferred. This results in a reduction to the budget estimate of $3,200,000.
FAA corporate systems architecture.--Budgeted funds include $170,000 to support the chief scientist and for `special projects as required' and $180,000 to `support NAS modernization, including FFP1 and apply evolutionary spiral process, enterprise architecture planning, and rapid application development'. It is unclear to the Committee what eventual product will come from this vaguely-worded effort. The recommendation would fund this project at the fiscal year 1999 enacted level, a reduction of $1,500,000 below the budget estimate.
Technical services support contract (TSSC).--In an ongoing audit, the OIG is finding serious cost control and contract administration problems in this cost plus fixed fee contract. The Committee recommendation would provide $40,000,000, which compares to $47,550,000 enacted in fiscal year 1999 and $48,800,000 in the President's budget.
Center for advanced aviation systems development (CAASD).--The Committee recommends the $63,400,000 requested for the center for advanced aviation systems development (CAASD) at Mitre Corporation, an increase of 11.2 percent above the fiscal year 1999 enacted level. According to the FAA, this funding level will support approximately 315 members of the technical staff (MTS). Consistent with this information, the limitation in the bill on staffing is set at the level of 320 MTS. Last year, the Committee took note of CAASD's assistance in the financial planning area, and encouraged the organization to continue and expand this work, especially in long-range planning and conceptualization for the operations budget. To date, the Committee has seen little result from this direction. Mitre is encouraged to use a portion of the increase in this bill to conduct additional work in this important area.
PERSONNEL AND RELATED EXPENSES
The recommendation provides $283,000,000, an increase of 14 percent above the fiscal year 1999 enacted level versus the 24.5 percent increase requested. This results in a reduction from the budget estimate of $25,793,900. The Committee believes a greater increase is not justified.
RESEARCH, ENGINEERING, AND DEVELOPMENT
(AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)
-------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 $150,000,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2000 173,000,000
Recommended in the bill 173,000,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 +23,000,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2000
-------------------------------------------------
This appropriation provides funding for long-term research, engineering and development programs to improve the air traffic control system and to increase its safety and capacity to meet air traffic demands of the future, as authorized by the Airport and Airway Improvement Act and the Federal Aviation Act. The appropriation also finances the research, engineering and development needed to establish or modify federal air regulations.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends $173,000,000, an increase of $23,000,000 (15.3 percent) above the fiscal year 1999 enacted level and the same as the President's budget request.
While still the safest airway system in the world, aviation accidents in this country in 1994 and 1996 highlight the need for more rapid implementation of advanced safety technologies, especially those related to forecasting and detection of hazardous weather conditions such as windshear, safety monitoring and oversight technologies, and aircraft technologies. The high percentage of accidents and incidents due to human error, deicing, and other hazardous weather problems call for sustained, high priority research programs to address these issues. In some cases, these priorities have necessitated reductions in other research programs.
A table showing the fiscal year 1999 enacted level, the fiscal year 2000 budget estimate, and the Committee recommendation follows:
RESEARCH, ENGINEERING, AND DEVELOPMENT
[Fiscal year 2000]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Program Fiscal year--
1999 enacted 2000 estimate Recommended in the bill
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
System Development and Infrastructure: $15,784,000 $17,269,000 $16,280,000
System planning & resource management 1,164,000 1,294,000 1,164,000
Technical laboratory facility 9,730,000 11,075,000 10,216,000
Center for Advanced Aviation System Development 4,890,000 4,900,000 4,900,000
Capacity and Air Traffic Management Technology 16,000,000
Safe Flight 21 16,000,000
Weather: 18,684,000 15,300,000 20,950,000
National laboratory program 9,118,000 8,700,000 12,000,000
In-house support 2,630,000 3,150,000 2,500,000
Center for Wind, Ice & Fog 336,000 350,000 1,000,000
Juneau, AK 3,600,000 3,100,000 2,450,000
SOCRATES 3,000,000 3,000,000
Aircraft Safety Technology: 34,886,000 39,639,000 44,639,000
Aircraft systems fire safety 4,750,000 5,528,000 5,528,000
Advanced materials/structural safety 1,734,000 2,338,000 2,338,000
Propulsion and fuel systems 2,831,000 3,126,000 3,126,000
Flight safety/atmospheric hazards research 2,619,000 3,844,000 3,844,000
Aging aircraft 14,694,000 15,998,000 20,998,000
Aircraft catastrophic failure prevention research 1,787,000 1,981,000 1,981,000
Aviation safety risk analysis 6,471,000 6,824,000 6,824,000
System Security Technology: 51,690,000 53,218,000 58,400,000
Explosives and weapons detection 41,700,000 40,676,000 45,858,000
Airport security technology integration 2,708,000 2,285,000 2,285,000
Aviation security human factors 5,282,000 5,256,000 5,256,000
Aircraft hardening 2,000,000 5,001,000 5,001,000
Human Factors & Aviation Medicine: 25,065,000 26,207,000 27,829,000
Flight deck/maintenance/system integration human factors 11,000,000 10,142,000 11,000,000
Air traffic control/airway facilities human factors 10,000,000 11,236,000 12,000,000
Aeromedical research 4,065,000 4,829,000 4,829,000
Environment and Energy 2,891,000 3,481,000 3,481,000
Innovative/Cooperative Research 1,000,000 1,421,000 1,421,000
Total appropriation 150,000,000 172,535,000 173,000,000
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT AND INFRASTRUCTURE
The recommended level is $16,280,000 for system development and infrastructure, an increase of $496,000 (3.1 percent) above the fiscal year 1999 enacted level.
System planning and resource management.--The recommendation provides $1,164,000, the same as the fiscal year 1999 enacted level. This results in a reduction of $130,000 below the budget estimate.
Technical laboratory facility.--The recommendation allocates $10,216,000, which is $486,000 (5 percent) above the fiscal year 1999 enacted level but $859,000 below the budget estimate. The reduction holds costs to a 5 percent increase instead of the 13.8 percent increase requested, and is necessary to fund higher priority activities in weather, safety and human factors research.
CAPACITY AND AIR TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT TECHNOLOGY
The Committee recommends no funding for this budget activity. The sole project proposed under this heading is transferred to the F&E appropriation, where it was funded in fiscal year 1999.
WEATHER
The Committee recommends $20,950,000 to address the effects of hazardous weather on aviation, an increase of $2,266,000 (12.1 percent) above the level enacted for fiscal year 1999 and $5,650,000 above the budget estimate. Within the funds provided, $3,000,000 is to continue development of Project Socrates. This is the same level provided for fiscal year 1999. Funding of $1,000,000 is included to continue activities of the Center for Wind, Ice and Fog at Mount Washington Observatory in New Hampshire under this program. In addition, funding of $12,000,000 is to be allocated to the National Laboratory Program. The Committee continues to strongly support this work, which is coordinated by the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) and performed jointly by several universities, federal laboratories, and non-profit organizations prominent in the field of weather research.
AIRCRAFT SAFETY TECHNOLOGY
The Committee recommends $44,639,000 for aircraft safety technology, $5,000,000 above the budget estimate and $9,753,000 above the level provided last year.
Flight safety/atmospheric hazards research.--In fiscal year 1999 appropriations action, Congress directed that FAA use $800,000 for wildlife hazard mitigation purposes. FAA's current plan is to use $200,000 for wildlife hazard mitigation and use the remaining $600,000 for other purposes. Wildlife strikes on aircraft are a growing threat to aviation safety which deserves much greater attention by regulators, airlines and airport operators. Since 1995, seventy-four people have been killed in collisions worldwide between aircraft and birds and four large aircraft have been destroyed. The FAA has estimated that bird and wildlife strikes cost the U.S. aviation industry more than 500,000 hours of downtime and $327,000,000 in aircraft damage and related costs. Given the magnitude of this problem, the Committee is perplexed that the agency is spending only a fourth of the funding that Congress provided in this area. The Committee directs FAA to utilize $800,000 of fiscal year 1999 funding to address wildlife hazard mitigation issues, reiterating last year's Congressional direction.
National Institute for Aviation Research.--Of the amount provided for `aging aircraft', $5,000,000 is to continue and expand research activities at the National Institute for Aviation Research, a current FAA Center of Excellence.
SYSTEM SECURITY TECHNOLOGY
The Committee recommendation provides $58,400,000 for system security technology, an increase of $5,182,000 above the budget estimate and $6,710,000 above the fiscal year 1999 enacted level. The increase would provide additional funding for an expanded effort in explosive detection systems technology.
HUMAN FACTORS AND AVIATION MEDICINE
The Committee recommendation provides $27,829,000, an increase of $1,622,000 (6.2 percent) above the budget request and $2,764,000 (11 percent) above the fiscal year 1999 enacted level.
ENVIRONMENT AND ENERGY
The recommendation provides $3,481,000, the same as the budget estimate and an increase of $590,000 (20.4 percent) above the level provided last year. This program researches ways to mitigate the impact of airport noise around the country.
INNOVATIVE AND COOPERATIVE RESEARCH
The recommendation provides $1,421,000, the same as the budget estimate and an increase of $421,000 (42.1 percent) above the level provided last year. This program finances the FAA centers of excellence, the FAA fellows program, and other university-based research of long-term interest to aviation.
GRANTS-IN-AID FOR AIRPORTS
(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)
(AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Liquidation of contract authorization) (Limitation on obligations)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 $1,600,000,000 ($1,950,000,000)
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2000 1,750,000,000 (1,600,000,000)
Recommended in the bill 1,867,000,000 (2,250,000,000)
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 +267,000,000 (+300,000,000)
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2000 +117,000,000 (+ 650,000,000)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The bill includes a liquidating cash appropriation of $1,867,000,000 for grants-in-aid for airports, authorized by the Airport and Airway Improvement Act of 1982, as amended. This funding provides for liquidation of obligations incurred pursuant to contract authority and annual limitations on obligations for grants-in-aid for airport planning and development, noise compatibility and planning, the military airport program, reliever airports, and other authorized activities. This is $117,000,000 above the level requested in the President's budget, and is necessary to support the $650,000,000 in additional obligation authority supported by this bill.
LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS
The bill includes a limitation on obligations of $2,250,000,000 for fiscal year 2000. This is $650,000,000 (40.6 percent) above the President's budget request and $300,000,000 (15.4 percent) above the fiscal year 1999 level.
DISCRETIONARY GRANTS
Within the obligation level recommended, the Committee directs that priority be given to grant applications involving further development of the following airports:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Airport (project)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama Dothan-Houston County, Haleyville Airport, Huntsville International (phase II expansion; noise mitigation land acquisition), Rankin-Fite Airport, Marion County, Montgomery Regional, Northwest Alabama Regional (security fencing), Pryor Field (runway extension), Russellville, Scottsboro, Shelby County.
California Ft. Irwin Barstow Daggett Heliport, Crescent City, Del Norte County (terminal upgrade), Southern California International Airport (ground access roads), March Air Reserve Base (civilian refueling system), Meadows Field Airport, Bakersfield, San Bernardino International (military airport program), George AFB (military airport program), Stockton Metropolitan, Ells Field, Willits, Mendocino County (runway/taxiway), Los Angeles International.
Florida Miami International (letter of intent), Orlando International (letter of intent), Palm Beach International (noise abatement program), Tallahassee Regional (noise reduction).
Georgia McCollum Field, Cobb County.
Kansas Kingman, Parson's City Airport, Manhattan.
Kentucky Louisville International.
Louisiana Ascension-St. James, Baton Rouge Metropolitan (sound insulation; sound easement; north side airport development), St. James Parish Airport, Houma-Terrebone.
Massachusetts Pittsfield Municipal (runway extension), Harriman-West Municipal (runway reconstruction).
Michigan Sawyer Airport (military airport program), Tulip City.
Mississippi Hawkins Field (runway extension), Jackson International (air cargo apron), John Bell Williams Airport, Hinds County (hangar taxiway).
Missouri Lee's Summit, Kansas City (runway extension).
Montana Anaconda-Deer Lodge Airport.
New York Adirondack Regional (snow removal equipment/infrastructure), Buffalo Niagara International (airport center acquisition/demolition/terminal/apron/access roads), Niagara Falls International Airport (taxiway `D').
North Carolina Brunswick County (runway extension), Concord Regional, Duplin County (parallel taxiway), Harnett County (runway extension), Johnston County (taxiway/apron/midfield), Richmond County, Stanly County.
North Dakota Dickinson Municipal.
Ohio Akron-Canton Regional, Dayton International, Pickaway County, Rickenbacker International, Toledo Express (air traffic control tower), Cleveland Hopkins International.
Oregon Newport Municipal (master plan; taxi lane and infrastructure; approach lighting system).
Pennsylvania Erie International, Hazleton Municipal Airport, Lehigh Valley International (noise monitoring system), Wilkes-Barre/Scranton International (terminal expansion).
South Carolina Florence Regional (hangar), St. George Airport (EA/EIS; runway improvement design).
Texas Abilene Regional (terminal/taxiway/emergency response), Ft. Hood, Gray Army Airfield (military airport program), Houston International (letter of intent), Ellington Field (runway; taxiway; related ramp pavement reconstruction).
Tennessee Memphis International (noise monitoring equipment), Millington Municipal (access road); Upper Cumberland Regional (taxiway and related runway/taxiway safety work).
Utah Ogden-Hinckley, Salt Lake City International.
Wisconsin Dane County Regional (primary runway rehabilitation), LaCrosse Municipal (approach lighting system), Richard Bong Airport (perimeter fencing).
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mammoth Lakes Airport, CA.--The Committee urges the FAA to give priority consideration to a request for discretionary funding for the extension of the existing runway by at least 1,000 feet, widening of the runway by at least 50 feet, and for strengthening the runway to meet FAA standards for group III aircraft. In addition, funding will be necessary to increase the maneuvering space in the taxiway and ramp areas to accommodate group III aircraft. The Committee is pleased to note the previous assistance and encourages the FAA to provide continued technical assistance to the Mammoth Lakes Airport. Such assistance has helped the airport identify the upgrades necessary to provide full commercial jet service.
Akron-Canton Regional Airport, OH.--The Committee urges the FAA to give priority consideration to requests for discretionary funding for the safety upgrades and extension of runway 1/19 at Akron-Canton Regional Airport in Ohio.
Kingman Airport, KS.--The Committee urges the FAA to give priority consideration to requests for discretionary funding for phase one upgrades at Kingman Municipal Airport, including land acquisition reimbursement, runway paving, runway lights, and new navigation aids.
Palm Beach International Airport, FL.--The Committee urges the FAA to give priority consideration for discretionary funding for noise abatement projects at the Palm Beach International Airport in Florida.
Leesburg Municipal Airport, VA.--The Committee recognizes that as air traffic operations in the Washington, D.C., area continue to grow, regional reliever airports will be called upon to play increased safety and capacity roles. Therefore, the Committee urges the FAA to consider the discretionary grant application made by the Leesburg Municipal Airport to expand the runway safety area.
Ellington Field, Houston, TX.--Last year, the Committee discussed the pending application of Houston's Ellington Field for readmission to the Military Airport Program. The Committee is extremely concerned that this application is still pending, and the FAA has not given any indication that it intends to move forward with its consideration. This airport is used by numerous federal agencies including NASA and the Coast Guard. Unfortunately, the main runway and related pavements at Ellington are deteriorating, putting NASA flight training activities in jeopardy. The Committee urges the FAA either to act favorably on Ellington's application for readmission to MAP, or to commit AIP discretionary funds to accomplish the main runway, taxiway, and related ramp pavement reconstruction necessary to assure future use of the airport by NASA and others.
Baton Rouge Metropolitan Airport, LA.--The Committee urges the FAA to give priority consideration to discretionary funding for runway, taxiway, landing and lighting system, and equipment improvements, as well as ongoing noise mitigation needs, in and around the Baton Rouge Metropolitan Airport in Louisiana. There are critical runway and taxiway upgrades that require immediate attention. Additionally, an accelerated effort to complete ongoing sound insulation and sound easements, begun in the 1980's, is vital to maintain the integrity of surrounding neighborhoods.
St. George Airport, SC.--The Committee encourages the FAA to give priority consideration to a request for discretionary funding for an environmental assessment and runway improvement design at the St. George Airport, South Carolina.
Florence Regional Airport, SC.--The Committee urges the FAA to request discretionary funding for demolition and hangar construction at the Florence Regional Airport, South Carolina.
Tallahassee Regional Airport, FL.--The Committee urges the FAA to give priority consideration to a request for discretionary funding for the Tallahassee, Florida Regional Airport noise reduction plan.
Pryor Field, AL.--The Committee understands that Pryor Field, a general aviation airport in Decatur, Alabama has submitted an application to the FAA to fund the extension of its runway in order to accommodate larger jets. The Committee recognizes the importance of this runway extension project, especially given the significant increase in industrial development in the Decatur metropolitan area, and urges the FAA to give priority consideration to this request for discretionary funding.
Huntsville International Airport, AL.--The Committee urges the FAA to give priority consideration to a request for discretionary funding for noise mitigation projects, particularly the acquisition of noise impacted property north of runway 18L-36R, at the Huntsville International Airport, Alabama.
Northwest Alabama Regional Airport, Muscle Shoals, AL.--The Committee urges the FAA to give priority consideration to a request for discretionary funding for the placement of security fencing at the Northwest Alabama Regional Airport in Muscle Shoals, Alabama.
Fort Hood, Gray Army Airfield, TX.--The Committee urges the FAA to give priority consideration to a request for discretionary funding under the military airport program for design and construction of a new joint-use airport facility at Robert Gray Army Airfield of Fort Hood, Texas.
Harnett County, NC.--The Committee urges the FAA to give priority consideration to a request for discretionary funding for a runway extension at Harnett County Airport, Erwin, North Carolina.
Johnston County Airport, NC.--The Committee understands that runway improvements at Johnston County Airport, North Carolina are needed, and encourages the FAA to give priority consideration to a request for discretionary funding for taxiway, apron and midfield area improvements at the airport.
Toledo Express Airport, OH.--The Committee urges the FAA to give priority consideration to a request for discretionary funding for preliminary design and engineering services for a new air traffic control tower at Toledo Express Airport, Ohio.
Dane County Regional Airport, WI.--The Committee urges the FAA to give priority consideration to a request for discretionary funding to rehabilitate the primary runway (runway 18/36) of the Dane County Regional Airport, Wisconsin. The Committee understands that the existing runway pavement is deteriorating rapidly and has a pavement condition index rating below the minimum service level.
Richard Bong Municipal Airport, WI.--The Committee urges the FAA to give priority consideration to a request for discretionary funding for perimeter fencing at the Richard Bong Municipal Airport, Wisconsin.
La Crosse Municipal Airport, WI.--The Committee encourages the FAA to give priority consideration to a request for discretionary funding for an approach lighting system at La Crosse Municipal Airport, Wisconsin.
Pittsfield Municipal Airport, MA.--The Committee urges the FAA to give priority consideration to a request for discretionary funding for study and design of a runway extension at Pittsfield Municipal Airport, Massachusetts.
Harriman-West Municipal Airport, MA.--The Committee urges the FAA to give priority consideration to a request for discretionary funding for runway reconstruction at the Harriman-West Municipal Airport in North Adams, Massachusetts
Jackson International Airport, MS.--The Committee encourages the FAA to give priority consideration to a request for discretionary funding for final design and construction of the air cargo apron at the Jackson International Airport, Jackson, Mississippi.
Hawkins Field, MS.--The Committee encourages the FAA to give priority consideration to a request for discretionary funding for a runway extension at Hawkins Field, Jackson, Mississippi. The Committee understands that extending the runway will make it possible for the airport to accommodate modern commercial jets and improve aviation access to the Jackson area.
John Bell Williams Airport, MS.--The Committee encourages the FAA to give priority consideration to a request for discretionary funding for a hangar and access taxiway construction and other airport improvements at John Bell Williams Airport in Hinds County, Mississippi.
Abilene Regional Airport, TX.--The Committee is aware of plans for essential infrastructure improvements to enhance competition, capacity and safety at the Abilene Regional Airport. Given the economic potential and immediate needs of this regional facility, the Committee encourages the FAA to give priority consideration to requests for discretionary funding that will assist the Abilene Regional Airport with various capital improvements such as terminal expansion, taxiway extension and emergency response vehicle procurement.
Crescent City Airport, CA.--The Committee encourages the FAA to give priority consideration to a request for discretionary funding for expansion and upgrade of the terminal at Crescent City Municipal Airport, California.
Ells Field, CA.--The Committee encourages the FAA to give priority consideration to a request for discretionary funding for runway and taxiway improvements at Ells Field in Willits, California.
Orlando International Airport, FL.--The Committee encourages the FAA to give priority consideration to a request for a letter of intent for a fourth runway for Orlando International Airport, Florida.
Miami International Airport, FL.--The Committee encourages the FAA to give priority consideration to a request for a letter of intent for a fourth runway at Miami International Airport, Florida.
MILITARY AIRPORT PROGRAM
The Committee directs FAA to fill any pending opening in the military airport program by December 1, 1999. The Committee is aware that the FAA has had one opening which could be filled, but the agency has been very slow in making the selection. The Committee does not wish to see further delay in this important program.
LETTERS OF INTENT
The Committee is concerned about allegations made that the FAA subjects airports which want to obtain a letter of intent (LOI) to an informal requirement that they either impose a passenger facility charge (PFC) or commit to imposing one in the near future. The Committee has been assured both by the Department of Transportation and by the FAA that, in the view of those agencies, they do not have the legal authority to make PFCs a requirement for getting an LOI, and that there is no such requirement. The Committee agrees that neither the department nor the FAA have the legal authority to require PFCs as a condition to receiving an LOI. The Committee notes with some concern, however, that every airport which has an LOI and is eligible to impose a PFC either has a PFC or just recently received an LOI and is in the process of imposing a PFC. The Committee finds it hard to accept that this is simply a coincidence. The Committee urges FAA not merely to take the correct position on this issue, but to ensure that AIP staff actually carry out that position.
GENERAL PROVISIONS
Safford Airport, Arizona- The bill includes a provision allowing the Secretary to waive terms of a 1956 deed of conveyance by which the United States conveyed lands to the city of Safford, Arizona for use by the city for airport purposes, provided that no such waiver may be granted if it would result in closure of an airport.
Limitation on Secretarial notification process- It has been customary for airport grant awards to be withheld until notification can be made to affected Members of Congress by the Office of the Secretary of Transportation (OST). The Committee has no objection to this overall policy. However, a report of the GAO dated May 18, 1999 indicated that these notifications are taking an increasing amount of time. In 1996, notifications took an average of 31 days. By 1998, the average had increased to 47 days, and some notifications took several months. The Committee believes this amount of delay is unnecessary, and clearly counterproductive to the efficient conduct of the AIP program. Therefore, a provision has been included in the bill which limits the notification period to fifteen calendar days. After that time period, the FAA may proceed with grant announcement and award.
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
SUMMARY OF FISCAL YEAR 2000 PROGRAM
The Federal Highway Administration provides financial assistance to the states to construct and improve roads and highways, enforces federal standards related to motor carriers and the highway transport of hazardous materials, and provides technical assistance to other agencies and organizations involved in road building activities. Title 23 and other supporting legislation provide authority for the various activities of the Federal Highway Administration. Funding is provided by contract authority, with program levels established by annual limitations on obligations in appropriations Acts.
The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA21) amended the Budget Enforcement Act to provide two additional discretionary spending categories, one of which is the highway category. This category is comprised of all federal-aid highway funding, motor carrier safety funding, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) highway safety grant funding and NHTSA highway safety research and development funding. The highway category obligations are capped at $28,085,150,000 and outlays are capped at $24,574,000,000 in fiscal year 2000. If appropriations action forces highway obligations or outlays to exceed these levels, the difference and the resulting outlays are charged to the non-defense discretionary spending category. If highway account receipts exceed levels specified in TEA21, automatic adjustments are made to increase or decrease obligations and outlays for the highway category accordingly, as is the case in fiscal year 2000.
The Committee's recommendation fully comports to and does not exceed the levels guaranteed by TEA21. The following table summarizes the program levels within the Federal Highway Administration for fiscal year 1999 enacted, the fiscal year 2000 budget request and the Committee's recommendation:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Program Fiscal year-- Recommended in the bill
1999 enacted 2000 request
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal-aid highways $25,511,000,000 $26,245,000,000 $26,245,000,000
Revenue aligned budget authority (RABA) 1,456,350,000 1,456,350,000
RABA transfer -502,120,000
Adjustment 63,000,000
Exempt obligations 1,424,047,000 1,132,116,000 1,132,116,000
Motor carrier safety grants 100,000,000 105,000,000 105,000,000
Motor carrier safety grants (RABA) 50,000,000
Surface transportation programs 332,000,000
Total 27,367,047,000 28,549,346,000 28,938,466,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LIMITATION ON ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES
--------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------
Limitation, fiscal year 1999 ($327,413,000)
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 (350,432,000)
Recommended in the bill (356,380,000)
Bill compared with:
Limitation, fiscal year 1999 (+28,967,000)
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 (+5,948,000)
--------------------------------------------------
This limitation controls spending for the salaries and expenses of the Federal Highway Administration required to conduct and administer the federal-aid highways programs and most other federal highway programs. In the past, this limitation included a number of contract programs, such as highway research, development and technology; however, the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA21) created a separate limitation for transportation research. Accordingly, in fiscal year 2000, costs related to highway research, development and technology are included under a separate limitation.
The Committee recommends a limitation of $356,380,000. This amount is $28,967,000 above amounts provided for fiscal year 1999 and $5,948,000 above the level requested in the budget. The recommendation will support an FTE level of 2,427 in the non-motor carrier program, the same level as enacted in fiscal year 1999. For motor carrier operations, the Committee recommendation includes $70,484,000, an increase of $17,109,000 over the fiscal year 1999 enacted level. The recommended level assumes the following adjustments to the budget request:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Undistributed reduction in administrative expenses (non-motor carrier) -$6,000,000
Eliminate funding for the human resources information system -802,000
Eliminate funding for community/federal information partnership program -6,000,000
Eliminate funding for national rural development program support -500,000
Advanced vehicle technology consortia program (Section 5111 of TEA21) +5,000,000
Transportation management planning for the Salt Lake City 2002 Winter Olympic Games (Section 1223 of TEA21) +5,000,000
Additional resources for federal inspectors and other safety-related activities within the office of motor carriers +9,250,000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Undistributed reduction in administrative expenses.--The Committee recommendation includes a general reduction of $6,000,000 in administrative expenses and provides FHWA the flexibility to allocate that reduction among such expenses as ADP, permanent change of station, travel, transportation and non-mandatory bonuses and incentives. Overall, the budget represents an 11 percent increase. The Committee notes that common administrative expenses billed through the TASC increase by 17 percent, while inflation assumptions for non-pay items is 1.3 percent. A reduction of $6,000,000 is a reduction of only 2 percent of the budget estimate.
Human resources information system (HRIS).--The Committee has deleted funding requested in each of the department's operating administrations for the human resources information system as systems development is premature. Further discussion of this recommendation can be found earlier in this report under the appropriation for the office of the assistant secretary for administration in the office of the secretary. FHWA's share of HRIS development in fiscal year 2000 is $802,000.
Community/federal information partnership participation.--No funds are provided for a new grant program, the community/federal information partnership participation program, for which the budget request included $6,000,000. This grant program is not authorized. Moreover, the Committee believes that organizations such as the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials can assist in the development of a standardized framework for the use and dissemination of geo-spatial information related to ground transportation infrastructure without cost to the Federal Government should state and local transportation agencies identify such a need.
National rural development program support.--The Committee has deleted funding requested for the department's share of the national rural development program (-$500,000). This program is a government-wide initiative/partnership, led by the Department of Agriculture, and is a network of rural development leaders and officials committed to the vitality of rural areas. The Committee has deleted funds for this activity for several years.
Advanced vehicle consortia program.--The Committee has included $5,000,000 within funds provided for the FHWA's administrative expenses for the advanced vehicle consortia program. The budget request had proposed to provide $20,000,000 for the program to be diverted from funds provided in TEA21 for the magnetic levitation program. The department is directed to include with the fiscal year 2001 budget request a report that: delineates a detailed strategic spending plan outlining the scope and direction of each of the planned research, development, demonstration, and deployment projects expected to be funded as part of the program during the next five years; demonstrates that the activities to be conducted by the participating consortia will be coordinated and integrated into a cohesive program; provides documentation that the projects to be funded do not in any way overlap with other FTA, FRA, or DOE activities; and demonstrates the financial participation of other federal departments. The Committee insists that all development, demonstration and deployment projects funded under this initiative require at least fifty percent non-federal funds. None of the funds made available shall be used to advance magnetic levitation technology.
Transportation management planning for the Salt Lake City 2002 Winter Olympic Games.--The Committee recommendation includes $5,000,000 for transportation management planning for the Salt Lake City 2002 Winter Olympic Games, as authorized by section 1223(c) of TEA21. These funds shall be available for planning activities and related transportation infrastructure investments based on the transportation management plan approved by the Secretary.
Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center contracting.--In response to an audit requested by the House Committee on Appropriations because of concerns regarding weaknesses in the award and administration of contracts at the Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center, the Inspector General identified systematic weaknesses in the Center's internal controls for monitoring interagency agreements and contracts. Recent fraud convictions have occurred and underscore the need for improved controls at the Center. The FHWA is therefore directed to identify and submit specific corrective actions it plans in response to the IG's recommendations and target dates for completion of these actions to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations by December 1, 1999.
Motor carrier.--In 1997, 5,398 people died on America's highways in truck related accidents, an increase of 4.5 percent in fatalities over the previous year and the highest fatality level in the current decade. At the same time, more commercial motor vehicles are driving more miles on our roadways. Trucking vehicle miles have increased 40 percent over the last decade. Over 20 percent of these trucks--more than one in every five--are operating with safety defects so serious that they should be placed out of service.
Last year, the Committee began reviewing the effectiveness of the Office of Motor Carriers and Highway Safety (OMCHS). In February, the Committee held a comprehensive hearing on the subject. The results of our review and the hearing were disturbing.
A common theme heard throughout testimony before the Committee was that OMCHS is not doing enough to prevent unsafe operators from traveling on our highways. For example, in 1997, the IG found that only 2.5 percent of interstate motor carriers were reviewed and 64 percent of the nation's carriers did not have a safety rating. Yet very little progress has been made since then to conduct safety ratings on motor carriers. The number of compliance reviews has fallen by 30 percent since 1995. The amount of fines collected from unsafe trucking companies has fallen to the lowest level since 1992. Currently, the average settlement per enforcement case is $1,600. Without a more effective and aggressive program to improve truck safety, the General Accounting Office (GAO) predicts that fatalities could rise as high as 6,000 per year by 2000.
This growth in trucking fatalities is alarming. It equates to a major airline accident every two weeks, with about 200 fatalities. In comparison, other transportation modes have seen a decline in fatalities.
The rising number of deaths and the poor oversight of the trucking industry are partially a result of OMCHS's placement within the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). FHWA's primary mission is to award over $25 billion in highway and construction funds to the states, not to improve highway safety. FHWA is skilled at building and maintaining roads, but has done a poor job at maintaining an effective and forceful monitoring program. Eclipsed by an agency of 2,427 FTE and fifty division offices and several regional resource centers, OMCHS and its safety mission lack a strong focus, and is subjugated to second-class status within FHWA. Based on a safety program of education and enforcement, some personnel within OMCHS have become too close to the trucking industry, which they are charged with regulating.
Earlier this year, the IG completed an audit of OMCHS' ties to the trucking industry. The IG found that OMCHS leadership had engaged in a `strategy * * * devised to solicit the trucking industry and third party communications to Congress in order to generate opposition to the OMCHS transfer provision' contained in Congressional legislation. In short, OMCHS used the industry it is charged with regulating to solicit support to defeat a congressional proposal which was designed to improve trucking safety.
In light of these findings the Committee believes that significant and fundamental changes are needed at the Office of Motor Carriers and Highway Safety. Although the department has changed its leadership and has begun to focus on enforcement actions, more needs to be done. No improvements to truck safety will occur if the regulators are unable to maintain an arms length relationship with the industry; if the office does not more effectively identify and target habitual violators of the federal safety regulations; if they do not adopt strong enforcement actions against the minority of carriers that repeatedly violate safety rules; and if OMCHS does not aggressively sanction the industry for safety violations. Without these types of changes, fatalities will continue to rise.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee has provided $70,484,000 for motor carrier safety operations, which is an increase of $9,250,000 over the amended budget request and $17,109,000 above the fiscal year 1999 enacted level. Many of the activities contained in the amended budget request can be legitimately defined as administrative expenses and have been included in this account. The following increases were made:
| Additional inspectors for compliance reviews | $500,000 |
| New staff to decrease the regulatory backlog | 250,000 |
| Additional staff for border enforcement activities | 816,000 |
| Crash data | 4,000,000 |
| Safety systems database | 3,000,000 |
| Census information | 4,500,000 |
| Critical incident management | 2,000,000 |
Inspectors for compliance reviews.--The Committee has provided $500,000 for the Office of Motor Carriers and Highway Safety to hire 10 additional inspectors to improve the vitality and vigor of its compliance program. Between 1995 and 1997, the number of federally conducted compliance reviews decreased from 5 per month to less than 2 per month. Also, the number of compliance orders and consent orders issued to problem carriers declined significantly. Although the Committee is pleased that FHWA has issued a memorandum to its personnel requiring a more vigorous enforcement and compliance program to promote motor carrier safety, it is unclear if a more robust program can be accomplished without additional personnel. The Committee directs FHWA to adopt a strategy that would ensure all A and B carriers and at least 20 percent of the C carriers are reviewed within six months of being entered into the Safety Status Measurement System (Safestat). Also, the Committee expects OMCHS enforcement personnel to conduct at least 8,000 compliance reviews per year on high risk carriers (both trucks and buses) that have violated the motor carrier safety or hazardous materials transportation regulations or have been involved in a reportable crash.
Bus safety.--Between 1993 and 1997, 21 people died in charter bus accidents. In the past six months, there have been 30 fatalities. The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) has been reviewing motor coach safety, including the most recent accident in New Orleans. They found `carriers that have repeatedly received conditional or unsatisfactory ratings in either the vehicle or driver factor of the compliance review continue to operate, placing school children and other passengers at risk.' The NTSB concluded `that OMCHS needs to increase its oversight of passenger carrier operations.' As part of the increased enforcement effort, the Committee expects OMCHS to complete more compliance reviews on the motor coach industry and develop a separate Safestat program to identify problem motor coach carriers.
Regulatory backlog.--To address more effectively the regulatory backlog facing this office, the Committee has included $250,000 to hire four additional personnel and to provide ample training for current and new regulatory staff. Both safety advocates and the trucking industry have criticized OMCHS for taking too long to issue safety rules. Two problems frequently cited were the delay in altering the current hours of service regulations and the eight years it took the agency to complete a rule on enhanced conspicuity for trailers. The Committee recognizes the complex nature of the rulemaking process; however, it believes that the OMCHS can be more timely in the issuance of its rules with additional staff to develop, write, and analyze proposed rules, and funding to better train its current regulatory staff.
Border enforcement activities.--The Committee has provided $816,000 to hire additional federal inspectors to man border crossings in Arizona, California, New Mexico, and Texas. The Inspector General, in a review of the motor carrier safety program for commercial trucks at the southern U.S. borders, found that `with the exception of California, far too few trucks are being inspected at the U.S.-Mexico border, and that too few inspected trucks comply with U.S. standards. For example, in fiscal year 1997, the truck out-of-service rate at border crossings in Texas was about 50 percent, compared to a U.S. truck out-of-service rate of about 25 percent, and a Canadian truck out-of-service rate of about 17 percent.' To address this problem, the Inspector General recommended increasing the number of federal inspectors per work shift for all 28 border crossings during the hours they were open. The Committee has provided $816,000 to hire additional inspectors for these crossings. According to FHWA personnel and the Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance, it takes between 6 and 9 months to hire and train new inspectors. The Committee has taken this time lag into account when developing the funding recommendation for these new inspectors.
To accommodate the additional inspector presence, the Committee has allocated $10,000,000 from FHWA's border program for border states to acquire portable scales, computers, and facilities and lease land necessary to conduct these inspections. These are eligible activities under the coordinated border infrastructure program.
Crash data.--The Committee has provided $4,000,000 to expand the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's (NHTSA's) fatal accident reporting system (FARS) to include all truck and bus crashes. Currently, there are about 150,000 crashes (tow-away, injury, and fatal); however only 100,000 are reported to the department. Without an accurate picture, OMCHS has difficulty identifying all high-risk carriers. At this funding level, FHWA can identify what data to collect and the impediments to uploading accurate and timely data. Also, FHWA should reimburse NHTSA for its work to: (1) design and implement an expanded data system built on FARS; (2) negotiate contracts with the states to collect this data; (3) hire the necessary contractors to collect the data; and (4) train the contractors to assure uniform coding of this new data. The Committee recognizes that additional funds will be necessary in the future once this system is fully implemented.
Safety systems database.--A total of $3,000,000 has been provided to establish a comprehensive database containing complete information on the predominant factors that contribute to large truck crashes. Information included in this database should enable OMCHS to address causal factors, preventing crashes in the future. GAO testified that `the data base would take 2-3 years to complete, at a cost of $2,000,000-$3,000,000.' The American Automobile Association testified about the need for this type of system and stated that the results could be relevant for 15 years. The Committee urges OMCHS to include NHTSA, the trucking industry, and the safety community in developing this proposal.
Census information.--The Committee has provided $4,500,000 to improve census data in the Safestat system. Census data includes information on the number of trucks a company operates and the vehicle miles traveled. In the majority of states, interstate carriers are required to file census data with OMCHS once, when they initially go into business. After that, census data is only updated when OMCHS or the state conducts compliance reviews at the carriers' facilities. According to GAO, Safestat's ability to target high-risk carriers is limited by out-of-date census data. The Committee understands that this is a two-year program that is needed only until the unified carrier register becomes operational in 2001.
Critical incident management.--A total of $2,000,000 has been allocated for critical incident management activities, which could include developing post-crash investigation training and working with states to collect driver citation data so that companies hiring problem drivers can be targeted for safety reviews.
School transportation study.--Within the funds allocated to OMCHS, $200,000 shall be for the school transportation safety study required by section 4030 of TEA21.
Operation respond.--Within the funds made available, $375,000 shall be available for Operation Respond.
Loading weight.--There is no federal requirement for shippers to determine or estimate the weight of a load and record this weight on its `straight bill of lading'. The argument has been made that without this basic and necessary weight information, the truck driver cannot determine whether the load is secured properly and/or whether his planned route is appropriate. As such, the department should examine whether regulations should require shippers to identify the exact weight or approximate load weights on all of their shipping papers and bills of lading.
Bill language.--A general provision (sec. 335) is included in the bill that prohibits funds in this Act from being used to carry out the functions and operations of the Office of Motor Carriers and Highway Safety within the Federal Highway Administration. Numerous hearings have been held on the vigor and professionalism of OMCHS. The Inspector General, the Chairman of the National Transportation Safety Board, trucking representatives, the enforcement community, and safety advocates all believe that OMCHS should be moved from the Federal Highway Administration to a Motor Carrier Safety Administration or to NHTSA. Although there is not agreement on the best structure to improve commercial motor vehicle and motor coach safety, it clearly needs to be moved from FHWA, whose primary mission is to invest in highway and bridge improvements. Safety cannot have the necessary focus under FHWA. The Committee cannot continue recommending funds for such an ineffective program, and hopes that the appropriate authorizing committees, which also have conducted several hearings on motor carrier safety, will report legislation expeditiously that transfers OMCHS from FHWA. It is the desire of this Committee that inclusion of this provision should expedite such legislation before the end of this current legislative session.
LIMITATION ON TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH
---------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------
Limitation, fiscal year 1999 1 (--)
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 1 (--)
Recommended in the bill ($422,450,000)
Bill compared with:
Limitation, fiscal year 1999 (+422,450,000)
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 (+422,450,000)
---------------------------------------------------
This limitation controls spending for the transportation research and technology contract programs of the Federal Highway Administration. This limitation includes a number of contract programs including intelligent transportation systems, surface transportation research, technology deployment, training and education, and university transportation research. In the past, funding under this limitation was provided in part from the limitation on general operating expenses and from contract authority provided in permanent law. The Committee recommends a limitation of $422,450,000. This is the same level as is authorized by TEA21, and an increase of $18,800,000 over comparable fiscal year 1999 enacted levels.
TEA21 authorizes $422,450,000 in fiscal year 2000 for the following transportation research programs:
| Surface transportation research | $97,000,000 |
| Technology deployment program | 40,000,000 |
| Training and education | 16,000,000 |
| Bureau of transportation statistics | 31,000,000 |
| ITS standards, research, operational tests, and development | 98,200,000 |
| ITS deployment | 113,000,000 |
| University transportation research | 27,250,000 |
| Subtotal | 422,450,000 |
Within the funds provided for surface transportation research, the accompanying bill provides funding for the following activities in the specified amounts, consistent with the provisions of TEA21:
| Technology assessment and deployment | $14,000,000 |
| Long term pavement performance | 10,000,000 |
| International outreach program | 500,000 |
| Research and technology support | 7,500,000 |
| Highway research and development | 65,000,000 |
| Subtotal | 97,000,000 |
Within the funds provided for highway research and development, the Committee recommends that $65,000,000 be allocated for the following activities in the specified amounts:
| Highway research and development: | |
| Safety | $14,200,000 |
| Pavements | 12,500,000 |
| Structures | 14,500,000 |
| Environment | 7,000,000 |
| Policy | 4,700,000 |
| Planning | 4,000,000 |
| Motor carrier | 6,400,000 |
| Advanced research | 900,000 |
| Highway operations | 800,000 |
| Subtotal | 65,000,000 |
Safety.--The safety research and technology program develops engineering practices, analysis tools, equipment, roadside hardware, and safety promotion and public information that will significantly contribute to the reduction of highway fatalities and injuries. The Committee recommends $14,200,000 for safety research and development activities, an increase of $2,200,000 over the budget request. FHWA shall implement a comprehensive research and technology program that will ensure that safety research and development activities receive at least the same amount of funds that were provided in fiscal year 1999. The Committee is pleased with the progress made since last year to advance technology combining the use of UV lights and flourescent materials to improve night time visibility (e.g., to help delineate lane markings). Because of the substantial benefits that may be realized as a result of this technology, FHWA should ensure that this initiative is pursued as expeditiously as possible.
The Committee encourages FHWA and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to work diligently to address the traffic safety issue of speeding--especially in rural communities where speed limits are higher than in urban areas. In recent years, close to half of the Nation's traffic fatalities occurred in rural areas. In addition, about 55 percent of all work zone fatalities occur in rural areas. One promising technology to address the challenge of increased speeds is variable speed limit (VSL) systems, which automatically adjust the speed limit to weather and/or traffic conditions. FHWA, working in cooperation with NHTSA, shall conduct a focused review of VSL enforcement, including consideration of legal, liability, and social issues; prepare guidelines for the type of evidence required for a VSL system to be enforceable and upheld in court; develop model statute language that would ensure successful implementation of the technology; and conduct a test to evaluate a VSL system. The results of this activity shall be contained in a report to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations.
Pavements research.--The pavement research and technology program identifies engineering practices, analytic tools, equipment, roadside hardware, and safety promotion and public information that will significantly contribute to the reduction of highway fatalities and injuries. For fiscal year 2000, the Committee recommends $12,500,000. The FHWA is encouraged to support research in silica fume technology, next generation pavement design, hot climate asphalt technology, and geosynthetic pavement systems.
Structures.--The structures research and technology program develops technologies, advanced materials and methods to efficiently maintain and renew the aging transportation infrastructure, improve existing infrastructure performance, and enable efficient infrastructure response and quick recovery after major disasters. For fiscal year 2000, the Committee recommends $14,500,000. The FHWA is encouraged to support research into advanced wood deposits and lithium technology to mitigate the damage from alkali silica reaction.
Environment research.--The environment research and technology program develops improved tools for assessing highway impacts on the environment; techniques for the avoidance, detection, and mitigation of those impacts and for enhancement of the environment; and expertise on environmental concerns within FHWA and state and local transportation agencies. For fiscal year 2000, the Committee recommends $7,000,000 for research on environmental issues affecting highway operations and construction, an increase of $1,000,000 over the budget request. The additional funds shall be available to support research to examine the levels and types of fine particulate matter produced by highway sources, and to develop improved tools to predict truck travel and resulting emissions of nitrous oxides (NOX). These studies will help assist state and local transportation agencies in demonstrating conformity with air quality plans and in attaining federal air quality standards. Further, within the funds provided for highway research and development, the department shall make available $100,000 for continuation of the PM-10 study.
Policy research.--The policy research and technology program supports FHWA policy analysis and development, strategic planning, and technology development through research in data collection, management and dissemination; highway financing, investment analysis, and performance measurement; and enhancement of highway program contributions to economic productivity, efficiency, and other national goals. The Committee recommends $4,700,000 for policy research in fiscal year 2000. The Committee notes that substantial concerns have been raised regarding the department's ongoing truck size and weight study. FHWA's management should ensure that future policy-oriented studies are based on more realistic assumptions and are completed in a timely manner. The Committee maintains that the authorization caps and legislated set-asides in TEA21 do not allow for the initiation of a new research funding category to conduct freight research. Furthermore, research to better understand freight movements should be conducted with private sector funds, rather than public funds as requested by the department. Consequently, the Committee does not recommend any funds for freight research from any surface transportation research subaccount.
Planning.--The planning research and technology program advances cost effective methods to evaluate transportation strategies and investments; develops and disseminates improved planning methods; develops more effective planning and data collection techniques for intermodal passenger and freight planning and programming; improves financial planning tools for use in developing transportation plans and programs; evaluates the characteristics of the National Highway System; and develops improved analytical tools to support metropolitan and statewide planning and for information and data sharing with state and local governments. The Committee recommendation includes $4,000,000 for planning research. Funds for real estate services are included within the planning subaccount. No funds are provided in any surface transportation subaccount for research into sustainability as contract funds specified in section 1221 of TEA21 can be used to support such research.
Motor carrier research.--The Committee has provided $6,400,000 for motor carrier research, which is the same level as requested. The Executive Director of FHWA is directed to improve the budget justification for this research area. Future budget requests should delineate the specific projects that will be funded and the exact amount for each project, similar to the format used by the Federal Railroad Administration's next generation high-speed rail program. As part of this improved format, FHWA should also include an analysis of the possible impacts of the proposed research on motor carrier safety and crash reduction.
Advanced research.--The advanced research program addresses longer-term, higher-risk research that shows potential benefits for improving the durability, efficiency, environmental impact, productivity, and safety of highway systems. The Committee provides $900,000 for advanced research.
Highway operations.--The highway operations research program is designed to develop, deliver and deploy advanced technologies and administrative methods to provide pavement and bridge durability, and to reduce construction and maintenance-related user delays. The Committee recommendation includes $800,000.
Technology assessment and deployment.--The technology assessment and deployment program identifies and assesses innovative research results, technology, and products, and promotes the application of those advances that are determined to be of potential benefit to the highway community through increased productivity, safety, and operations. Within the funds provided for surface transportation research, the Committee recommends $14,000,000 for technology assessment and deployment activities, which represents an increase of $500,000 over the budget request. The recent reorganization of FHWA, both at headquarters and in the field, has changed how new technology is delivered to states and local governments. The additional funds are to assist in the deployment of technology in the field.
The Committee requests that by December 1, 1999, FHWA respond to each of the recommendations presented in the Transportation Research Board report on technology deployment and report to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations how FHWA will improve its mechanisms of technology transfer and evaluations.
Research and technology support.--Within the funds provided for surface transportation research, the Committee recommends $7,500,000 for research and technology support. Sufficient funds are provided to ensure continued support of the Research and Technology Coordinating Committee of the Transportation Research Board. This senior level group provides useful guidance and recommendations intended to improve FHWA's research, development, and technology-related programs.
The Committee recognizes that the funding environment established by Title V of TEA21 has created challenges for the FHWA in fully supporting priority programs at previously planned levels. To meet that challenge, the Committee notes that FHWA has vigorously pursued a national research and technology partnership in conjunction with key partners including the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, the Transportation Research Board, academia, numerous safety and surface transportation organizations, and the private sector. The Committee supports those efforts to strengthen coalitions and partnerships to work together on strategic R&T priorities, leverage federal funds, and ensure that federal research investments meet the needs of the user community.
ITS standards, research, operational tests and development.--The Committee recommends the $98,200,000 provided in TEA21 for ITS research be allocated in the following manner:
| Research and development | $47,450,000 |
| Operational tests | 6,650,000 |
| Evaluations | 6,400,000 |
| Architecture and standards | 17,000,000 |
| Integration | 11,700,000 |
| Program support | 9,000,000 |
| Total | 98,200,000 |
Research and development- The research and development program supports the research and development of new ITS technologies to improve the safety, mobility, and productivity of the surface transportation system. In total, the Committee recommends $47,450,000 for research and development activities. Within these funds, the Committee has allocated $7,300,000 for commercial vehicle operations research, or $800,000 more than requested. These additional funds shall help advance critical safety data systems, such as SAFER/CVIEW and ASPEN, and further test the Safer Data mailbox project that allows for the electronic retrieval of information on prior inspections of commercial motor vehicles and drivers. The mailbox technology provides a valuable tool used by enforcement officers to reduce highway crashes and fatalities involving trucks and buses. Using the information provided, state safety personnel concentrate inspections on previously identified high-risk carriers and drivers, especially those who do not correct out-of-service defects identified in previous inspections.
The Safer Data mailbox project allows state enforcement officials working at the roadside to gain access to near real-time inspection information. One of the greatest needs for that information is to assist officers working in the border states who are ensuring that safety requirements are met as specified in NAFTA. Historical safety information is lacking on carriers from adjoining countries, making quick retrieval of safety information most critical. Past inspection records in the mailbox system may be the only information available for making critical safety and inspection decisions at the border. The Committee expects FHWA to continue to advance this program and ensure that it is made available to all states, especially border states. FHWA shall work with a border state to serve as a lead technology distribution agent to provide technical assistance to all states in advancing and deploying the Safer Data mailbox system.
Operational tests.--The operational tests program provides a bridge between research and development and large-scale deployment through the technical testing of ITS technologies and by addressing institutional barriers.
Intelligent vehicle initiative (IVI).--The Committee encourages the director of the joint program office to continue to ensure that the primary federal role in the IVI is focused on expediting the innovation of integrated crash avoidance technologies for passenger vehicles. In view of the substantial human factors research, performance specification work, operational tests of crash avoidance technologies, integration of information systems, and cost/benefit assessment work that remains to be completed, an IVI program focused on this critical safety area is of foremost importance.
Evaluations program.--The Committee recommends $6,400,000 for program evaluation studies and recognizes the importance of continuing to evaluate the benefits and costs of various ITS projects and to track their progress.
Architecture and standards.--The architecture and standards program provides for the maintenance, enhancement and application of the national ITS architecture and the development and testing of ITS standards. The Committee recommends $17,000,000 for architecture and standards work, which is $3,000,000 more than requested in the budget. The Committee recognizes the progress made to date on ITS standards and expects that any provisional standards, if needed, will be issued within the time frame specified in TEA21. It is essential to achieve a nationally interoperable ITS network. During the last several years, FHWA has been working diligently with the states, toll authorities, and commercial vehicle carriers that must deal with continuing challenges to interoperability, such as different payment procedures and divergent business models. There remain many barriers to achieving national interoperability. The Committee supports FHWA's continuing efforts to eliminate or reduce those barriers, explore whether facilitated resolutions can be achieved, and use the authorities provided in TEA21 to ensure an interoperable ITS network.
Integration.--The integration program supports training and technical guidance for federal, state, and local professionals charged with implementing integrated ITS systems. The Committee is pleased that the department has changed the scope and nature of the mainstreaming activity and supports initiatives to provide direct technical and procurement assistance to states and other governmental entities planning, evaluating, or deploying ITS.
National ITS program plan.--The Committee looks forward to receiving as soon as possible an update of the National ITS Program Plan, which is to be prepared in a manner consistent with requirements of section 5205 of TEA21.
ITS deployment projects.--It is the intent of the Committee that the following projects contribute to the integration and interoperability of intelligent transportation systems in metropolitan and rural areas as provided under section 5208 of the TEA21 and promote deployment of the commercial vehicle intelligent transportation system infrastructure as provided under section 5209 of TEA21. These projects shall conform to the requirements set forth in these sections, including the project selection criteria contained in section 5208(b) and the priority areas outlined in section 5209(c), respectively. Funds provided in TEA21 for ITS deployment activities are to be made available as follows:
| Project | Amount |
| Albuquerque, New Mexico | $3,000,000 |
| Central Pennsylvania | 2,000,000 |
| Chicago, Illinois | 1,000,000 |
| City of Superior and Douglas County, Wisconsin | 1,000,000 |
| Clay County, Missouri | 300,000 |
| Clearwater, Florida | 5,000,000 |
| College Station, Texas | 2,000,000 |
| Commonwealth of Virginia | 12,000,000 |
| Fairfield, California | 750,000 |
| Florida Bay County, Florida | 2,000,000 |
| Fort Worth, Texas | 5,000,000 |
| Houma, Louisiana | 1,000,000 |
| Houston, Texas | 3,000,000 |
| Huntsville, Alabama | 200,000 |
| Inglewood, California | 1,000,000 |
| Jefferson County, Colorado | 2,500,000 |
| Kansas City, Missouri | 1,000,000 |
| Los Angeles, California | 1,800,000 |
| Las Vegas, Nevada | 2,790,000 |
| Miami, Florida | 2,000,000 |
| Mission Viejo, California | 1,000,000 |
| Monroe County, New York | 1,000,000 |
| Northeast Florida | 1,000,000 |
| Oakland County, Michigan | 3,000,000 |
| Orlando, Florida | 1,000,000 |
| Oxford, Mississippi | 3,000,000 |
| Pueblo, Colorado | 2,000,000 |
| Rensselaer County, New York | 1,000,000 |
| Sacramento, California | 1,000,000 |
| San Francisco, California | 1,000,000 |
| Santa Clara, California | 1,000,000 |
| Seattle, Washington | 5,700,000 |
| Shreveport, Louisiana | 1,000,000 |
| State of Delaware | 3,000,000 |
| State of Idaho | 2,000,000 |
| State of Maryland | 2,000,000 |
| State of Minnesota | 12,000,000 |
| State of North Dakota | 950,000 |
| State of Oregon | 2,000,000 |
| State of Utah | 3,500,000 |
| States of New Jersey and New York | 1,500,000 |
| Thurston, Washington | 1,000,000 |
| Tuscon, Arizona | 1,000,000 |
| Wausau-Stevens Point-Wisconsin Rapids, Wisconsin | 3,000,000 |
| Washington, DC | 8,000,000 |
| Wayne County, Michigan | 1,000,000 |
FEDERAL-AID HIGHWAYS
(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)
(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)
-----------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 ($24,000,000,000)
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 (26,000,000,000)
Recommended in the bill (26,125,000,000)
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 +2,125,000,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 +125,000,000
-----------------------------------------------------
The Committee recommends a liquidating cash appropriation of $26,125,000,000. This is an increase of $2,125,000,000 over the fiscal year 1999 enacted level and is needed to pay the outstanding obligations of the various highway programs at levels provided in TEA21. This appropriation is mandatory and has no scoring effect.
FEDERAL-AID HIGHWAYS
Federal-aid highways and bridges are managed through a federal-state partnership. States and localities maintain ownership and responsibility for maintenance, repair and new construction of roads. State highway departments have the authority to initiate federal-aid projects subject to FHWA approval of plans, specifications, and cost estimates. The Federal Government provides financial support for construction and repair through matching grants, the terms of which vary with the type of road.
There are almost four million miles of public roads in the United States and approximately 577,000 bridges. The Federal Government provides grants to states to assist in financing the construction and preservation of about 945,000 miles (24 percent) of these roads, which represents an extensive interstate system plus key feeder and collector routes. Highways eligible for federal aid carry about 85 percent of total U.S. highway traffic.
The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA21) reauthorized highway, highway safety, transit, and other surface transportation programs through fiscal year 2003. The TEA21 builds on programs and other initiatives established in the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) of 1991, the previous major authorizing legislation for surface transportation programs.
Under the TEA21, Federal-aid highways funds are made available through the following major programs:
National highway system.--The ISTEA of 1991 authorized--and the National Highway System Designation Act of 1995 subsequently established--the National Highway System (NHS). This 163,000-mile road system serving major population centers, international border crossings, intermodal transportation facilities and major travel destinations, is the culmination of years of effort by many organizations, both public and private, to identify routes of national significance. It includes all Interstate routes, other urban and rural principal arterials, the defense strategic highway network, and major strategic highway connectors, and is estimated to carry up to 75 percent of commercial truck traffic and 40 percent of all vehicular traffic. A state may choose to transfer up to 50 percent of its NHS funds to the surface transportation program category. If the Secretary approves, 100 percent may be transferred. The federal share of the NHS is 80 percent, with an availability period of 4 years.
Interstate maintenance.--The 46,000-mile Dwight D. Eisenhower National System of Interstate and Defense Highways retains a separate identity within the NHS. This program finances projects to rehabilitate, restore, resurface and reconstruct the Interstate system. Reconstruction of bridges, interchanges, and over-crossings along existing interstate routes is also an eligible activity if it does not add capacity other than high occupancy vehicle (HOV) and auxiliary lanes.
All remaining federal funding to complete the initial construction of the Interstate system has been provided through previous highway legislation. TEA21 provides flexibility to States in fully utilizing remaining unobligated balances of prior Interstate Construction authorizations. States with no remaining work to complete the Interstate system may transfer any surplus Interstate Construction funds to their Interstate maintenance program. States with remaining completion work on Interstate gaps or open-to-traffic segments may relinquish Interstate construction fund eligibility for the work and transfer the federal share of the cost to their Interstate maintenance program.
Surface transportation program.--The Surface Transportation Program (STP) is a very flexible program that may be used by the states and localities for any roads (including NHS) that are not functionally classified as local or rural minor collectors. These roads are collectively referred to as Federal-aid highways. Bridge projects paid with STP funds are not restricted to Federal-aid highways but may be on any public road. Transit capital projects are also eligible under this program. The total funding for the STP may be augmented by the transfer of funds from other programs and by minimum guarantee funds under TEA21 which may be used as if they were STP funds. Once distributed to the states, STP funds must be used according to the following percentages: 10 percent for safety construction; 10 percent for transportation enhancement; 50 percent divided among areas of over 200,000 population and remaining areas of the State; and, 30 percent for any area of the state. Areas of 5,000 population or less are guaranteed an amount based on previous funding, and 15 percent of the amounts reserved for these areas may be spent on rural minor collectors. The federal share for the STP program is 80 percent with a 4-year availability period.
Bridge replacement and rehabilitation program.--This program is continued by TEA21 to provide assistance for bridges on public roads including a discretionary set-aside for high cost bridges and for the seismic retrofit of bridges. Fifty percent of a state's bridge funds may be transferred to the NHS or the STP, but the amount of any such transfer is deducted from the national bridge needs used in the program's apportionment formula for the following year.
Congestion mitigation and air quality improvement program.--This program provides funds to states to improve air quality in non-attainment and maintenance areas. A wide range of transportation activities are eligible, as long as DOT, after consultation with EPA, determines they are likely to help meet national ambient air quality standards. TEA21 provides greater flexibility to engage public-private partnerships, and expands and clarifies eligibilities to include programs to reduce extreme cold starts, maintenance areas, and particulate matter (PM-10) nonattainment and maintenance areas. If a state has no non-attainment or maintenance areas, the funds may be used as if they were STP funds.
Federal lands highways.--This program provides authorizations through three major categories--Indian reservation roads, parkways and park roads, and public lands highways (which incorporates the previous forest highways category)--as well as a new category for federally-owned public roads providing access to or within the National Wildlife Refuge System. TEA21 also establishes a new program for improving deficient bridges on Indian reservation roads.
Funds provided for the federal lands program in fiscal year 2000 shall be available for the following activities:
| Project | Amount |
| Austin Junction-Baker County Line section of US 26, Oregon | $6,500,000 |
| Blackstone Valley National Heritage Corridor, Rhode Island | 2,000,000 |
| Chincoteague National Wildlife Refuge, Virginia | 1,000,000 |
| Daniel Boone Parkway, Kentucky | 2,000,000 |
| Historic Columbia River Highway state trail, Oregon | 500,000 |
| Lemhi Pass Road, west of Clark Canyon dam, Montana | 2,000,000 |
| Highway 117 feasibility study, Louisiana | 500,000 |
| North Fork Road in Columbia Falls, Montana | 2,400,000 |
| Soldier Hollow improvements, Utah | 4,000,000 |
| SR 248, Utah | 4,000,000 |
| Timucuan Preserve Road, Florida | 1,000,000 |
Minimum guarantee.--Under TEA21, after the computation of funds for major Federal-aid programs has been completed, additional funds are distributed to ensure that each State receives an additional amount based on equity considerations. This minimum guarantee provision ensures that each State will have a return of 90.5 percent on its share of contributions to the highway account of the Highway Trust Fund. To achieve the minimum guarantee each fiscal year, $2.8 billion nationally is available to the States as though they are STP funds (except that requirements related to set-asides for transportation enhancements, safety, and sub-State allocations do not apply), and any remaining amounts are distributed among core highway programs.
Emergency relief.--This program provides for the repair and reconstruction of Federal-aid highways and Federally-owned roads which have suffered serious damage as the result of natural disasters or catastrophic failures. TEA21 restates the program eligibility specifying that emergency relief (ER) funds can be used only for emergency repairs to restore essential highway traffic, to minimize the extent of damage resulting from a natural disaster or catastrophic failure, or to protect the remaining facility and make permanent repairs. If ER funds are exhausted, the Secretary of Transportation may borrow funds from other highway programs.
High priority projects.--TEA21 includes 1,850 high priority projects specified by the Congress. Funding for these projects totals $9.5 billion over the 6 year period with a specified percentage of the project funds made available each year. Unlike demonstration projects in the past, the funds for TEA21 high priority projects are subject to the Federal-aid obligation limitation, but the obligation limitation associated with the projects does not expire.
Appalachian development highway system.--This program makes funds available to construct highways and access roads under section 201 of the Appalachian Regional Development Act of 1965. Under TEA21, funding is authorized at $450,000,000 for each of fiscal years 1999-2003; is available until expended and distributed based on the latest available cost-to-complete estimate.
National corridor planning and border infrastructure programs.--TEA21 established a new national corridor planning and development program that provides funds for the coordinated planning, design, and construction of corridors of national significance, economic growth, and international or interregional trade. Allocations may be made to corridors identified in section 1105(c) of ISTEA and to other corridors using considerations identified in legislation. The coordinated border infrastructure program is established to improve the safe movement of people and goods at or across the U.S./Canadian and U.S./Mexican borders. The Committee directs that $10,000,000 shall be available to Arizona, California, New Mexico and Texas to procure portable scales, facilities and equipment and to lease land necessary to house additional OMCHS inspectors.
Transportation and community and system preservation pilot program.--TEA21 established a new transportation and community and system preservation program that provides grants to states and local governments for planning, developing, and implementing strategies to integrate transportation and community and system preservation plans and practices. These grants may be used to improve the efficiency of the transportation system; reduce the impacts of transportation on the environment; reduce the need for costly future investments in public infrastructure; and provide efficient access to jobs, services, and centers of trade.
Funds provided for the transportation and community and system preservation pilot program in fiscal year 2000 shall be available for the following activities:
| Project | Amount |
| Arlington County, Virginia pedestrian, bicycle access and other transit improvements | $1,000,000 |
| City of New Haven, Connecticut trolley cars | 500,000 |
| Community and environmental transportation acceptability program of southern California | 1,000,000 |
| Florence, Alabama pedestrian and other transportation improvements | 1,500,000 |
| Fort Worth, Texas corridor redevelopment and transit linkages | 3,000,000 |
| Green Bay, Wisconsin pedestrian improvements and livable communities projects | 1,000,000 |
| DuPage County, Illinois transportation alternatives development | 1,000,000 |
| Houston, Texas Main Street corridor livable communities | 1,000,000 |
| Knoxville, Tennessee electric transit project | 1,000,000 |
| Metrowest regional transportation study, Massachusetts | 500,000 |
| Monmouth County, New Jersey pedestrian improvements | 300,000 |
| Montclair, New Jersey connection transit livable communities | 500,000 |
| New Rochelle, New York intermodal center | 1,000,000 |
| Northwest Michigan transportation use initiative | 250,000 |
| Potomac River ferry | 500,000 |
| Richmond, Virginia Main Street intermodal facility | 4,000,000 |
| River Market/College Station, Arkansas livable communities | 1,000,000 |
| San Francisco, California civic center plaza | 1,700,000 |
| Savannah, Georgia water taxi | 1,000,000 |
| Seattle, Washington water taxi | 750,000 |
| South Amboy, New Jersey regional multimodal transportation initiative | 500,000 |
| White Plains, New York TRANSCENTER pedestrian improvements | 2,000,000 |
FEDERAL-AID HIGHWAYS
(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)
------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------
Limitation, fiscal year 1999 ($25,511,000,000)
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 1 (27,262,230,000)
Recommended in the bill 2 (27,701,350,000)
Bill compared with:
Limitation, fiscal year 1999 (+2,190,350,000)
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 (+439,120,000)
------------------------------------------------------
The accompanying bill includes language limiting fiscal year 2000 federal-aid highways obligations to $27,701,350,000, an increase of $2,190,350,000 over the 1999 enacted level and $439,120,000 over the budget request. The recommended level is the level assumed in TEA21. These funds are guaranteed under the highway category.
The obligation limitation for the federal-aid highways program contained in this bill includes $1,456,350,000 in obligations resulting from revenue aligned budget authority. TEA21 provides for an automatic increase in the federal-aid highway program budget authority and obligation authority in any budget year in which projected income to the highway account of the highway trust fund exceeds estimates of income to the trust fund that were made at the time TEA21 was enacted. By law, a determination of the size of this increase in so-called `firewall' spending levels is made in the President's budget submission. TEA21 calls for any such increases in budget authority to be distributed proportionately among federal-aid highways appportioned and allocated programs, and for the overall federal-aid obligation limitation to be increased by an equal amount. The estimate of increased income, and therefore, budget authority and obligations, for fiscal year 2000 is $1,456,350,000.
The budget request--in contravention of TEA21 provisions proposed to allocate this additional obligational authority in fiscal year 2000 to other programs, including NHTSA's operations and research program; FTA's formula grants and national research programs; FHWA's research and technology, congestion mitigation, and motor carrier safety grants programs; and FRA's rail program. The accompanying bill allocates the additional obligational authority consistent with the provisions of TEA21.
Although the following table reflects an estimated distribution of obligations by program category, the bill includes a limitation applicable only to the total of certain federal-aid spending. The following table indicates estimated obligations by program within the $27,701,350,000 provided by this Act and additional resources made available by permanent law:
FEDERAL-AID HIGHWAYS ESTIMATED OBLIGATIONS
[In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Programs FY 1998 actual FY 1999 estimate FY 2000 estimate (Presidential budget) FY 2000 estimate (current law)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject to limitation:
Surface transportation program $5,936,062 $5,818,830 $5,993,039 6,286,764
National highway system 3,744,113 4,983,080 5,123,041 5,381,707
Interstate maintenance 2,931,668 4,134,904 4,266,189 4,474,670
Bridge program 2,259,083 3,547,135 3,699,144 3,830,660
Congestion mitigation and air quality improvement 699,754 1,407,709 1,792,874 1,525,303
Minimum guarantee 1,238,278 1,763,685 1,905,474 2,000,000
Safety incentive grants for use of seat belts 72,406 84,111 86,523
Safety incentive to prevent operation of motor carrier by intoxicated persons 18,187 57,395 72,000 70,960
ITS standards, research and development 80,872 87,658 159,600 92,354
ITS deployment 85,876 96,830 114,611 106,272
Transportation research 121,351 246,148 404,260 202,176
Federal lands highways 492,342 614,047 636,104 654,340
National corridor planning and coordinated border infrastructure 123,620 127,995 131,665
Administration 332,912 324,767 344,616 344,616
Other programs 1,574,176 293,129 329,263 304,463
High priority projects 55,062 904,804 1,535,531 1,584,468
Woodrow Wilson Memorial Bridge 88,500 137,138 141,070
Transportation infrastructure finance and innovation 70,640 82,283 84,642
Appalachian development highway system 387,350 405,000 393,362
Emergency relief 1,425 5,346
Total subject to obligation limitation 19,569,736 1 25,031,637 27,213,698 2 27,701,350
Emergency relief program 83,040 140,016 100,000 100,000
Minimum allocation/guarantee 555,159 833,684 716,874 716,874
Demonstration projects 405,379 450,346 315,242 315,242
Total exempt programs 1,043,578 1,424,046 1,132,116 1,132,116
Emergency relief supplemental 362,822 115,956
Grand total, Federal-aid highways (direct) 20,976,136 26,571,639 28,345,814 28,833,466
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following table reflects the estimated distribution of the federal-aid limitation by state:
ESTIMATED FY 2000 OBLIGATION LIMITATION
[in thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Estimated FY 2000 formula limitation FY 2000 minimum guarantee Appalachian development highways Total Change from FY 1999
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama $386,926 $35,581 $43,312 $465,819 +$31,311
Alaska 207,839 65,797 273,636 +19,609
Arizona 344,238 44,183 388,421 +28,431
Arkansas 273,370 27,763 301,133 +20,123
California 1,988,217 130,113 2,118,330 +143,128
Colorado 260,070 16,332 276,402 +19,728
Connecticut 299,269 48,383 347,652 +23,867
Delaware 99,133 7,877 107,011 +7,988
District of Columbia 92,574 311 92,885 +6,393
Florida 926,486 156,463 1,082,949 +76,911
Georgia 710,515 103,261 17,309 831,085 +57,434
Hawaii 107,743 10,512 118,255 +7,934
Idaho 149,414 20,109 169,524 +10,535
Illinois 733,062 37,820 770,882 +50,695
Indiana 510,511 68,518 579,029 +39,751
Iowa 266,318 11,720 278,037 +18,819
Kansas 264,786 6,284 271,069 +18,223
Kentucky 329,643 31,309 39,732 400,683 +27,167
Louisiana 350,742 34,749 385,491 +25,617
Maine 113,767 9,155 122,922 +8,589
Maryland 337,686 23,363 6,773 367,823 +25,204
Massachusetts 402,108 23,737 425,845 +28,221
Michigan 664,606 73,186 737,793 +49,727
Minnesota 319,401 19,612 339,013 +21,983
Mississippi 258,031 17,426 4,857 280,314 +18,873
Missouri 521,290 39,839 561,130 +37,478
Montana 204,715 33,010 237,726 +17,805
Nebraska 181,468 5,836 187,304 +13,701
Nevada 151,536 18,618 170,154 +12,158
New Hampshire 106,292 9,737 116,030 +7,500
New Jersey 551,013 35,326 586,340 +38,422
New Mexico 205,869 22,440 228,309 +15,732
New York 1,070,227 87,815 9,335 1,167,378 +76,141
North Carolina 558,308 69,988 25,500 653,796 +45,093
North Dakota 146,177 11,157 157,334 +11,573
Ohio 765,190 70,447 19,531 855,168 +57,973
Oklahoma 337,812 23,040 360,852 +25,059
Oregon 266,215 11,364 277,579 +18,038
Pennsylvania 940,620 64,758 105,903 1,111,281 +69,174
Rhode Island 125,966 15,404 141,370 +10,309
South Carolina 327,550 43,633 2,122 373,305 +26,703
South Dakota 152,054 13,262 165,316 +11,342
Tennessee 442,633 38,969 48,558 530,159 +35,665
Texas 1,556,806 202,277 1,759,084 +124,253
Utah 167,905 11,118 179,022 +11,909
Vermont 102,097 6,719 108,815 +7,850
Virginia 533,386 51,248 10,206 594,840 +41,165
Washington 395,973 20,047 416,020 +27,400
West Virginia 181,279 8,108 60,224 249,611 +14,850
Wisconsin 408,157 50,594 458,751 +31,563
Wyoming 154,882 11,681 166,563 +12,206
Subtotal 20,951,876 2,000,000 393,362 23,345,238 1,587,319
Special Limitation:
High Priority Projects 1,584,468 344,756
Woodrow Wilson Bridge 141,070 74,845
Allocation Reserves 2,630,573 183,429
Total limitation 27,701,350 2,190,349
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY GRANTS
(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)
(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)
-------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 $100,000,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2000 155,000,000
Recommended in the bill 105,000,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 +5,000,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2000 -50,000,000
-------------------------------------------------
The motor carrier safety assistance grants program (MCSAP) is intended to assist states in developing or implementing national programs for the uniform enforcement of federal and state rules and regulations concerning motor carrier safety. The major objective of this program is to reduce the number and severity of accidents involving commercial motor vehicles. Grants are made to qualified states for the development of programs to enforce the federal motor carrier safety and hazardous materials regulations and the Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1986. The basic program is targeted at roadside vehicle safety inspections of both interstate and intrastate commercial motor vehicle traffic.
On May 14, 1999, the department submitted an amended budget request that raised the motor carrier safety grants program from $105,000,000 to $155,000,000. The proposed $50,000,000 to be derived from revenue aligned budget authority is in contravention to existing law. Such a request does not indicate a true commitment to safety, as revenue aligned budget authority must be allocated to the states under existing law. Moreover, such a funding mechanism may not be sustained as revenue aligned budget authority is subject to annual fluctuations in highway trust fund collections.
The Committee recommends $105,000,000 in liquidating cash for this program. This is an increase of $5,000,000 above the level enacted in fiscal year 1999.
LIMITATIONS ON OBLIGATIONS
The Committee recommends a $105,000,000 limitation on obligations for motor carrier safety grants. This is the level guaranteed within the highway category of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century. None of this funding is to be derived from revenue aligned budget authority.
The Committee recommends the allocation of funds as follows:
| Motor carrier safety assistance program: | $95,000,000 |
| Basic motor carrier safety grants | 75,881,250 |
| Performance-based incentive grant program | 8,431,250 |
| Border assistance | 4,750,000 |
| High-priority activities | 4,750,000 |
| Training | 1,187,500 |
| Information systems and strategic safety initiatives: | 10,000,000 |
| Information systems | 3,200,000 |
| Motor carrier analysis | 1,100,000 |
| Implementation of PRISM | 4,875,000 |
| Driver programs | 825,000 |
Performance-based incentive grant program.--Numerous experts have testified to the Committee about the poor data collected by the states on the number of fatal truck accidents. The General Accounting Office found that `states did not report an estimated 38 percent of all crashes and 30 percent of the fatal crashes involving large trucks in 1997. Of the total number of states, 10 reported fewer than 50 percent of the fatal crashes occurring within their border and 4 reported fewer than 10 percent.' OMCHS uses this data to identify high-risk carriers for compliance reviews, safety actions and improvements. Without accurate and timely data, OMCHS is likely to miss carriers that are involved in a substantial number of crashes on our nation's highways.
The Committee urges OMCHS to allocate a significant portion of this funding to help states improve the accuracy, quality and timeliness of their data. Small incentive grants have proven to be very successful in the past. For example, in 1997, the State of Mississippi only reported 1 of 99 fatal crashes. After receiving a one-time incentive grant, Mississippi reported over 1,500 crashes.
Commercial drivers license program.--Recent accidents, such as Bourbonnais, Illinois and New Orleans, Louisiana, have brought serious problems with the commercial drivers license (CDL) program to light. It has been reported that the drivers in these two accidents each had been ticketed or cited repeatedly for serious traffic violations yet they continued to hold a CDL. More needs to be done to ensure that states have the most up-to-date conviction data on CDL holders and that this information can be transferred from state to state easily. OMCHS should work with the states on resolving this issue and report to the House Committee on Appropriations by May 1, 2000, on the office's efforts and results.
NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION
SUMMARY OF FISCAL YEAR 2000 PROGRAM
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) was established as a separate organizational entity in the Department of Transportation in March 1970. It succeeded the National Highway Safety Bureau, which previously had administered traffic and highway safety functions as an organizational unit of the Federal Highway Administration.
The administration's current statutes and programs are authorized in four major laws: (1) the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, (chapter 301 of title 49, U.S.C.); (2) the Highway Safety Act, (chapter 4 of title 23, U.S.C.); (3) the Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings (MVCIS) Act, (Part C of subtitle VI of title 49, U.S.C.); and (4) the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA21).
The first law provides for the establishment and enforcement of safety standards for vehicles and associated equipment and the conduct of supporting research, including the acquisition of required testing facilities and the operation of the national driver register (NDR). Discrete authorizations were subsequently established for the NDR under the National Driver Register Act of 1982.
The second law provides for coordinated national highway safety programs (section 402) to be carried out by the states and for highway safety research, development, and demonstration programs (section 403). The Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988 (Public Law 100-690) authorized a new drunk driving prevention program (section 410) to make grants to states to implement and enforce drunk driving prevention programs.
The third law (MVICS) provides for the establishment of low-speed collision bumper standards, consumer information activities, diagnostic inspection demonstration projects, automobile content labeling, and odometer regulations. An amendment to this law established the Secretary's responsibility, which was delegated to NHTSA, for the administration of mandatory automotive fuel economy standards. A 1992 amendment to the MVICS established automobile content labeling requirements.
The fourth law (TEA21) reauthorizes the full range of NHTSA programs and enacts a number of new initiatives. These include: safety incentives to prevent operation of motor vehicles by intoxicated persons (section 163 of title 23 U.S.C.); seat belt incentive grants (section 157 of title 23 U.S.C.); occupant protection incentive grants (section 405); and highway safety data improvement incentive grant program (section 411). TEA21 also reauthorized highway safety research, development and demonstration programs (section 403) to include research measures that may deter drugged driving, educate the motoring public on how to share the road safely with commercial motor vehicles, and provide vehicle pursuit training for police. Finally, TEA21 adopts a number of new motor vehicle safety and information provisions, including rulemaking directions for improving air bag crash protection systems, lobbying restrictions, exemptions from the odometer requirements for classes or categories of vehicles the Secretary deems appropriate, and adjustments to the automobile domestic content labeling requirements.
TRAFFIC SAFETY TRENDS
In 1992, the nation experienced the lowest number of highway fatalities since 1962--39,250--despite an increasing amount of travel on the roadways. This trend has reversed itself since then. However, it appears that fatalities may be leveling off. The latest NHTSA data indicates fatalities in 1998 were 41,480, which is a decrease from 42,013 fatalities in 1997. In comparing 1998 to 1997, there was a 3.9 percent decrease in the number of police-reported traffic crashes and a 4.4 percent decrease in reported injuries caused by those accidents.
The fatality rate has remained constant, 1.6 deaths per 100 million vehicle miles traveled (VMT), where it stood for the first time in 1997. In 1998, this rate continued even with an estimated increase of 2 percent VMT from 1997. The following charts show these safety trends.
The percentage of traffic crashes involving alcohol decreased in 1998. An estimated 15,936 people (38 percent) were killed in alcohol-related crashes, down from 39 percent in 1997. This is the lowest rate since recordkeeping began in 1975.
OPERATIONS AND RESEARCH
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
(General fund) (Highway trust fund)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 1 --- $161,400,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 --- 199,450,000
Recommended in the bill $87,400,000 74,000,000
Bill compared to:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 +87,400,000 -87,400,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 +87,400,000 -125,450,000
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
TEA21 authorized a total appropriation level of $161,400,000 for NHTSA's operations and research activities in fiscal year 2000. This total consists of three separate authorizations. First, the bill includes $72,000,000 of contract authority from the Highway Trust Fund to finance NHTSA's operations and research activities under title 23 U.S.C. 403. This funding is included within the firewall guarantee for highway spending and is not subject to an appropriation. Second, TEA-21 includes an authorization, subject to appropriation, of $87,400,000 for operations and research activities under section 30102 and 30104 of title 49 U.S.C. Third, the bill includes an authorization from the Highway Trust Fund of $2,000,000 for the National Driver Register. This funding is subject to appropriations.
For fiscal year 2000, the Administration requested a total of $199,450,000 for NHTSA's operations and research activities. Funding was to be allocated as follows: $72,000,000 in guaranteed funds for activities eligible under title 23 U.S.C.; $2,000,000 for the National Driver Register; and $125,450,000 from revenue aligned budget authority (RABA).
The Committee is greatly disappointed in the fiscal year 2000 budget request for NHTSA. Safety is purported to be the department's guiding principle, or `North star'. However, under its budget proposal, RABA funding supplants general revenues for approximately 55 percent of NHTSA's operations and research account unlike other elements of the department's budget request in which RABA funds supplement existing program levels. Such budget gimmickery does not indicate a sincere commitment to safety. Further, by submitting this request to Congress, the department is shortchanging safety by not continuing a reliable funding source for safety programs. The higher than anticipated increase in gasoline tax receipts, that is used to fund NHTSA's safety programs, is not assured in future years.
The Committee recommends new budget authority and obligation limitations for a total program level of $161,400,000, the same level as enacted in fiscal year 1999. None of this funding is from revenue aligned budget authority.
The Committee has worked with NHTSA to identify program reductions in its fiscal year 2000 budget request to comply with the levels authorized under TEA21 and recommends that the funding provided in this Act for operations and research be distributed as follows:
-------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------
Salaries and benefits $53,152,000
Travel 1,501,000
Operating expenses 18,986,000
Contract programs:
Safety performance 3,429,000
Safety assurance 9,045,000
Highway safety programs 36,298,000
Research and analysis 48,317,000
General administration 645,000
Grant administration reimbursements -9,973,000
Total $161,400,000
-------------------------------------------------
Between now and the time for conference action on this bill, NHTSA shall provide its recommendations to the House Committee on Appropriations as to how reductions from the budget request shall be distributed.
New staff positions.--The Committee has approved half-year funding for 12 of the 14 new positions requested in the budget. Funding for these positions is provided for one-half year because NHTSA will need to complete an extensive recruitment effort before hiring several of these positions. The Committee recommendation does not include funding for two general administration positions. NHTSA is unable to justify the need to hire technical support for Y2K issues after January 1, 2000 (-$381,000).
Safe communities.--The Committee has denied funding for the safe communities program (-$2,250,000). In fiscal year 1999, funding for this initiative was deleted because the program had concluded its initial three-year effort. The Committee sees no merit in continuing to fund this program beyond its original three-year pilot period when there are over 500 safe communities projects throughout the United States today.
Driver license identification.--The Committee continues to carry a general provision (sec. 332) that prohibits NHTSA from finalizing its rule on driver license identification. As such, the Committee has deleted funding for this initiative (-$325,000).
Biomechanics- At a minimum, NHTSA shall continue to support the biomechanics program at the 1999 level. The Committee continues to support the work conducted by the crash injury research and engineering network at the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey; the Charles McMathias National Study Center for Trauma and EMS; the William Lehman Injury Research Center; the Children's National Medical Center; the University of Michigan Medical Center; the University of California Medical School; and the Harborview Medical Center. It is important that these centers receive a consistent stream of funding from year to year.
Human resource information center.--The Committee has not provided any funding for the human resource information center throughout the department. Further discussion can be found earlier in this report under the office of the secretary, office of the assistant secretary for administration. (-$223,000).
National driver register- Within the $2,000,000 provided for the national driver register, up to $250,000 can be used for the technology assessment authorized under section 2006 of TEA21.
Bill language- The Committee has included a provision prohibiting any agency funded in this Act from planning, finalizing, or implementing any rulemaking which would require passenger car tires be labeled to indicate their low rolling resistance. Also, the bill contains a general provision (sec. 320) that prohibits funds from being used to prepare, prescribe, or promulgate corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) standards for automobiles that differ from those previously enacted. The limitation does not preclude the Secretary of Transportation, in order to meet lead time requirements of the law, from preparing, proposing, and issuing a CAFE standard for model year 2002 automobiles that is identical to the CAFE standard established for such automobiles for model year 2001.
HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY GRANTS
(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)
(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)
--------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 $200,000,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2000 206,800,000
Recommended in the bill 206,800,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 +6,800,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2000 .........................
--------------------------------------------------------------
TEA21 authorized four state grant programs: the highway safety program, the alcohol-impaired driving countermeasures grant program, the occupant protection incentive grant program, and the state highway safety data improvement grant program. The Committee recommends $206,800,000 for the liquidation of contract authorization, which is a 3.4 percent increase over the 1999 enacted level. This funding is mandatory and has no scoring implications.
LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS
As in past years and recommended in the budget request, the bill includes language limiting the obligations to be incurred under the various highway traffic safety grants programs. These obligations are included within the highway guarantee. The bill includes separate obligation limitations with the following funding allocations:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 1999 enacted Fiscal year 2000 estimate Recommended in the bill
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Highway safety grants $150,000,000 $152,800,000 $152,800,000
Occupant protection grants 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000
Alcohol incentive grants 35,000,000 36,000,000 36,000,000
State highway safety data improvements 5,000,000 8,000,000 8,000,000
Total 200,000,000 206,800,000 206,800,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Highway safety grants- These grants are awarded to states for the purpose of reducing traffic crashes, fatalities and injuries. The states may use the grants to implement programs to reduce deaths and injuries caused by exceeding posted speed limits; encourage proper use of occupant protection devices; reduce alcohol-and drug-impaired driving; reduce crashes between motorcycles and other vehicles; reduce school bus crashes; improve police traffic services; improve emergency medical services and trauma care systems; increase pedestrian and bicyclist safety; increase safety among older and younger drivers; and improve roadway safety. The grants also provide additional support for state data collection and reporting of traffic deaths and injuries.
An obligation limitation of $152,800,000 is included in the bill, which is the same amount as requested. The national occupant protection survey shall be funded within this total. Also, language is included in the bill that limits funding available for federal grants administration from this program to $7,500,000 for NHTSA.
The bill continues to carry language that prohibits the use of funds for construction, rehabilitation, and remodeling costs or for office furnishings or fixtures for state, local, or private buildings or structures.
Alcohol-impaired driving incentive grants.--These grants will offer two-tiered basic and supplemental grants to reward states that pass new laws and start more effective programs to attack drunk and impaired driving. States may qualify for basic grants in two ways. First, they can implement 5 of the following 7 laws and programs: (1) administrative license revocation; (2) programs to prevent drivers under age 21 from obtaining alcoholic beverages; (3) intensive impaired driving law enforcement; (4) graduated licensing law with nighttime driving restrictions and zero tolerance; (5) drivers with high blood-alcohol-content (BAC); (6) young adult programs to reduce impaired driving by individuals ages 21-34; (7) an effective system for increasing the rate of testing for BAC of drivers in fatal crashes. Second, they can demonstrate a reduction in alcohol involved fatality rates in each of the last three years and demonstrate rates lower than the national average for each of the last three years. Supplemental grants are provided to states that adopt additional measures, including videotaping of drunk drivers by police; self-sustaining impaired driving programs; laws to reduce driving with suspended licenses; use of passive alcohol sensors by police; a system for tracking information on drunk drivers; and other innovative programs. The Committee has provided $36,000,000 for these grants in fiscal year 2000. Language is included in the bill that limits funding available for federal grants administration from this program to $1,750,000.
In addition to the alcohol-impaired driving incentive grant program, TEA21 authorized $500,000,000 in grants over six years for states that have enacted and are enforcing a 0.08 BAC law (section 163). For each fiscal year a state meets this criterion, it will receive a grant in the same ratio in which they receive section 402 funds. The states may use these funds for any project eligible for assistance under title 23 (e.g. highway construction, bridge repair, etc.). This grant program, combined with the alcohol impaired driving incentive grant program will significantly increase the resources the department has to encourage states to adopt and enforce anti-drunk driving legislation.
Occupant protection incentive grants.--The Committee has fully funded the occupant protection incentive grant program at $10,000,000. States may qualify for this new grant program by implementing 4 of the following 6 laws and programs: (1) a law requiring safety belt use by all front seat passengers; (2) a safety belt use law providing for primary enforcement; (3) minimum fines or penalty points for seat belt and child seat use law violations; (4) special traffic enforcement programs for occupant protection; (5) a child passenger protection education program; and (6) a child passenger protection law which requires minors to be properly secured. Language is included in the bill that limits funding available for federal grants administration from this program to $500,000.
In addition to the occupant protection incentive grant program, TEA21 established a safety incentive grant program (section 157) to encourage states to increase seat belt usage. The grant program totals $500,000,000 over six years. Allocations of federal grants require determinations of (1) seat belt use rates and improvements and (2) federal medical cost savings attributable to increased seat belt use. States that meet the section 157 requirements can use funds for any purpose under title 23, including highway construction and intelligent transportation systems. NHTSA and FHWA are jointly administering this program. NHTSA will collect the state data and determine the allocation of funds.
State highway safety data improvements- The Committee has provided $8,000,000 for the state highway safety data improvement grants program. To receive first year grants, a state has three options. Option 1: establish a multi-disciplinary highway safety data and traffic records coordinating committee; complete a highway safety data and traffic records assessment or audit within the last five years; and initiate development of a multi-year highway safety data and traffic records strategic plan. Option 2: a state must certify that it has met the first two criteria in Option 1; submit a data and traffic records multi-year plan; and certify that the coordinating committee continues to operate and support the plan. Option 3: the Secretary may award grants of up to $25,000 for one year to any state that does not meet the criteria for Option 1. States that receive first year grants then would be eligible for subsequent grants by: submitting or updating a data and traffic multi-year plan; certifying that the coordinating committee continues to support the multi-year plan; and reporting annually on the progress made to implement the plan. Language is included in the bill that limits funding available for federal grants administration from this program to $223,000.
FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION
SUMMARY OF FISCAL YEAR 2000 PROGRAM
The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) is responsible for planning, developing, and administering programs to achieve safe operating and mechanical practices in the railroad industry, as well as managing the high speed ground transportation program. Grants to the National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) and other financial assistance programs to rehabilitate and improve the railroad industry's physical plant are also administered by the FRA.
The total recommended program level for the FRA for fiscal year 2000 is $718,724,000, which is $60,847,000 more than requested. The following table summarizes the fiscal year 1999 program levels, the fiscal year 2000 program requests and the Committee's recommendations:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Program Fiscal year 1999 enacted level Fiscal year 2000 request Recommended in the bill
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office of the Administrator $21,215,000 --- ---
Railroad safety 61,488,000 --- ---
Safety and operations 1 (85,574,000) $95,462,000 $94,448,000
Safety and operations user fees --- -66,461,000 ---
Railroad research and development 22,364,000 21,800,000 21,300,000
Railroad research and development user fees --- -21,300,000 ---
Next generation high speed rail 20,494,000 12,000,000 22,000,000
Alaska railroad 38,000,000 --- ---
Rhode Island rail development 5,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000
Grants to National Railroad Passenger Corporation 609,230,000 570,976,000 570,976,000
Rail initiative (limitation on obligations) --- (35,400,000) ---
Total $777,791,000 $657,877,000 $718,724,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OFFICE OF THE ADMINISTRATOR
------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 $21,215,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2000 ---
Recommended in the bill ---
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 -21,215,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2000 ---
------------------------------------------------
This account provides funds for executive direction and administration, policy support, passenger and freight services, salaries and expenses, and contractual support. The Committee recommends combining the office of the administrator with FRA's railroad safety program, and personnel from the railroad research and development and next generation high-speed rail programs, as described below.
RAILROAD SAFETY
------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 $61,488,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2000 ---
Recommended in the bill ---
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 -61,488,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2000 ---
------------------------------------------------
The federal role in the railroad safety program is to protect railroad employees and the public by ensuring the safe operation of passenger and freight trains. The authority to accomplish this role is found in the Federal Railroad Safety Act of 1970 (as amended), the Department of Transportation Act, and the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act. Greatly expanded railroad safety authority was granted the FRA under the Rail Safety Improvement Act of 1988. The Committee recommends combining the office of the administrator with FRA's railroad safety program, and personnel from the railroad research and development and next generation high-speed rail programs, as described below.
SAFETY AND OPERATIONS
---------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 1 ($85,574,000)
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2000 2 95,462,000
Recommended in the bill 94,448,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 +8,874,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2000 -1,014,000
---------------------------------------------------
The administration's fiscal year 2000 request restructured FRA's salaries and expense accounts into one new account--safety and operations. The restructuring consolidates the entire office of the administrator and railroad safety with personnel from the railroad research and development and next generation high-speed rail programs. The safety and operations account will provide support for FRA's rail safety activities and all other administrative and operating activities related to staff and programs. The presentation of all staffing and operations into a single account is consistent with account structures in other modal administrations.
A total of $94,448,000 has been allocated for the new safety and operations account. The Committee is very supportive of this new structure. It should provide FRA more flexibility with its personnel and program costs. For example, under the new structure, FRA will have centralized costs for the entire administration instead of allocating costs within four different appropriations accounts. This will allow FRA to better track safety, administrative and program costs (such as rent, travel, and information technology), and reallocate funding or personnel to those programs that have immediate needs.
The following adjustments have been made to the budget request:
| Reduce funding for new positions | -$411,000 |
| Deny funding for new human resource information system | -253,000 |
| Other support | -500,000 |
| Credit availability study | +150,000 |
New positions- The Committee has approved the new positions requested to support ongoing programs; however, it has reduced the funding available for these positions (-$411,000). The budget requested a total of $726,000 for 6.5 new positions, which is over $113,000 per position. These costs are excessive, particularly for half-year funding. Funding has been reduced to $50,000 per position, which is the same funding level FRA hired its new safety inspectors in fiscal year 1999.
Human resource information system- The Committee has not provided any funding for the human resource information center throughout the department (-$253,000). Further discussion can be found earlier in this report under the office of the secretary, office of the assistant secretary for administration.
Other support- The administration requested $1,000,000 for other support costs; however, the budget documentation was only able to justify half of these costs. The Committee has denied the remainder (-$500,000).
Credit availability study- A total of $150,000 has been provided to study the availability of private sector credit to shortline and regional railroads. This study should include: (1) a review of the financial institutions that have provided credit to small railroads during the last 5 years, the general terms of the financing and the financial performance of the borrowers; (2) an assessment of the key financial measures of profitability, stability, and financial strength used by the financial institutions in evaluating the creditworthiness of the shortline and regional railroads that have received credit; and (3) an evaluation of the appropriateness to the small railroad industry of the financial performance ratios used by the financial institutions that have provided credit.
Training- Sufficient funding is included within the Committee's recommendation to provide for peer training. The safety assurance and compliance program initiatives have identified training as a significant systemic issue directly impacting safety. Comprehensive safety training is an essential element of any effective railroad safety program affecting every railroad safety craft. Despite significant efforts, there is widespread inconsistent interpretations and understanding of railroad safety rules and federal safety standards throughout the industry. To reduce these misunderstandings, it is essential that the rail work force be adequately and consistently trained. Peer training is one possible means to achieve this goal.
Valley trains and trails- The Committee remains interested in the successful development of scenic passenger train service in Virginia's Shenandoah Valley between Strasburg and New Market on track provided by Norfolk Southern Corporation. The Committee encourages the Administrator to continue working with the Commonwealth of Virginia, Valley Trains and Trails, and Norfolk Southern to fund a service and financing plan for the project.
User fees.--The Committee has denied the administration's request to collect $66,461,000 in user fees for railroad safety activities. This request has not been authorized. Until such authorization occurs, the Committee will continue to fund railroad safety activities in the traditional manner.
RAILROAD RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 $22,364,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 20001 21,800,000
Recommended in the bill 21,300,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 -1,064,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2000 -500,000
------------------------------------------------
The railroad research and development appropriation finances technical support for rail safety rulemaking and enforcement activities and contract research activities to reduce the frequency and severity of railroad accidents. The Committee recommends an appropriation of $21,300,000 for fiscal year 2000, which is $500,000 less than requested. Funding to replace or upgrade FRA's T-6 track research vehicle has been denied. The Committee provided an appropriation for this effort in fiscal year 1999. It is unclear why this funding is needed again in fiscal year 2000.
The Committee has denied the request to collect $21,300,000 in user fees from the railroad industry to fund research and development activities. Non-federal entities have been cost-sharing with FRA on research and development projects since at least 1995. For example, within the track and vehicle track interaction program, the industry contributed 40 percent of the total program costs in 1999. To impose user fees on the same entities that are contributing research and development funds, equipment, or expertise could greatly diminish the benefits FRA already receives under this program. The Committee is concerned that these new user fees would, in essence, charge the community twice.
Railcar Weight Study- The Committee encourages the Federal Railroad Administrator to conduct a study regarding the track and bridge requirements for handling 286,000-pound rail cars. As higher capacity 286,000 rail cars are phased into the industry to increase the railroads' productivity and improve equipment utilization there is a need for additional information on the economic impact of handling larger cars on light density rail lines. Recognizing that the investments needed to upgrade a line to handle heavier cars are very site-specific, the study should develop the unit costs that would enable such calculations to be made. An increasing number of individual shippers in rural areas stand to lose their rail service without this information. Accordingly, the Committee encourages that research funds be dedicated to such a study.
RAILROAD REHABILITATION AND IMPROVEMENT FINANCING PROGRAM
TEA21 establishes a railroad rehabilitation and improvement financing loan and loan guarantee program. The aggregate unpaid principal amounts of the obligations may not exceed $3.5 billion at any one time. Not less than $1 billion is reserved for projects primarily benefiting freight railroads other than Class I carriers. The funding may be used (1) to acquire, improve, or rehabilitate intermodal or rail equipment or facilities, including track, components of track bridges, yards, buildings, or shops; (2) to refinance existing debt; or (3) to develop and establish new intermodal or railroad facilities. No federal appropriation is required since a non-federal infrastructure partner may contribute the subsidy amount required by the Credit Reform Act of 1990 in the form of a credit risk premium. Once received, statutorily established investigation charges are immediately available for appraisals and necessary determinations and findings.
The Committee has included bill language specifying that no new direct loans or loan guarantee commitments can be made using federal funds for the payment of any credit premium amount during fiscal year 2000, as requested.
NEXT GENERATION HIGH-SPEED RAIL
------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 $20,494,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2000 12,000,000
Recommended in the bill 22,000,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 +1,506,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2000 +10,000,000
------------------------------------------------
The next generation high-speed rail program funds the development, demonstration, and implementation of high-speed rail technologies. It is managed in conjunction with the program authorized in TEA-21.
The Committee recommends $22,000,000 for the next generation high-speed rail program. This is $10,000,000 more than requested. Total program funding is allocated as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year-- Recommendation
1999 enacted 2000 request
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Train control systems $4,300,000 --- $10,000,000
Illinois project (1,300,000) --- (7,000,000)
Alaska railroad (3,000,000) --- (---)
Michigan project (---) --- (3,000,000)
Non-electric locomotives 9,800,000 6,800,000 6,800,000
ALPS (2,800,000) (3,800,000) (3,800,000)
Prototype locomotive (7,000,000) (3,000,000) (3,000,000)
Grade crossings & Innovative technologies 4,600,000 4,000,000 4,000,000
N.C. sealed corridor (1,000,000) (400,000) (400,000)
Mitigating hazards (2,500,000) (2,500,000) (2,500,000)
Low-cost technologies (1,100,000) (1,100,000) (1,100,000)
Track and structures 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000
Administration 594,000 --- ---
Total 20,494,000 12,000,000 22,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Train control systems.--The Committee has provided $10,000,000 for two train control demonstration projects in the midwest. Both of these projects are critical to the development of safe, high-speed passenger rail service.
In the past, funding for train control projects in the states of Illinois and Michigan has been provided under the next generation high-speed rail account. However, for fiscal year 2000, the administration requested that these projects be funded under a new rail initiative account, solely funded from revenue aligned budget authority. The Committee recommendation allocates revenue aligned budget authority consistent with existing law.
Of the $10,000,000 appropriated for train control systems, $7,000,000 shall be provided to develop positive train control technology between Springfield and Chicago, Illinois. This project is estimated to cost $60,000,000, of which $22,900,000 has already been committed. The $7,000,000 provided in this Act will be the second federal installment of this four-year project. The Committee expects that the Association of American Railroads and the State of Illinois will continue their commitments to the project as well, by contributing $15,000,000 and $6,000,000, respectively, through fiscal year 2002.
The Committee has also provided $3,000,000 for the Michigan incremental train control project in fiscal year 2000, the last year of federal funding for this project. According to FRA, the total cost to complete the demonstration and to enter into daily high-speed revenue service is $4,200,000. The state, Amtrak, and the manufacturers are expected to contribute the remaining $1,200,000 necessary to complete this project.
Rail-highway crossings hazard eliminations.--Under section 1103 of TEA21, an automatic set-aside of $5,250,000 a year is made available for the elimination of rail-highway crossing hazards. A limited number of rail corridors are eligible for these funds. Of these set-aside funds, $1,000,000 shall be used to mitigate grade crossing hazards along North Carolina's sealed corridor; $1,000,000 shall be used between Washington D.C. and Richmond, Virginia; $1,000,000 shall be used between Mobile, Alabama and New Orleans, Louisiana; $750,000 shall be used between Schenectady and New York City, New York; and $750,000 shall be used along Oregon's high-speed rail corridor in Linn and Multnomah counties.
Grade crossing program- A general provision (sec. 337) is included in the bill that deletes the 10 percent non-federal match for the section 130 grade crossing program. Many states have difficulty expending section 130 funds, and as a result, some states have several years of unobligated balances. For example, the State of Wisconsin has $13,033,337 in unobligated balances, which equates to approximately four years of apportionments. Similarly the State of Oregon has $6,888,681 in unobligated balances, which approximates three years of apportionments. The Committee anticipates that by deleting the non-federal match, States should be able to reduce these unobligated balances and eliminate a greater number of grade crossing hazards than previously planned. The table below indicates the current unobligated balances by State and anticipated fiscal year 2000 section 130 apportionments.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Rail/Highway Crossings
Est. FY 2000Apportionment Unobligatedas of 9/30/98
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama 3,220,384 2,081,282
Alaska 2,439,186 7,656,630
Arizona 1,576,081 6,110,115
Arkansas 2,457,429 2,764,038
California 10,182,716 1,336,239
Colorado 2,202,728 1,369,523
Connecticut 1,047,610 505,288
Delaware 504,776 853,836
District of Columbia 210,728 737,547
Florida 4,686,707 6,590,786
Georgia 4,696,264 7,661,114
Hawaii 391,793 783,586
Idaho 1,429,320 731,748
Illinois 7,926,261 5,798,777
Indiana 4,962,375 6,376,330
Iowa 3,795,673 2,597,008
Kansas 4,870,650 1,080,910
Kentucky 2,535,034 3,101,098
Louisiana 3,176,113 1,980,187
Maine 938,057 2,416,913
Maryland 1,427,286 2,388,232
Massachusetts 2,011,267 1,477,143
Michigan 5,352,187 4,308,852
Minnesota 4,041,936 4,616,218
Mississippi 2,240,007 989,401
Missouri 3,998,022 309,740
Montana 1,613,367 3,982,993
Nebraska 2,661,323 5,584,417
Nevada 783,990 72,978
New Hampshire 612,960 96,567
New Jersey 2,691,259 1,390,033
New Mexico 1,205,846 652,454
New York 6,020,444 2,510,910
North Carolina 3,981,325 3,994,275
North Dakota 2,242,521 538,346
Ohio 6,301,744 758,151
Oklahoma 3,300,832 171,391
Oregon 2,194,099 6,888,681
Pennsylvania 5,804,391 1,085,639
Rhode Island 445,013 776,895
South Carolina 2,584,926 1,306,066
South Dakota 1,654,832 3,803,916
Tennessee 3,267,384 1,495,863
Texas 10,906,280 5,771,981
Utah 1,152,999 2,936,055
Vermont 618,631 3,962,126
Virginia 2,731,204 2,448,246
Washington 2,717,360 6,852,891
West Virginia 1,708,309 896,187
Wisconsin 3,929,021 13,033,337
Wyoming 912,318 343,914
Total 154,362,968 147,976,853
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FRA and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) shall work with the states to identify the ten most deadly crossings in each state and identify ways in which those crossings could be closed or reconfigured to reduce or mitigate the inherent dangers. The Committee believes that focusing on the most dangerous crossings in each state will greatly reduce the likelihood of fatal accidents. FRA and FHWA shall identify those crossings and the mitigations under consideration in a report to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations by May 1, 2000.
RHODE ISLAND RAIL DEVELOPMENT
-----------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 $5,000,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2000 10,000,000
Recommended in the bill 10,000,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 +5,000,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2000 ---
-----------------------------------------------
The Rhode Island rail development project will construct a third track along portions of the Northeast Corridor between Davisville and Central Falls, Rhode Island. This third track will prevent mixing freight and high-speed passenger rail service and will provide sufficient clearance to accommodate double-stack freight cars.
The Committee has provided $10,000,000 for the Rhode Island rail development project, as requested. Between fiscal years 1995 and 1999, a total of $28,000,000 in federal funds was appropriated to construct a third track. Of this total, $23,000,000 remains available for obligation. This funding is matched on a dollar-for-dollar basis by the state.
The state has been slow to obligate previously appropriated funds. Although the state plans to begin the construction phase of the project in the spring of 1999, there has yet to be an increase in expenditures for the project. Currently the state is projecting a federal cash expenditure of $20,500,000 in fiscal year 2000, which is within the unobligated balances. Should the state accelerate construction on this project, additional funding will be available at the $10,000,000 level for this work in fiscal year 2000.
GRANTS TO THE NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION
-------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 $609,230,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2000 570,976,000
Recommended in the bill 570,976,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 -38,254,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2000 (---)
-------------------------------------------------
The National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) is a private/public corporation created by the Rail Passenger Service Act of 1970 and incorporated under the laws of the District of Columbia to operate a national rail passenger system. Amtrak started operation on May 1, 1971.
STATUS OF AMTRAK
Over the past four years, Amtrak has undergone a remarkable change. Escalating expenses had been widening the gap between total revenues and expenses to such a point that Amtrak was concerned that it would not be able to borrow enough to cover these costs. Only two years ago, the President of Amtrak was discussing the possibility of bankruptcy. Within the last few years, Amtrak has been able to turn these numbers around. In 1998, it achieved record passenger revenues, topping $1 billion, and the largest ridership increase (4.5 percent) in a decade. Also, expenses were less than projected.
In March, the Committee heard testimony from Amtrak, the Federal Railroad Administration, and the Department of Transportation's Inspector General about Amtrak's ability to achieve operational self-sufficiency. All three testified that, while possible, it would be difficult. For example, the Inspector General (IG) stated, `overall assessment [of Amtrak] is that with strong leadership, intense management, and continued favorable economic conditions, it will be possible--albeit difficult--for Amtrak to meet its Congressional mandate to become operationally self-sufficient by 2003.'
To meet operational self-sufficiency, a number of crucial items must occur. These include: (1) enacting high-speed rail on a timely basis on the Northeast Corridor, (2) increasing capital investments, (3) meeting growth targets in the Intercity and on the West Coast, (4) completing the market-based network analysis and implementing its results, and (5) continuing to grow mail and express opportunities.
The first key element to reaching operating self-sufficiency by 2003 will be Amtrak's ability to implement its high-speed rail program between New York and Boston at the beginning of fiscal year 2000. Amtrak and the IG testified that revenue from this new service is key to reaching self-sufficiency. The high-speed rail program has experienced repeated delays and is on a very tight schedule. In March 1999, full system testing was scheduled for October, the same month that electrified service was scheduled to begin. More recently, Amtrak has stated that high-speed rail service will begin in November or December, yet another delay in the program.
The second key element is for Amtrak to realize additional capital investments between fiscal years 2000 and 2003. The IG testified that while `there is a good chance that Amtrak will be able to sustain operating self-sufficiency beyond 2002 . . . because of revenues from the Northeast Corridor . . . a caveat to this statement is needed.' The IG estimated that Amtrak's `minimum capital investment level is $2.7 billion, which is $125,000,000 per year more than current projected federal appropriations. This minimum level would be enough to keep Amtrak operating in a steady state through 2003, but would make Amtrak vulnerable to equipment deterioration and schedule reliability problems after that date. If Amtrak cannot continue to invest in its capital needs at a sustainable level ($3 billion), this could negatively impact its reliability and its ability to maintain operational self-sufficiency'.
Third, operational self-sufficiency depends on continued growth in the Intercity and West Coast passenger revenues. The IG's November assessment of Amtrak's financial needs through fiscal year 2002, concluded both the Intercity and West Coast revenue estimates were overly optimistic. In addition, states must continue to support state services. It has come to the Committee's attention that certain states in these two business units may be reluctant to support their Amtrak services to the same level as in previous years, which may precipitate Amtrak to raise fares faster than anticipated in those areas, causing a decrease in ridership and passenger revenues to flatten or decline. This could be detrimental to Amtrak's self-sufficiency.
Fourth, Amtrak is undertaking a market-based network analysis that will help the railroad determine where adjustments are needed in the system. As part of this analysis, Amtrak must consider a full range of options, including route elimination and rationalization. Once the analysis is completed, Amtrak must have the fortitude to undertake the adjustments necessary to increase revenues and decrease expenses; however, without considering route elimination, the railroad may not have the capital necessary (e.g. locomotives, express cars, etc.) to assure the long-term success of these adjustments.
Fifth, with the recent Surface Transportation Board ruling that allows Amtrak to operate express service with some limitation, Amtrak has an opportunity to increase its revenues. For the first five months of this year, express revenues increased 500 percent. In total, Amtrak hopes to collect $138,000,000 from the expansion of mail and express services by 2002. Results to date make this a promising possibility.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The budget request sought $570,976,000 in capital funds and an expanded definition of `capital' to allow use of the capital appropriation for preventive maintenance. This level is the third installment of a five-year, $5 billion plan to re-energize and recapitalize Amtrak. The Committee recommendation fully funds this request.
Expanded capital definition- The Administration and Amtrak requested a more flexible definition of the term `capital' arguing that Amtrak should be able to use its federal capital appropriations on maintenance of equipment, infrastructure, and facilities. Amtrak has indicated that as much as $481,000,000 of the requested $570,976,000 may pay for preventive maintenance activities. Specifically, $304,000,000 is necessary for maintenance of equipment and $177,000,000 is needed for maintenance of way. The remainder will be used for long-term capital investments and debt service.
With the passage of the Taxpayer Relief Act (TRA) and Department of Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 1999, Amtrak was permitted to use its TRA funds and its capital grant appropriation to finance maintenance of equipment. In 1999, this equated to $353,000,000.
Amtrak's fiscal year 2000 grant request states that if the expanded definition `were not provided, Amtrak will not be able to remain on the glidepath to operational self-sufficiency, nor will the corporation make it, on a cash basis, through fiscal year 2000.' In the Committee hearing on Amtrak's viability, the Inspector General concurred noting, `if Amtrak does not receive the expanded capital definition, it will not be able to cover its operating losses and could be forced to default on current obligations. This could occur even though Amtrak is likely to have $1 billion in Taxpayer Relief Act (TRA) funds in the bank'. Because TRA and the 1999 appropriations Act permitted Amtrak to use its capital funding for maintenance of equipment only, when Amtrak's annual federal appropriation is used to fully fund the maintenance of equipment, no TRA funds can legally be used to cover additional operating expenses. Amtrak estimates that this shortfall will be $47,000,000.
Amtrak, the Administration, and the Inspector General all support greater flexibility. Restricting Amtrak's permissible uses for its federal appropriation in fiscal year 2000 would be shortsighted. It could force Amtrak to default on its current obligations at a time when many are cautiously optimistic that the railroad may become operationally self-sufficient two years later. The Committee concurs and approves the request of Amtrak and the Administration to use Amtrak's capital appropriations for preventive maintenance.
Bill language- The Committee has included bill language that prohibits Amtrak from obligating more than $228,400,000 prior to September 30, 2000. Last year, Amtrak's Board of Directors agreed to hold its capital expenditures to 40 percent. At the time the Board made this commitment, Amtrak hoped to use the expanded capital definition to cover what had previously been defined as operating costs, such as maintenance of equipment and way without increasing the spend-out rate for its capital programs. Since the Committee has permitted Amtrak to use capital appropriations for previously defined operating expenses in fiscal year 2000, the Committee must continue to hold Amtrak to the 40 percent obligation limitation that the Board adopted last year.
Fencing along the Northeast Corridor- The Committee recognizes that Amtrak has made progress in enhancing safety along the tracks where high-speed rail will be operating. Amtrak should continue to work closely with northeast corridor communities, as well as state transit officials and owners of the track, to identify dangerous locations and install perimeter fencing along the Corridor, wherever needed. In particular, Amtrak should continue to focus on increased community coordination in urbanized areas where there have been problems or community concerns have been expressed, such as near Attleboro, Foxboro, Mansfield, and Sharon, Massachusetts. Amtrak should ensure that fencing improvements for these areas is completed before high-speed rail is operational.
Beech Grove maintenance facility- The Committee recognizes that Amtrak's heavy overhaul facility in Beech Grove, Indiana is in need of capital investment. The Committee is also aware that Amtrak's investment needs are greater than its available funds. Amtrak shall submit a report to the Committee within 90 days of enactment of this Act, detailing its plans, including a proposed timeline and a list of priorities, for capital improvements at its Beech Grove facility, should capital funds be available.
RAIL INITIATIVES
(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)
(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)
------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 ---
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2000 $35,400,000
Recommended in the bill ---
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 ---
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2000 -35,400,000
------------------------------------------------
The Administration has proposed a new rail initiative program that would be funded from revenue aligned budget authority. This new program would fund three rail initiatives: grade crossings in high-speed rail corridors ($15,000,000), two train control systems ($10,000,000), and a nationwide differential global positioning system ($10,400,000).
Funding for the rail initiatives under this new account structure has been denied. The Committee opposes altering the distribution of revenue aligned budget authority to any program outside of those authorized under TEA21. The rail initiative is one of many diversions proposed by the administration, which propose higher spending levels contingent upon passage of legislation and user fees that the administration knows are highly unlikely.
The Committee has deferred consideration of further increases in funding for grade crossings beyond those guaranteed levels contained in TEA21 and available through the highway formula, until the Committee sees the results of a general provision deleting the 10 percent non-federal match required for the section 130 hazard elimination program. This program provides roughly $155,000,000 per year to the states. Eliminating the non-federal match should allow states to address grade crossing hazards on a more expeditious basis and defer any current requirements for additional resources.
The Committee has provided $10,000,000 in the next generation high-speed rail account to fund two positive train control demonstration projects in the states of Illinois and Michigan. The Committee has funded these two projects for several years which are a key component of a partnership forged by Amtrak, FRA and nine midwestern States to bring high-speed rail to Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, Ohio, and Wisconsin, as part of the midwest regional rail initiative.
The Committee has denied any funding for the nationwide differential global positioning system (-$10,400,000). Seventeen federal agencies and private entities will be the beneficiaries of this system. Last year, the department stated that these agencies, particularly Agriculture, would be the primary beneficiaries of this information. Since the Department of Transportation is not the principal beneficiary, the Committee believes that it should not be the only source of funding for this system in fiscal year 2000 or beyond. Last year, the Committee urged the department to finalize plans to collect contributions for this network from the other federal agencies and private sources to fund the conversion of GWEN sites to a DGPS network and to provide such a proposal to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations. This report has not been delivered to the committees yet.
FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION
SUMMARY OF FISCAL YEAR 2000 PROGRAM
The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) was established as a component of the Department of Transportation on July 1, 1968, when most of the functions and programs under the Federal Transit Act (78 Stat. 302; 49 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.) were transferred from the Department of Housing and Urban Development. Known as the Urban Mass Transportation Administration until enactment of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991, the Federal Transit Administration administers federal financial assistance programs for planning, developing and improving comprehensive mass transportation systems in both urban and non-urban areas.
Much of the funding for the Federal Transit Administration is provided by annual limitations on obligations provided in appropriations Acts. However, direct appropriations are required for every accounts.
The current authorization for the programs funded by the Federal Transit Administration is contained in the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA21). TEA21 also amended the Budget Enforcement Act to provide two additional discretionary spending categories, the highway category and the mass transit category. The mass transit category is comprised of transit formula grants, transit capital, investments funding, Federal Transit Administration administrative expenses, transit planning and research, job access and reverse commute grants, and university transportation research center funding. The mass transit category obligations are capped at $5,797,000,000 and outlays are capped at $4,761,000,000 in fiscal year 2000. Any additional appropriated funding above the levels specified as guaranteed for each transit program in TEA21 (that which could be appropriated from general funds authorized under section 5338(h)) is scored against the non-defense discretionary category.
The total funding provided for FTA for fiscal year 2000 is $5,797,000,000, including $1,159,000,000 direct appropriations and $4,638,000,000 limitations on contract authority. The total recommended is $407,000,000 over the 1999 enacted level, $291,270,000 below the fiscal year 2000 budget request, and the same level as guaranteed in TEA21. The following table summarizes the fiscal year 1999 program levels, the fiscal year 2000 budget request, and the fiscal year 2000 program levels:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Program 1999 enacted 2000 request Recommended in the bill
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Administrative expenses $54,000,000 $60,000,000 $60,000,000
Formula grants 1 2,850,000,000 3,310,270,000 3,098,000,000
University transportation research 6,000,000 6,000,000 6,000,000
Transit planning and research 1 98,000,000 111,000,000 107,000,000
Capital investment grants 2,257,000,000 2,451,000,000 2,451,000,000
Job access and reverse commute grants 1 75,000,000 150,000,000 75,000,000
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority 50,000,000 --- ---
Total 5,390,000,000 6,088,270,000 5,797,000,000
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriation (General fund) Limitation on obligations (Trust fund)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 1 $10,800,000 ($43,200,000)
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 12,000,000 (48,000,000)
Recommended in the bill 12,000,000 (48,000,000)
Bill compared to:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 +1,200,000 (+4,800,000)
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 --- (---)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The bill provides a total appropriation of $60,000,000 for FTA's salaries and expenses. The recommendation is $6,000,000 above the 1999 enacted level and the same level as the budget request. This appropriation is guaranteed under the transit funding category. The recommended appropriation of $60,000,000 is comprised of an appropriation of $12,000,000 from the general fund and $48,000,000 from limitations on obligations from the mass transit account of the highway trust fund.
Full-time equivalent (FTE) staff years- The Committee observes that TEA21 has imposed additional duties on the FTA and approves the budget request to increase staffing at the FTA by 10 FTE. The Committee directs that the FTE level in fiscal year 2000 not rise in excess of 495 FTE.
Information technology activities.--The Committee recommendation deletes funds for the human resources information system (-$200,000) as systems development is premature. Further discussion is included under the appropriation for the office of the assistant secretary for administration in the office of the secretary.
In addition, the Committee has deferred consideration of several information technology activities (-$2,500,000), since the FTA is unable to inform the Committee of the out-year financial requirements to complete systems review, development and acquisition. Funding for development of several new major information technology systems cannot be fully justified until such time as future annual and total costs for such systems are fully developed and submitted to the Committee for consideration. The Committee will reconsider the request for information technology activities when FTA submits complete cost estimates. The Committee encourages the FTA to submit such documentation and justification before final consideration of the fiscal year 2000 Department of Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriations Act.
Project management oversight activities.--The Committee directs the FTA to increase its financial management oversight activities within the funds provided under the project management oversight program, section 23. The Committee believes it is imperative that the FTA understand more fully the financing proposals of major transit projects authorized in TEA21 before entering into full funding grant agreements and to identify critical funding deficiencies or inadequate financing plans before such funding shortfalls materialize. The experience to date with several projects in FTA's current portfolio suggests a more aggressive approach by the FTA is needed. The Committee directs that not less than $4,500,000 shall be available in fiscal year 2000 for the conduct of such financial management oversight reviews.
The Committee has included bill language requiring the FTA to transfer to the Inspector General $800,000 for reimbursement of audits and reviews of major transit projects, continuing a provision contained in the fiscal year 1999 Department of Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriations Act. Over the past several years, the IG has provided critical oversight of several major transit projects, which the Committee has found invaluable. The Committee anticipates that such oversight activities will be continued by the Inspector General in fiscal year 2000.
Full funding grant agreements (FFGAs).--The Committee observes that cost increases on several projects with existing FFGAs suggest that the FFGAs for those projects may have been executed too early during the conceptual design phase. As a result, the project's scope and design were not substantially complete and total costs to construct the project were not reliably identified at the time the full funding grant agreement was executed. To more fully anticipate the federal and local financial requirements necessary to undertake such large transportation investments, the FTA is directed not to execute any full funding grant agreements for projects that have not completed at least eighty percent of the design phase.
The FTA is directed to notify in writing the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations not later than 60 days before issuing a new full funding grant agreement. Such correspondence shall include: (1) a copy of the proposed FFGA; (2) the total and annual federal appropriations required for the project; (3) yearly and total federal appropriations that can be reasonably planned or anticipated for future FFGAs for each fiscal year through 2003; and (4) a detailed analysis of annual commitments for current and anticipated FFGAs against the program authorization. The Committee further directs that such correspondence include a financial analysis of the project's cost and sponsor's ability to finance, which shall be conducted by an independent examiner. This independent evaluation shall contain pertinent information, including an assessment of the capital cost estimate and the finance plan; the source and security of all public- and private-sector financial instruments; the project's operating plan which enumerates the project's future revenue and ridership forecasts; and planned contingencies and risks associated with the project.
The Committee directs the FTA to be judicious in the development and execution of new full funding grant agreements in fiscal year 2000 in order to preserve a sufficient level of new starts contract authority to allow other new fixed guideway projects to participate in the capital new starts program during the balance of the TEA21 authorization period.
FORMULA GRANTS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriation (General fund) Limitation on obligations (Trust fund)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 $570,000,000 ($2,280,000,000)
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 1 619,600,000 (2,690,670,000)
Recommended in the bill 619,600,000 (2,478,400,000)
Bill compared to:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 +49,600,000 (+198,400,000)
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 (-212,270,000)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The accompanying bill provides a total of $3,098,000,000 for transit formula grants. This level is $248,000,000 above the fiscal year 1999 enacted level of $2,850,000,000 and is guaranteed under the transit category.
The recommended program level of $3,098,000,000 is comprised of an appropriation of $619,600,000 from the general fund and $2,478,400,000 from limitations on obligations from the mass transit account of the highway trust fund. Formula grants to states and local agencies funded under this heading fall into four categories: urbanized area formula grants (U.S.C. sec. 5307); clean fuels formula grants (U.S.C. sec. 5308); formula grants and loans for special needs of elderly individuals and individuals with disabilities (U.S.C. sec. 5310); and formula grants for other than urbanized areas (U.S.C. sec. 5311). In addition, set asides of formula funds are directed to a grant program for intercity bus operators to finance Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) accessibility costs and the Alaska Railroad for improvements to its passenger operations.
Within the total funding level of $3,098,000,000, the new statutory distribution of formula grants is allocated among the following activities:
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Urbanized areas (sec. 5307) $2,772,890,281
Clean fuels (sec. 5308) 50,000,000
Elderly and disabled (sec. 5310) 72,946,801
Non-urbanized areas (sec. 5311) 193,612,968
Rural transportation accessibility incentive program 3,700,000
Alaska Railroad 4,849,950
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 3007 of TEA21 amends U.S.C. 5307, urbanized formula grants, by striking the authorization to utilize these funds for operating costs, but includes a specific provision allowing the Secretary to make operating grants to urbanized areas with a population of less than 200,000. Generally, these grants may be used to fund capital projects, and to finance planning and preventive maintenance of equipment, facilities, and vehicles used in mass transportation. All urbanized areas greater than 200,000 in population are statutorily required to use one percent of their annual formula grants on enhancements, which include landscaping, public art, bicycle storage, and connections to parks.
Major project preliminary engineering and design (PE&D).--The accompanying bill provides appreciable increases in formula funds allocated to transit authorities. These funds can be used, among other activities, for preliminary engineering and design of new rail extensions or busways. The Committee asserts that local project sponsors of new rail extensions or busways should use these funds for PE&D activities rather than seek section 5309 discretionary set-asides. The numerous authorizations for new fixed guideway projects contained in TEA21 and the limited funding available annually for preliminary engineering and design of such new systems will necessitate local sponsors to use their formula apportionment and other local funds for preliminary engineering and design activities. Moreover, the Committee expects the FTA, when evaluating the local financial commitment of a given project, to consider the extent to which the project's sponsors have used the appreciable increases in the formula grants apportionments for preliminary engineering and design activities of proposed new systems.
Clean fuels program.--TEA21 requires that $50,000,000 be set aside from funds made available under the formula grants program to fund a new clean fuels program. The clean fuels program is supplemented by an additional set-aside from the major capital investment's bus program and provides grants for the purchase or lease of clean fuel buses for eligible recipients in areas that are not in compliance with air quality attainment standards. The Committee has identified designated recipients of these funds within the projects listed under the bus program of the capital investment grants account.
Requested set-asides.--The Committee has not earmarked funding requested for several projects from amounts made available for the section 5307 formula program. The budget proposed to set aside $20,000,000 for the Long Island East Side Access project; $25,000,000 for Salt Lake City 2002 Winter Olympic Games transportation-related activities; and a total of $5,000,000 (of which $3,700,000 is guaranteed and $1,300,000 is derived from revenue aligned budget authority) for the over-the-road accessibility program. These set-asides were to be derived from additional budget resources transferred to the section 5307 formula program from revenue aligned budget authority. The Committee has not approved the transfer of revenue aligned budget authority and therefore additional resources above the guaranteed level are not available for these specific purposes.
The following table displays the state-by-state distribution of the formula funds within each of the program categories:
UNIVERSITY TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriation (General fund) Limitation on obligations (Trust fund)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 $1,200,000 ($4,800,000)
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 1,200,000 (4,800,000)
Recommended in the bill 1,200,000 (4,800,000)
Bill compared to:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 --- (---)
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 --- (---)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The accompanying bill provides a total of $6,000,000 for university transportation research. The recommendation is the same level as provided in fiscal year 1999. This appropriation is guaranteed under the transit funding category.
The recommended program level of $6,000,000 is comprised of an appropriation of $1,200,000 from the general fund and $4,800,000 from limitations on obligations from the mass transit account of the highway trust fund.
TRANSIT PLANNING AND RESEARCH
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriation (General fund) Limitation on obligations (Trust fund)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 $19,800,000 ($78,200,000)
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 1 21,000,000 (90,000,000)
Recommended in the bill 21,000,000 (86,000,000)
Bill compared to:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 +1,200,000 (+7,800,000)
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 -- (-4,000,000)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The accompanying bill provides a total of $107,000,000 for transit planning and research. The recommendation is $9,000,000 more than provided in fiscal year 1999 and $4,000,000 less than the budget request. This appropriation is guaranteed under the transit funding category. The Committee has not approved an additional $4,000,000 in obligations for the national program to be derived from revenue aligned budget authority.
The recommended program level of $107,000,000 is comprised of an appropriation of $21,000,000 from the general fund and $86,000,000 from limitations on obligations from the mass transit account of the highway trust fund.
The bill contains language specifying that $49,632,000 shall be available for metropolitan planning; $10,368,000 shall be available for state planning; $29,500,000 shall be available for national planning and research; $8,250,000 shall be available for transit cooperative research; $4,000,000 shall be available for the National Transit Institute; and $5,250,000 shall be available for rural transportation assistance.
TEA21 earmarks the following projects within the funds provided for the national program in fiscal year 2000:
| Washoe County, Nevada transit technology | $1,250,000 |
| MBTA, Massachusetts advanced electric transit buses and related infrastructure | 1,500,000 |
| Palm Springs, California fuel cell buses | 1,000,000 |
| Gloucester, Massachusetts intermodal technology center | 1,500,000 |
| SEPTA, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania advanced propulsion control system (TEA21) | 3,000,000 |
| Project ACTION | 3,000,000 |
Support in fiscal year 2000 is provided for a number of important initiatives including:
| Advanced transportation and alternative fueled vehicle technology consortium | $2,750,000 |
| Safety and security programs | 5,450,000 |
| International program | 1,000,000 |
| Santa Barbara Electric Transit Institute | 1,750,000 |
| Hennepin County community transportation, Minnesota | 1,000,000 |
| Pittsfield economic development authority electric bus program | 1,500,000 |
| Independent transportation network, Portland, Maine | 500,000 |
| Citizens for Modern Transit, Missouri | 300,000 |
In addition, the FTA is directed to undertake a project, in partnership with the transit industry, to identify the common accident causal factors, how to collect data on those factors, and how such information collection might be incorporated into the National Transit Database safety data collection process. Such an effort shall address the concerns raised by the National Transportation Safety Board. The recommendation also includes sufficient funding to conduct an assessment of the benefits of new transit investments compared with investments to maintaining existing infrastructure. To offset funding necessary for these activities, the Committee has deleted funding for several low priority activities, including $200,000 for an information data outreach project.
Fuel cell bus program.--The Committee directs that none of the funds available under this heading shall be available to supplement funding provided under section 3015(b) of TEA21 for the fuel cell bus and bus facilities program. To the extent that supplemental funding is believed necessary above the $29,100,000 provided in TEA21, the Committee directs the FTA and Georgetown University to obtain additional funding support from transit agencies that have expressed interest in fuel cell transit buses and other corporate sponsors to finance such perceived program shortfalls.
Advanced transportation and alternative fueled vehicle.--The Committee has included $2,750,000 for the advanced transportation and alternative fueled vehicle program. Within the funds provided, $500,000 shall be made available to WESTART and $2,250,000 shall be made available to CALSTART.
The Committee has deleted funds for several lower priority activities, including $200,000 for an information data outreach project.
Within the funds provided for safety activities, the FTA is directed to undertake a project, in partnership with the transit industry, to identify the common accident causal factors, how to collect data on those factors, and how much information collection might be incorporated into the National Transit Database safety collection process. Such an effort shall address the concerns raised by the National Transportation Safety Board.
The FTA is further directed to conduct an assessment of the benefits of new transit investments compared with investments to maintaining existing infrastructure.
TRUST FUND SHARE OF EXPENSES
(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)
(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)
----------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 ($4,251,800,000)
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 (4,929,270,000)
Recommended in the bill (4,638,000,000)
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 (+386,200,000)
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 (-291,270,000)
----------------------------------------------------
For fiscal year 2000, the Committee has provided $4,638,000,000 for liquidation of contract authorization. The increase over last year is necessary to pay outstanding obligations of the various transit programs at the levels contained in TEA21. This appropriation is mandatory and has no scoring effect.
CAPITAL INVESTMENT GRANTS
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriation (General fund) Limitation on obligations (Trust fund)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 $451,400,000 ($1,805,600,000)
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 490,200,000 (1,960,800,000)
Recommended in the bill 490,200,000 (1,960,800,000)
Bill compared to:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 +38,800,000 +155,200,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 --- ---
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The accompanying bill provides a total of $2,451,000,000 to be available for capital investment grants. The recommendation is $194,000,000 more than provided in fiscal year 1999 and the same level as the budget request. This appropriation is guaranteed under the transit category.
The recommended program level of $2,451,000,000 is comprised of an appropriation of $490,200,000 from the general fund and $1,960,800,000 from limitations on obligations from the mass transit account of the highway trust fund.
Funds provided for capital investment grants shall be distributed as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1999 enacted 2000 request Recommended in the bill
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fixed guideway modernization $902,800,000 $980,400,000 $980,400,000
New starts 902,800,000 980,400,000 980,400,000
Bus and bus facilities 451,400,000 490,200,000 490,200,000
Total 2,257,000,000 2,451,000,000 2,451,000,000
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Three-year availability of section 5309 funds.--The Committee has included bill language that permits the administrator to reallocate discretionary new start and buses and bus facilities funds from projects which remain unobligated after three years. Funds made available in the fiscal year 1997 Department of Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriations Act and previous Acts are available for reallocation in fiscal year 2000 as availability for these discretionary projects is limited to three years. The Committee directs the FTA to reprogram funds from recoveries and previous appropriations that remain available after three years and are available for reallocation to only those section 3 new starts that have full funding grant agreements in place on the date of enactment of this Act, and with respect to bus and bus facilities, only to those bus and bus facilities projects identified in the accompanying reports of the fiscal year 2000 Department of Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriations Act. The FTA shall notify the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations 15 business days prior to any such reallocation, consistent with the department's reprogramming guidelines.
The Committee, however, directs the FTA not to reallocate funds provided in the fiscal year 1997 Department of Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriations Act for the Houston regional bus plan, the New Orleans Streetcar project, the Buffalo intermodal center, and the Jackson, Mississippi intermodal corridor and bus projects. The FTA informs the Committee that these funds are likely to be awarded in the fourth quarter of fiscal year 1999 or soon thereafter.
BUSES AND BUS FACILITIES
The accompanying bill provides $490,200,000 for bus purchases and bus facilities, including maintenance garages and intermodal facilities. Bus systems are expected to play a vital role in the mass transportation systems of virtually all cities. FTA estimates that 95 percent of the areas that provide mass transit service do so through bus transit only and over 60 percent of all transit passenger trips are provided by bus.
TEA21 requires that funding of $100,000,000 be made available for a new clean fuels grant program. This funding is derived from $50,000,000 from the formula grants account and $50,000,000 from funds allocated for buses under this account. Designated recipients of the clean fuels grant program--funding for which is derived in part from the formula grants program--are identified in the lists below (to the extent funding is allocated for the purchase of eligible alternative-fuel vehicles, related facilities and other eligible activities).
TEA21 requires that the funds provided for buses and bus facilities be allocated as follows:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State and project Amount
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State of Alabama: Birmingham-Jefferson County buses $1,250,000
State of Arkansas:
Arkansas Highway and Transit Department buses 2,000,000
Fayetteville, University of Arkansas Transit System buses 500,000
Hot Springs Transportation Depot and Plaza 560,000
Little Rock Central Arkansas Transit buses 300,000
State of California:
Culver City, CA CityBus buses 1,250,000
Davis, CA Unitrans transit maintenance facility 625,000
Healdsburg Intermodal Facility 1,000,000
Livermore automatic vehicle locator 1,000,000
Los Angeles Union Station Gateway Intermodal Transit Center 1,250,000
Modesto bus maintenance facility 625,000
Monterey-Salinas transit buses 625,000
Perris bus maintenance facility 1,250,000
Sacramento CNG buses 1,250,000
Santa Clarita buses 1,250,000
Santa Cruz bus facility 625,000
San Francisco, Islais Creek bus maintenance facility 1,250,000
Santa Rosa/Cotati Intermodal Transportation Facilities 750,000
Windsor Intermodal Facility 750,000
Woodland Hills Warner Center Transportation Hub 625,000
State of Colorado:
Boulder/Denver, CO RTD buses 625,000
Denver Stapleton Intermodal Center 1,250,000
State of Connecticut:
New Haven bus facility 2,250,000
Norwich buses 2,250,000
Waterbury bus facility 2,250,000
District of Columbia: Washington, D.C. intermodal transportation center 2,500,000
State of Florida:
Daytona Beach intermodal center 2,500,000
Lakeland, FL Citrus Connection transit vehicles and related equipment 1,250,000
Miami Beach Electric Shuttle Service 750,000
Miami-Dade buses 2,250,000
Orlando downtown intermodal facility 2,500,000
State of Georgia: Atlanta MARTA buses 13,500,000
State of Hawaii: Honolulu bus facility and buses 2,250,000
State of Iowa:
Fort Dodge Intermodal Facility (Phase II) 885,000
Iowa/Illinois Transit Consortium bus safety and security 1,000,000
State of Illinois: statewide buses and bus-related equipment 8,200,000
State of Indiana:
Gary Transit Consortium buses 1,250,000
Indianapolis buses 5,000,000
South Bend Urban Intermodal Transportation Facility 1,250,000
Commonwealth of Massachusetts:
Springfield Union Station 1,250,000
Worcester Union Station intermodal transportation center 2,500,000
State of Maryland: statewide bus facilities and buses 11,500,000
State of Michigan: statewide buses 13,500,000
State of Minnesota:
Duluth Transit Authority community circulation vehicles 1,000,000
Duluth Transit Authority intelligent transportation systems 500,000
Duluth Transit Authority Transit Hub 500,000
Northstar Corridor Intermodal Facilities and buses 10,000,000
State of Missouri: St. Louis Bi-state Intermodal Center 1,250,000
State of North Carolina:
Greensboro multimodal center 3,339,000
Greensboro Transit Authority buses 1,500,000
State of New Jersey:
New Jersey Transit jitney shuttle buses 1,750,000
Newark, NJ Morris & Essex Station access and buses 1,250,000
South Amboy regional intermodal transportation initiative 1,250,000
State of New Mexico:
Albuquerque, NM buses 1,250,000
Washoe County transit improvements 2,250,000
State of New York:
Babylon intermodal center 1,250,000
Buffalo Auditorium Intermodal Center 2,000,000
Dutchess County Loop System buses 521,000
Ithaca TCAT bus technology improvements 1,250,000
Long Island CNG transit vehicles and facilities 1,250,000
Mineola/Hicksville LIRR Intermodal Centers 1,250,000
New York West 72nd St. Intermodal Station 1,750,000
Rensselaer intermodal bus facility 6,000,000
Utica Union Station 2,100,000
Westchester County Bee-Line transit system fareboxes 979,000
Westchester County Bee-Line transit system shuttle buses 1,000,000
Westchester County DOT articulated buses 1,250,000
State of Ohio:
Dayton Multimodal Transportation Center 625,000
Cleveland, Triskett garage bus maintenance facility 625,000
State of Oklahoma: statewide bus facilities and buses 5,000,000
State of Oregon:
Lane County, bus rapid transit 4,400,000
Portland Tri-Met buses 1,750,000
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania:
Allegheny County, buses 1,500,000
Altoona Metro Transit Authority buses and transit system improvements 842,000
Armstrong Mid-County transit authority bus facilities and buses 150,000
Cambria County bus facilities and buses 575,000
Centre Area Transportation Authority buses 1,250,000
Chester County Paoli Transportation Center 1,000,000
Erie Metropolitan Transit Authority buses 1,000,000
Fayette County intermodal facilities and buses 1,270,000
Lackawanna County Transit System buses 600,000
Philadelphia Frankford Transportation Center 5,000,000
Philadelphia Intermodal 30th Street Station 1,250,000
Reading, BARTA intermodal transportation facility 1,750,000
Robinson Towne Center Intermodal Facility 1,500,000
Somerset County transportation bus facilities and buses 175,000
Towamencin Township Intermodal Bus Transportation Center 1,500,000
Washington County intermodal facilities 630,000
Westmoreland County intermodal facility 200,000
Wilkes-Barre intermodal facility 1,250,000
Williamsport Bus Facility 1,200,000
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico: San Juan intermodal access 600,000
State of Rhode Island: Providence buses and bus maintenance facility 3,294,000
State of South Carolina: statewide Virtual Transit Enterprise 1,220,000
State of South Dakota: statewide bus facilities and buses 1,500,000
State of Texas:
Austin buses 1,250,000
Texas statewide small urban and rural buses 4,500,000
State of Utah:
Ogden Intermodal Center 800,000
Utah Transit Authority Intermodal Facilities 1,500,000
Utah Transit Authority/Park City Transit buses 6,500,000
Commonwealth of Virginia:
Alexandria bus maintenance facility 1,000,000
Richmond GRTC bus maintenance facility 1,250,000
State of Washington:
Everett multimodal transportation center 1,950,000
Mount Vernon Multimodal Center 1,750,000
Seattle Intermodal Transportation Terminal 1,250,000
State of Wisconsin:
Milwaukee County buses 6,000,000
Wisconsin statewide buses and bus facilities 12,000,000
State of West Virginia:
Huntington Intermodal Facility 12,000,000
Statewide Intermodal Facility and buses 5,000,000
Other legislated set-asides:
Altoona, Pennsylvania, bus testing 3,000,000
Fuel cell bus project (Georgetown University) 4,850,000
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, federal support is provided for the following projects:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State and Project Amount
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State of Alabama:
Cullman, AL, buses $500,000
Guntersville, AL, buses 500,000
Huntsville, AL, intermodal facility 2,500,000
Jefferson State Community College/University of Montevallo pedestrian walkway 200,000
Valley, AL, buses 110,000
State of Arizona:
Phoenix South Central Avenue transit facility 1,000,000
Phoenix, AZ, buses 6,500,000
San Luis, AZ, buses 140,000
Tucson, AZ, buses and intermodal facility 5,235,000
Yuma, AZ, special needs buses 125,000
State of California:
California Mountain Area Regional Transit Authority fueling stations 80,000
Interstate 5 corridor transit centers 2,500,000
Lodi, CA, multimodal facility 1,700,000
Los Angeles County Foothill Transit buses and HEV vehicles 3,000,000
Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority buses and bus-related facilities 7,000,000
Los Angeles municipal transit operators coalition buses 5,000,000
Maywood, Commerce, Bell, and Cudahy, California buses and bus facilities 1,600,000
Orange County, LA, bus and bus facilities 4,000,000
Redlands, CA, trolley project 800,000
San Bernardino Valley, CA, CNG buses and bus facilities 1,000,000
San Bernardino train station 4,000,000
San Diego North County CNG buses and bus facilities 6,000,000
San Francisco county connection buses 500,000
Santa Barbara, buses and bus facility 2,000,000
Santa Cruz, buses and bus facilities 2,260,000
Santa Maria Valley/Santa Barbara County, CA, buses 480,000
Westminster, CA, vans 300,000
State of Delaware:
Delaware buses and bus facilities 1,000,000
State of Florida:
Gainesville hybrid-electric buses and facilities 1,000,000
Jacksonville buses and bus-related facilities 1,000,000
Miami-Dade buses 1,000,000
Palm Beach, FL, buses 2,000,000
Tampa, HARTline buses 1,000,000
State of Georgia:
Chatham Area transit bus transfer center and buses 7,000,000
State of Iowa:
Iowa City intermodal facility 3,000,000
Iowa statewide buses and bus facilities 5,000,000
North Iowa, Mason City, Region 2 transit facility 160,000
State of Indiana:
West Lafayette, IN, buses and bus facilities 3,500,000
State of Kansas:
Girard, KS, buses and vans 700,000
Johnson County, KS, farebox equipment 250,000
Kansas City, KS, buses 2,250,000
Southeast Kansas Community Action Agency maintenance facility (Girard, KS) 480,000
Topeka, KS, downtown transfer facility 1,200,000
Wichita, KS, buses and bus facilities 5,000,000
State of Kentucky:
Kentucky (southern and eastern) transit vehicles 2,000,000
Lexington (LexTran), KY maintenance facility 2,000,000
River City, KY, buses 3,000,000
State of Louisiana:
Louisiana statewide buses and bus facilities 10,000,000
Commonwealth of Massachusetts:
Attleboro intermodal mixed-use garage facility 1,000,000
Berkshire, MA buses and equipment 2,000,000
Greenfield Montague, MA buses 600,000
Merrimack Valley regional transit authority buses and bus facilities 1,000,000
Montachusett, MA, bus and park-and-ride facilities 2,500,000
Pioneer Valley, MA, alternative fuel and paratransit vehicles 900,000
Pittsfield, MA, intermodal facility 6,000,000
Swampscott, MA, buses 65,000
Westfield, MA, intermodal transportation facility 1,000,000
State of Michigan:
Detroit, transfer terminal facilities 9,713,000
Detroit, EZ Ride program 287,000
Port Huron, CNG fueling station 500,000
State of Minnesota:
Twin Cities metropolitan buses and bus facilities 16,000,000
Greater Minnesota transit authorities buses, bus facilities and bus equipment 1,000,000
State of Missouri:
Missouri (eighth congressional district) buses and bus facilities 2,500,000
St. Louis, Missouri buses 2,000,000
Southwest Missouri State University park and ride facility 2,000,000
State of Mississippi:
North Delta planning and development district, buses and bus facilities 200,000
Jackson, MS, maintenance and administration facility project 1,000,000
State of Montana:
Missoula urban transportation district buses 1,200,000
State of North Dakota:
North Dakota statewide buses and bus facilities 1,000,000
State of Nebraska:
Lincoln, Nebraska, bus maintenance facility 1,000,000
State of New Mexico:
Albuquerque, NM, West Side transit facility 4,000,000
Las Cruces, NM, buses 500,000
Santa Fe, NM, buses and bus facilities 2,000,000
State of New York:
Ithaca, NY, intermodal facility 2,250,000
Putnam County, NY, vans 470,000
Rochester Central bus facility 1,000,000
Syracuse, NY buses 6,000,000
State of North Carolina:
Statewide buses and bus facilities 4,884,000
State of Ohio:
Ohio statewide buses and bus facilities 15,000,000
Dayton, multimodal transportation center 4,000,000
State of Oregon:
Salem Area Mass Transit District natural gas buses 1,000,000
Sunset Empire transit facility 600,000
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania:
Bethlehem, PA, intermodal facility 2,000,000
Norristown, PA, parking garage (SEPTA) 2,000,000
Lackawanna County, PA, intermodal bus facility 1,000,000
Mid-Mon Valley buses and bus facilities 500,000
State of South Carolina:
Central Midlands COG/Columbia transit system buses, bus facilities and bus equipment 5,800,000
Charleston Area regional transportation authority, buses and bus facilities 4,000,000
Clemson Area Transit buses and bus equipment 1,100,000
Greenville transit authority, buses and bus facilities 1,000,000
Pee Dee regional transportation authority, buses 2,000,000
Santee-Wateree regional transportation authority, buses, bus facilities and bus equipment 1,000,000
Transit Management of Spartanburg, Incorporated (SPARTA), bus and bus facilities 1,200,000
State of Tennessee:
Southern Coalition for Advanced Transportation (SCAT) (TN, GA, FL, AL) electric buses 7,000,000
State of Texas:
Austin buses 1,000,000
Brazos transit district buses and facilities 2,000,000
Fort Worth bus replacement (including CNG vehicles) and paratransit vehicles 7,000,000
Galveston, Texas, buses and bus facilities 1,000,000
Texas statewide small urban and rural buses and bus facilities 1,000,000
State of Virginia:
Statewide buses and bus facilities 14,750,000
State of Washington:
Bremerton transportation multimodal facility 1,500,000
Grant Transit Authority (Grant County, WA) buses 1,000,000
Grays Harbor County, WA, buses and equipment 2,500,000
King County Metro park and ride facilities 4,000,000
Sequim, WA, multimodal facility 1,000,000
Snohomish County, WA, buses, bus facilities and bus equipment 2,500,000
Spokane, WA, HEV buses 3,000,000
Tacoma Dome Station 1,500,000
State of Wisconsin:
Wisconsin statewide buses and bus facilities 5,000,000
State of West Virginia:
Parkersburg, WV, intermodal transportation facility 2,200,000
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Detroit, Michigan- The Committee recommendation includes a total of $10,000,000 for buses and bus related facilities in Detroit, Michigan. Of this amount, $287,000 shall be used solely for the improvement of the EZ ride transportation program, which provides transportation in Detroit for senior citizens who are unable to use traditional forms of bus transit.
FIXED GUIDEWAY MODERNIZATION
The accompanying bill provides $980,400,000 from the capital investment grants program to modernize existing rail transit systems. These funds are to be redistributed, consistent with the provisions of TEA21, shown below.
SECTION 5309 FIXED GUDEWAY MODERNIZATION APPRORTIONMENTS
-------------------------------------------------------------------
STATE Fiscal year--
1999 2000 Change from 1999
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Arizona $1,276,627 $1,714,915 $438,288
California 86,293,374 97,447,440 11,154,066
Colorado 1,072,768 1,276,142 203,374
Connecticut 34,538,688 35,613,122 1,074,434
Delaware 661,929 900,963 239,034
District of Columbia 31,797,959 41,405,152 9,607,193
Forida 11,011,678 14,894,671 3,882,993
Georgia 14,855,414 20,056,733 5,201,319
Hawaii 528,313 717,140 188,827
Illinois 105,900,396 109,835,226 3,934,830
Indiana 7,108,243 7,372,357 264,114
Louisiana 2,305,868 2,719,194 413,326
Maryland 19,801,081 21,651,851 1,850,770
Massachusetts 59,763,228 63,230,944 3,467,716
Michigan 318,620 449,343 130,723
Minnesota 2,433,932 2,844,835 410,903
Missouri 1,516,420 1,632,113 115,693
New Jersey 81,715,296 87,109,545 5,394,249
New York 301,682,929 320,395,319 18,712,390
Ohio 14,805,733 16,007,175 1,201,442
Pennsylvania 93,529,903 95,594,209 2,064,306
Puerto Rico 1,326,488 1,777,215 450,727
Oregon 2,267,470 3,059,860 792,390
Rhode Island 1,800,384 2,412,069 611,865
Tennessee 58,594 79,754 21,160
Texas 4,455,080 5,696,889 1,241,809
Virginia 464,097 464,097 0
Washington 12,227,786 15,992,245 3,764,459
Wisconsin 510,702 696,482 185,780
Total 896,029,000 973,047,000 77,018,000
3/4 percent oversight 6,771,000 7,353,000 582,000
Total appropriation 902,800,000 980,400,000 77,600,000
-------------------------------------------------------------------
NEW STARTS
The accompanying bill provides $980,400,000 of new authority for new starts. These funds are available for preliminary engineering, right-of-way acquisition, project management, oversight, and construction of new systems and extensions. TEA21 requires that no more than eight percent of the funding provided for new starts be available for preliminary engineering and design activities. The funds are to be distributed as follows:
| Project | Amount |
| Alaska or Hawaii ferry projects | $10,400,000 |
| Atlanta, Georgia, North line extension project | 45,142,000 |
| Baltimore central LRT double track project | 5,000,000 |
| Canton-Akron-Cleveland commuter rail project | 4,000,000 |
| Charlotte, North Carolina, north-south corridor transitway project | 3,000,000 |
| Chicago METRA commuter rail project | 25,000,000 |
| Chicago Transit Authority Douglas branch line project | 2,000,000 |
| Chicago Transit Authority Ravenswood branch line project | 2,000,000 |
| Cincinnati northeast/northern Kentucky corridor project | 2,000,000 |
| Clark County, Nevada, fixed guideway project | 2,000,000 |
| Cleveland Euclid corridor improvement project | 1,000,000 |
| Colorado Roaring Fork Valley project | 1,000,000 |
| Dallas north central light rail extension project | 35,000,000 |
| Dayton, Ohio, light rail study | 1,000,000 |
| Denver Southwest corridor project | 35,000,000 |
| Dulles corridor project | 25,000,000 |
| Fort Lauderdale, Florida Tri-County commuter rail project | 12,000,000 |
| Houston advanced transit program | 4,000,000 |
| Houston regional bus project | 52,770,000 |
| Johnson County, Kansas, I-35 commuter rail project | 1,000,000 |
| Kenosha-Racine-Milwaukee rail extension project | 1,000,000 |
| Long Island Railroad East Side access project | 4,000,000 |
| Los Angeles Mid-City and East Side corridors projects | 5,000,000 |
| Los Angeles North Hollywood extension project | 50,000,000 |
| Los Angeles-San Diego LOSSAN corridor project | 1,000,000 |
| MARC commuter rail project | 703,000 |
| Massachusetts North Shore corridor project | 1,000,000 |
| Memphis, Tennessee, Medical Center rail extension project | 5,000,000 |
| Miami-Dade Transit east-west multimodal corridor project | 3,000,000 |
| Miami-Dade Transit North 27th corridor project | 3,000,000 |
| Nashville, Tennessee commuter rail project | 1,000,000 |
| New Jersey Hudson Bergen project | 99,000,000 |
| New Orleans Canal Street corridor project | 2,000,000 |
| Newark rail link MOS-1 project | 6,000,000 |
| Norfolk-Virginia Beach corridor project | 1,000,000 |
| Northern Indiana south shore commuter rail project | 4,000,000 |
| Oceanside-Escondido, California light rail system | 2,000,000 |
| Olympic transportation infrastructure investments | 5,000,000 |
| Orange County, California, transitway project | 1,000,000 |
| Orlando Lynx light rail (phase 1) project | 20,000,000 |
| Philadelphia-Reading SEPTA Schuylkill Valley metro project | 1,000,000 |
| Phoenix metropolitan area transit project | 7,000,000 |
| Pinellas County, Florida, mobility initiative project | 3,000,000 |
| Portland Westside light rail transit project | 11,062,000 |
| Puget Sound RTA Link light rail project | 2,000,000 |
| Puget Sound RTA Sounder commuter rail project | 12,000,000 |
| Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill triangle transit project | 12,000,000 |
| Sacramento south corridor LRT project | 25,000,000 |
| San Bernardino, California, Metrolink project | 1,000,000 |
| San Diego Mid Coast corridor project | 7,000,000 |
| San Diego Mission Valley East light rail transit project | 23,000,000 |
| San Fransciso BART extension to the airport project | 84,000,000 |
| San Jose Tasman West light rail project | 20,000,000 |
| San Juan Tren Urbano project | 82,000,000 |
| South Boston piers transitway | 53,962,000 |
| South DeKalb-Lindbergh, Georgia, corridor project | 1,000,000 |
| Spokane, Washington, South Valley corridor light rail project | 3,000,000 |
| St. Louis, Missouri, MetroLink cross county corridor project | 3,000,000 |
| St. Louis-St. Clair County MetroLink light rail (phase II) extension project | 50,000,000 |
| Tampa Bay regional rail project | 1,000,000 |
| Twin Cities Transitways projects | 5,433,000 |
| Twin Cities Transitways projects--Hiawatha corridor project | 46,000,000 |
| Utah north/south light rail project | 37,928,000 |
| Virginia Railway Express Woodbridge station improvements project | 2,000,000 |
| West Trenton, New Jersey, rail project | 1,000,000 |
| Whitehall terminal reconstruction project | 3,000,000 |
Atlanta, Georgia north line extension.--The Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority (MARTA) is constructing a 1.9 mile, 2-station extension of the North Line from the Dunwoody station to North Springs. When completed, this extension will serve the rapidly-growing area north of Atlanta, which includes Perimeter Center and north Fulton County, and will connect this area with the rest of the region by providing better transit service for both commuters and inner-city residents traveling to expanding job opportunities. On December 20, 1994, FTA issued a full funding grant agreement committing a total of $305,010,000 in new starts funding to this project. Of this commitment, a total of $249,870,000 has been appropriated through fiscal year 1999. For fiscal year 2000, the accompanying bill provides $45,142,000.
Baltimore central light rail double tracking project.--The Maryland Mass Transit Administration proposes to construct 9.4 miles of track to upgrade designated areas of the Baltimore central light rail line (CLRL) that are currently single track. The CLRL is 29 miles long and operates from Hunt Valley in the north to Cromwell/Glen Burnie in the south, serving Baltimore City and Baltimore and Anne Arundel Counties, with extensions providing service to Amtrak at Penn Station and the Baltimore-Washington International Airport. The proposed project will double track eight sections of the CLRL between Timonium and Cromwell Station/Glen Burnie. Although no new stations are required, the addition of a second track will require construction of second station platforms at four stations where side boarding platforms are now in use. Other elements included in the double track project are bridge and crossing improvements, bi-directional signal system with traffic signal preemption on Howard Street, and catenary and other equipment and systems. The double tracking will be constructed almost entirely in existing right-of-way. The MTA estimates the total cost of these improvements at $150,000,000. To date, $1,000,000 has been appropriated to the project. For fiscal year 2000, the Committee recommends $5,000,000 for final design activities related to this project.
Canton-Akron-Cleveland commuter rail project.--The METRO Regional Transit Authority (METRO), in cooperation with local metropolitan planning organizations, regional transit authorities, and the Ohio Department of Transportation, is conducting a major investment study to assess the costs and benefits of new passenger rail service, transportation system management, and/or capacity improvements for the Canton-Akron-Cleveland corridor. The 70-mile corridor follows a path along Interstate 77 between Canton and Akron. Between Akron and Cleveland, the corridor widens to include both I-77 and State Route 8. The SR-8 alignment utilizes interstate 270 and interstate 480, returning to I-77 and continues into the central business district of Cleveland. The corridor frequently experiences traffic congestion and related safety problems. The study is currently in the primary scoping stage. The proposed project is included in the Akron metropolitan area transportation study's long range needs plan. In addition, several miles of rail right-of-way have been purchased for passenger rail use. Federal, state and local sources have allocated nearly $15,000,000 to the project. Through fiscal year 1999, Congress has appropriated $12,844,142 in section 5309 funds for this effort. The Committee recommends $4,000,000 in fiscal year 2000.
Charlotte, North Carolina north-south corridor transitway project.--In Charlotte, North Carolina, the north-south corridor extends approximately 36.4 miles from Davidson in North Mecklenburg County through Center City Charlotte to Pineville in southern Mecklenburg. This corridor was identified in the centers and corridors plan adopted by the Charlotte Council and Mecklenburg County Board of Commissioners in 1994 and reaffirmed through inclusion in the approved 2015 long range transportation plan. Several alternatives will be considered, and include: no-build; transportation systems management; bus rapid transit; light rail transit; high occupancy vehicle/bus lanes on interstate 77 and widening of I-77. The City of Charlotte, Mecklenburg County and six other municipalities in the county have developed a countywide transit/land use plan for 2025. Transit operations and possible land use actions for the north-south corridor were analyzed. The 2025 plan built upon earlier transit studies and land use plans for the Charlotte-Mecklenburg area. The plan was also the basis for obtaining support for the recently approved county-wide referendum for a 1/2 cent sales and use tax dedicated to public transportation. The tax, which is anticipated to yield $50 million during the first year, will provide local capital and operating funds to support a county-wide public transportation system. Through fiscal year 1999, Congress has appropriated nearly $4,000,000 in section 5309 funds for this effort. In fiscal year 2000, the Committee recommends $3,000,000.
Chicago Metra commuter rail project.--Metra, the commuter rail division of the Regional Transit Authority (RTA) of northeastern Illinois, is proposing several extensions: the central Kane corridor, which would extend trackage west to Elburn, Illinois; the Wisconsin central limited corridor, which extends from downtown Chicago to Antioch on the Illinois-Wisconsin border, traversing suburban Lake County; and the southwest corridor, which would extend commuter rail service from Orchard Park southwest to Manhattan, Illinois. The accompanying bill provides $25,000,000 for final design activities for fiscal year 2000.
Chicago Transit Authority Douglas Branch line project.--The Douglas Branch project is a complete reconstruction of the Douglas Branch of the Chicago Transit Authority's blue line. The line runs for six miles from a point just west of downtown Chicago to the terminus of the line at Cermak Avenue. The Douglas Branch includes 11 stations. CTA has completed the necessary planning and engineering work. The Douglas Branch was built between 1912 and 1915. The line currently carries approximately 27,000 daily riders. Because of its age, the line is seriously deteriorated and has resulted in high maintenance and operating costs. The Douglas Branch serves one of the most economically disadvantaged, distressed areas in Chicago. Total project costs are currently estimated at $394,000,000. Through fiscal year 1999, Congress has appropriated $1,490,000 in section 5309 new start funds for the project. The Committee recommends $2,000,000 in fiscal year 2000.
Chicago Transit Authority Ravenswood Branch line project.--The Chicago Transit Authority (CTA) is proposing to lengthen existing platforms and expand stations on the existing CTA Brown Line to accommodate 8-car trains. The Brown Line runs for 9.2 miles from the north side of Chicago to the Loop elevated in downtown Chicago and includes 19 stations. Most of the line is operated on elevated structure except for a portion near the northern end of the line, which operates at grade. The Brown Line was built between 1900 and 1907. The Line currently carries approximately 104,000 daily riders. Ridership has been steadily increasing and current station and platform size prohibits CTA from increasing capacity of the line to handle increased demand. Selected yard improvements would also be undertaken. CTA has completed the necessary planning and engineering work. Total project costs are currently estimated at $310,000,000. Through fiscal year 1999, $1,490,000 in section 5309 new starts funds for this project. The Committee recommends $2,000,000 for final design and construction during fiscal year 2000.
Cincinnati northeast/northern Kentucky corridor project.--The Ohio-Kentucky-Indiana (OKI) Regional Council of Governments is proposing to design and construct a 43-mile light rail transit line in a corridor extending north from the Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International Airport and Florence, Kentucky to the city of Mason, Ohio. The proposed alignment will use an existing right-of-way and active right-of-way along a portion of the Indiana and Ohio railroad, owned by the Southwest Ohio Regional Transit Authority. OKI has initiated preliminary engineering and the preparation of a draft environment impact statement for the first minimum operable segment (MOS-1) extending approximately 16.5 miles. The MOS-1 begins at 12th Street in Covington, Kentucky and terminates at Pfieffer Road in Blue Ash, Ohio. The MOS-1 includes a proposed 18 stations. Capital cost estimates for MOS-1 total $675.8 million. OKI estimates that 19,821 average weekday riders will use the MOS-1 in the year 2020. The total capital cost estimate for the entire 43-mile LRT, including 30 proposed stations, for the I-71 corridor, is $1,157,000,000. Through fiscal year 1999, Congress has appropriated $8,780,000. For fiscal year 2000, the bill includes $2,000,000.
Clark County, Nevada fixed guideway project- The Regional Transportation Commission (RTC) of Clark County (Las Vegas), Nevada, is the designated metropolitan planning organization (MPO) and regional governmental entity responsible for providing public transportation within Clark County. In the Fall of 1997, RTC selected a locally preferred alternative for the Las Vegas resort corridor which includes a combination of fixed guideway transit, significant expansion of the bus fleet, implementation of TSM/TDM strategies, and some roadway improvements. The core system includes a dual direction, elevated fixed guideway rail system along Las Vegas Boulevard with a link to downtown Las Vegas, an interim maintenance and control facility, and the acquisition of 30 vehicles. The resort corridor project will be completed in two phases, with a Phase 1 minimum operable segment (MOS), located in the northernmost portion of the system. The MOS consists of 5.2 miles of double track, all elevated, with an automated guideway and ten stations. A major facility at the northern terminus will include a guideway station, a 28- to 30-by bus terminal, a 2,000 vehicle park and ride lot, and a maintenance and operating facility. The MOS is estimated to cost $500.3 million, and serve 93,000 daily riders in the year 2020. The full build-out of the complete project includes up to 18.4 miles of elevated double-track, with an automated guideway and 27 stations extending to the McCarren International Airport, and is estimated to cost $2,180,000,000. Through fiscal year 1999, Congress has appropriated $8,954,000 for the project. The accompanying bill includes $2,000,000 for the project in fiscal year 2000.
Cleveland Euclid corridor improvement project.--The Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority (GCRTA), in partnership with the City of Cleveland, is proposing to design and construct a 5.6 mile transit corridor incorporating exclusive bus rapid transit lanes and related capital improvements on Euclid Avenue from Public Square in downtown Cleveland, east to University Circle. The proposed project is known as the Euclid Corridor improvement project (ECIP). GCRTA also proposes that three stations along the existing Red Line be relocated and three stations be renovated in order to spur economic development and improve access between the stations, surrounding neighborhoods, and employment centers. The total capital cost estimate for the ECIP is $327,000,000. Through fiscal year 1999, Congress has appropriated $8,500,000. For fiscal year 2000, the Committee recommends $1,000,000.
Colorado Roaring Fork Valley project.--In 1995, the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) completed a feasibility study of rail transit in the 40-mile Aspen to Glenwood Springs Corridor in the Roaring Fork Valley, about 160 miles west of Denver. The study estimated that a valley-wide rail system would cost approximately $129,000,000. As a result, the City of Aspen is considering a locally-funded light rail transit (LRT) line in a four-mile segment of the corridor connecting Pitkin County Airport with downtown Aspen. This segment is dependent on the outcome of a local ballot initiative that is expected in November 1999. CDOT, meanwhile, is conducting a major investment study/draft environmental impact statement (MIS/DEIS) to analyze transportation alternatives, alignments, and costs in the remainder of the valley, the 35-mile corridor to Glenwood Springs. The MIS/DEIS is scheduled for completion in June 1999. Through fiscal year 1999, Congress has appropriated $1,993,000,000 in section 5309 new starts funds for this effort. The Committee recommends $1,000,000 for this project in fiscal year 2000.
Dallas north central light rail project.--Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) plans to build an extension of its existing light rail system, which opened in phases from June 1996 to May 1997, north to the City of Plano. The 12.5-mile extension would connect with the existing system at the Park Lane Station, adding nine new stations. DART estimates that approximately 17,000 riders will use this extension by 2020. The total cost of this project is estimated at $517,200,000. This extension is nearing completion of the final design phase of project development. It is included in the regionally adopted metropolitan transportation plan and transportation improvement program, which are in conformance with the state implementation plan for air quality. DART began contracting for construction and purchasing vehicles and necessary right-of-way in May 1998. The North Central Extension is authorized for final design and construction by section 3030(a)(20) of TEA21. A total of $43,200,000 in section 5309 new starts funds has been appropriated for this project through fiscal year 1999. For fiscal year 2000, the Committee has included an appropriation of $35,000,000 for final design and construction.
Dayton, Ohio light rail study- The Committee recommendation includes an appropriation of $993,000 for a light rail feasibility study in Dayton, Ohio. The Congress has previously provided $1,000,000 for this project.
Denver southwest corridor project.--The Regional Transit District (RTD) in Denver is constructing an 8.7-mile light rail extension between Denver and Littleton. The line extends from the I-25/Broadway station on the existing Central Corridor line south to Mineral Avenue in Littleton, running parallel to Santa Fe Drive over an exclusive, grade-separated right-of-way. This extension is expected to serve 8,400 daily passengers when it opens for revenue service in July 2000, with an estimated 22,000 daily riders by 2015. FTA issued an FFGA for this project on May 9, 1996, which will provide a total of $120,000,000 in section 5309 new starts funding. Through fiscal year 1998, a total of $25.76 million has been provided to this project, with an additional $39.70 million appropriated in fiscal year 1999. For fiscal year 2000, the Committee recommends $35,000,000.
Dulles corridor project.--In June 1997, the Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation (VDRPT) completed a major investment study which evaluated several transportation options in the Dulles Corridor. The corridor extends from the West Falls Church Metrorail Station to Dulles International Airport and continues into Loudon County. The study recommended that a 23-mile, $1.45 billion rail system be constructed to alleviate congestion and facilitate future growth in the corridor. The study also called for the development of a funding plan and the implementation of enhanced bus service. In July 1998, the Virginia Secretary of Transportation assembled the Dulles Task Force to determine the steps necessary for phased implementation of rail service along the Dulles Corridor. This includes a bus rapid transit (BRT) system that will operate similar to a rail system with stations built in the median and access provided through pedestrian overpasses. These stations will be designed for conversion into rail stations during the next phase of the project. Through fiscal year 1999, Congress has appropriated $16,870,000 in section 5309 new starts funds for this effort. The accompanying bill provides $25,000,000 in fiscal year 2000 to be available for final design activities.
Fort Lauderdale, Florida Tri-county commuter rail project.--The Tri-County Commuter Rail Authority (Tri-Rail) is proposing a number of system improvements to the 71.7-mile regional transportation system it operates within Palm Beach, Broward and Dade Counties in South Florida. This area has a population of over four million, nearly one-third of the total population of Florida. The planned improvements include construction of a second mainline track, rehabilitation of the signal system, station and parking improvements, acquisition of new rolling stock, improvements to the Hialeah maintenance yard facility and construction of a new, northern layover facility. The proposed double-tracking is intended to allow for 15 minute headways during peak commuter hours, as opposed to the current one-hour headways. Tri-Rail estimates that these improvements will serve an average of 68,348 daily riders by 2015. To date, 9.6 miles of the double track corridor improvement project have been completed, including a station at Miami International Airport, which will be the cornerstone of the future Miami Intermodal Center. An additional 7.0 miles are scheduled to be completed in early 2000. The Tri-Rail Commuter Rail Upgrade (described as the Ft. Lauderdale-West Palm Beach-Miami Tri-County Commuter Rail) is authorized for final design and construction by Section 3030(a)(27) of TEA21. Congress appropriated a total of $55,250,000 in section 5309 new starts funding for this project through fiscal year 1999. For fiscal year 2000, the Committee recommends $12,000,000 for final design and construction.
Houston advanced transit program- The Metropolitan Transit Authority of Harris County (METRO) is conducting a major investment study (MIS) to examine high capacity bus transit alternatives in the 7-mile central business district to (CBD) Astrodome Corridor. The proposed corridor extends south through Houston's growing CBD, the rapidly redeveloping midtown area, and a major museum/park/zoo/university area, the Texas Medical Center and to the Astrodome event complex. The corridor experiences some of METRO's highest ridership levels in the region. Improvements are needed to improve mobility in the corridor to serve a wide range of travel needs, including employment, school, shopping, medical, recreational and special events. METRO is seeking to develop a transit improvement that will connect significant and diverse activity centers and redevelopment within the corridor and to reinforce the transit/development linkages. The MIS was initiated in September 1998, and is scheduled to be completed in September 1999. The region's 2020 metropolitan transportation plan includes high capacity transit within the proposed corridor.
The metropolitan transit authority of Harris County (METRO) is also conducting a major investment study (MIS) focusing on Interstate 610 from the Interstate 10 interchange on the north (with connections to the Katy High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Lane and Northwest Transit Center) to the vicinity of Westpark Drive on the south. The corridor exhibits congestion as a result of high demand, limited road capacity, and difficult freeway interchanges. The focus of the study is the identification and evaluation of transit and HOV modes and strategies to serve corridor needs. METRO is working closely with the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) to ensure that any recommendation from the West Loop MIS is compatible with TxDOT's planned maintenance improvements to the West Loop. Preliminary alternatives include a no-build, low-cost alternative, a north-south connection alternative, diamond HOV lane, and a barrier separated HOV lane alternative. Public involvement contributed to the range of alternatives being considered in the MIS. The study is scheduled for completion in December 1999. Through fiscal year 1999, Congress has appropriated $2,980,000 in section 5309 new starts funds for this effort. The accompanying bill provides $4,000,000 for this activity in fiscal year 1999.
Houston regional bus project.--Houston Metro's $1 billion Regional Bus Plan consists of a package of improvements to its existing bus system. The package includes service expansions in most of the region, new and extended HOV (high-occupancy vehicle, or `carpool') facilities and ramps, new buses, several transit centers and park-and-ride lots, and supporting facilities. This collection of projects was selected as the locally-preferred alternative over a proposed rail project in 1992. A full funding grant agreement was issued on December 30, 1994, to provide a total of $500,000,000 in section 5309 new starts funds. A total of $437,480,000 has been provided through fiscal year 1999. The Committee recommendation includes $52,770,000 for fiscal year.
Johnson County, Kansas I-35 commuter rail project- Johnson County, Kansas, in conjunction with the Mid-America Regional Council--the local Metropolitan Planning Organization for the Kansas City region--is evaluating the feasibility of implementing commuter rail service along a proposed corridor extending from the Olathe, Kansas area to downtown Kansas City. The proposed project has been adopted in the area's Long Range Transportation Plan. Through fiscal year 1999, Congress has appropriated about $1,000,000 in section 5309 new starts funds for this effort. The accompanying bill provides $1,000,000 for fiscal year 2000.
Kenosha-Racine-Milwaukee rail extension project- The Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission (SEWRPC)--a local metropolitan planning organization--plans to conduct a major investment study (MIS) to examine the feasibility of extending Chicago-based Metra commuter rail service from Kenosha to Racine and Milwaukee. The study will focus on a proposed 33-mile corridor connecting the central business districts of Kenosha, Racine and Milwaukee in southeastern Wisconsin. SEWRPC has recently completed a feasibility study, funded entirely with local funds, that concluded the extension is feasible. The SEWRPC has adopted the project into the region's long range transportation plan. Through fiscal year 1999, Congress has appropriated nearly $500,000 in section 5309 new starts funds for this effort. To continue the project in fiscal year 2000, the accompanying bill provides $1,000,000.
Long Island Railroad, East Side access project- The proposed Long Island Rail Road (LIRR) East Side Access would provide increased capacity for the commuter rail lines of the Long Island Rail Road and diect access between suburban Long Island and Queens and a new passenger terminal in Grant Central Terminal in east Midtown Manhattan. The Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) is the lead agency for this project. The East Side Access (ESA) connection would be achieved by constructing a 4,600-foot tunnel from the LIRR Main Line in Sunnyside, Queens to the existing tunnel under the East River at 63rd Street. LIRR trains would use the lower level of this bi-level structure. A second 5,000-foot tunnel would carry LIRR trains from the 63rd Street Tunnel under Park Avenue and into a new LIRR terminal in the lower level of Grand Central Terminal. As part of this project, a passenger station would be constructed at Sunnyside Yard to provide access to the growing Long Island City business district; this station would not provide a direct connection to Grand Central Terminal. Overall, more than 178,000 daily customers would benefit directly from the LIRR ESA project by the year 2020. There would be 172,000 daily trips to and from the new LIRR Grand Central Terminal; 6,000 daily trips to the proposed Sunnyside Yard Station; and 56,200 trips by Penn Station-bound LIRR passengers who will no longer have to travel in overcrowded train conditions during the morning and evening peak hours. Total capital costs are projected to be approximately $4,300,000,000 (escalated dollars). This sum includes $2,700,000,000 for construction and right-of-way and $0.8 billion for rolling stock (1997 dollars). Construction is scheduled to begin in 2000 and to be completed in 2010. A major investment study (MIS) on the Long Island Rail Road East Side Access was completed in March 1998. In June 1998, the New York Metropolitan Transportation Council (NYMTC), the Metropolitan Planning Organization, passed a resolution endorsing the recommended extension of the LIRR into Grand Central Station. In September 1998, FTA approved preliminary engineering and preparation of an Enviroinmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the project. MTA has designated $42,000,000 for the LIRR ESA preliminary engineering and draft EIS. Through fiscal year 1999, Congress has appropriated $43,760,000. For fiscal year 2000, the accompanying bill provides $4,000,000.
Los Angeles Mid-City and East Side corridors projects- The Metro Rail Red Line Project in Los Angeles is being planned, programmed and constructed in phases through a series of `minimum operable segments' (MOSs). The 4.4-mile, 5-station segment called MOS-1 opened for revenue service in January 1993. A 2.1-mile, three-station segment of MOS-2 opened along Wilshire Boulevard in July 1996. An additional 4.6-mile, 5-station segment in MOS-2 is currently under construction. ISTEA section 3034 authorized three extensions to the Metro Rail Red Line:
1. The North Hollywood Extension is 6.3 miles in length with three stations, all in subway. It extends the Hollywood branch of MOS-2 generally to the north through the Santa Monica mountains into North Hollywood in the San Fernando Valley. The estimated cost is $1,300,000,000 (escalated dollars). Ridership for this extension is estimated to be 26,000 daily boardings in 2010.
2. The East Side Extension is 3.7 miles in length with four stations, originally designed as subway. It would extend MOS-1 from Union Station into neighborhoods east of downtown. The estimated cost was $1,050,000 (escalated dollars). Ridership for this extension was estimated at 12,000 daily boardings by 2010.
3. The Mid-City Extension would extend the Wilshire Boulevard branch generally to the west beyond the current MOS-2 terminus at Western Avenue. It would add 2.3 miles, originally designed as subway, and two stations to the system. The estimated cost was $683,000,000 (escalated dollars). Ridership for this extension was estimated at 13,000 daily boardings in 2010.
LACMTA and FTA signed an FFGA for MOS-3 in May 1993 which provided $1,230,000,000 in section 5309 new start funds for the three extensions of MOS-3. Subsequently, the FFGA was amended on December 28, 1994 to provide an additional $186,490,000 for a total commitment of $1,416,490,000 in section 5309 new start funding. A restated FFGA for the North Hollywood extension (Phase I-A) of MOS-3 was signed on June 9, 1997. In January 1997, FTA requested that the MTA submit a recovery plan to demonstrate its ability to complete MOS-2 and MOS-3, while maintaining and operating the existing bus system. On January 14, 1998, the LACMTA board of directors voted to suspend and demobilize rail construction on all rail projects other than the MOS-2 and MOS-3 North Hollywood Extension. The MTA subsequently submitted a Recovery Plan to FTA on May 15, 1998; FTA approved the Plan on July 2, 1998. In 1998, the MTA undertook a regional transit alternatives analysis (RTAA) to analyze and evaluate feasible alternatives for the East Side and Mid-City corridors. The RTAA addressed system investment priorities, allocation of resources to operate existing transit services at a reliable standard, assessment and management of financial risk, countywide bus service expansion, and a process for finalizing corridor investments. On November 9, 1998, the LACMTA board reviewed the RTAA and directed staff to reprogram state and local resources previously allocated to the East Side and Mid-City Extensions to the implementation of RTAA recommendations, including the LACMTA accelerated bus procurement Plan. The MTA plans to conduct further studies of transit investment options in the East Side and Mid-City corridors. Through fiscal year 1999, Congress has appropriated $7,940,000 in new start funds for the RTAA. For fiscal year 2000, the Committee recommends $5,000,000 for continued planning and analysis in the Mid-City and East Side corridors.
Los Angeles North Hollywood extension project- The Metro Rail Red Line Project in Los Angeles is being planned, programmed and constructed in phases, through a series of `minimum operable segments' (MOSs). The first of these segments (MOS-1), a 4.4-mile, 5-station segment, opened for revenue service in January 1993. A 2.1-mile, three-station segment of MOS-2 opened along Wilshire Boulevard in July 1996; an additional 4.6-mile, 5-station segment of MOS-2 is currently under construction, and the Federal funding commitment has been fulfilled. On May 14, 1993, an FFGA was issued to the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (LACMTA) for the third construction phase, MOS-3. MOS-3 was defined under ISTEA (section 3034) to include three segments: the North Hollywood segment, a 6.3-mile, three-station subway extension of the Hollywood branch of MOS-2 to North Hollywood through the Santa Monica mountains; the Mid-City segment, a 2.3-mile, two-station western extension of the Wilshire Boulevard branch; and an undefined segment of the Eastside project, to the east from the existing Red Line terminus at Union Station. LACMTA later defined this eastern segment as a 3.7-mile, four-station extension under the Los Angeles River to First and Lorena in East Los Angeles. On December 28, 1994, the FFGA for MOS-3 was amended to include this definition of the eastern segment, bringing the total commitment of Federal new starts funds for MOS-3 to $1,416,490,000. On June 9, 1997, FTA and LACMTA negotiated a revised FFGA covering the North Hollywood segment (Phase 1-A) of MOS-3, which is proceeding as scheduled. In January 1997, FTA requested that the MTA submit a recovery plan to demonstrate its ability to complete MOS-2 and MOS-3. On January 14, 1998, the LACMTA board of directors voted to suspend and demobilize construction on all rail projects other than MOS-2 and MOS-3 North Hollywood Extension. The MTA submitted a recovery plan to FTA on May 15, 1998, which was approved by FTA on July 2, 1998. A total of $532,765,000 has been appropriated for North Hollywood. A total of $617,185,000 has been appropriated for MOS-3 to date. The Committee recommends that $50,000,000 be provided to the North Hollywood project in fiscal year 2000.
Los Angeles-San Diego LOSSAN corridor project- The Los Angeles-San Diego Rail Corridor Agency (LOSSAN), a Joint Powers Authority operating in Los Angeles, Orange, and San Diego counties, was created to improve the rail system between San Diego and Los Angeles, along a 126-mile corridor with 21 stations (11 joint commuter rail/intercity stations and 10 commuter rail only stations). This rail corridor is used by both passenger (intercity and commuter rail) and freight service. LOSSAN is implementing a long-range plan to improve the safety, capacity and speed of inter-city rail service between Los Angeles and San Diego. The proposed five-element rail improvement program would provide intercity rail capital enhancements to the terminal facility at Los Angeles Union Station; expand parking supply at the Irvine, Oceanside, and Solana Beach Amtrak stations; and stabilize the railway roadbed in the City of Del Mar. An earlier project implemented grade-separation improvements at three sites (Commerce in Los Angeles County, Fullerton in Orange County, and Solana Beach in San Diego County). Total project costs for the program of improvements in the LOSSAN Rail Corridor equal $60,600,000 (escalated dollars). Through fiscal year 1999, Congress has appropriated $19,890,000 for related improvements. For fiscal year 2000, the Committee recommends $1,000,000.
MARC commuter rail project- The Mass Transit Administration of Maryland (MTA) is extending the Maryland Commuter Rail (MARC) system from Point of Rocks to Frederick, Maryland. This extension will provide service from suburban Montgomery and Frederick counties to Baltimore, Maryland and Washington, D.C. The project involves track, signal, and station and yard improvements along an existing freight line. In addition, MTA is embarking on a major procurement of additional commuter rail coaches and locomotives needed to meet anticipated systemwide demand on the MARC system and provide service on this extension. Manufacturing of the coaches is underway, and delivery has begun. The locomotive procurement is being undertaken jointly with Amtrak; delivery is expected to begin by 2000. Protracted negotiations with CSXT over right-of-way purchase terms have resulted in project delays; MTA now expects to begin MARC service on the Frederick extension by 2001. Section 3030(g)(2) of TEA21 authorizes an amendment to the FFGA for this project to include capacity and efficiency improvements through construction of a Penn-Camden Connection, maintenance and storage facilities and other capacity-related improvements, and the Silver Spring Intermodal Center. An FFGA was issued on June 19, 1995, committing a total of $105,250,000 to complete the project. This does not include $33,260,000 in fiscal year 1994 and prior year funding appropriated before the FFGA, which brings total Federal funding for this project to $138,510,000. Through 1999, a total of $137,800,000 has been appropriated for this project, leaving $703,300 needed to fulfill the FFGA. The Committee recommends that these remaining funds be provided in fiscal year 2000 to complete the current FFGA.
Massachusetts North Shore corridor project- The Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) has previously conducted a series of feasibility studies for improvements to the North Shore transportation system. These studies evaluated extensions of the Blue Line; improved commuter rail and express bus services; and the connection of the Blue Line and North Shore commuter rail service in Revere. Area officials now intend to further evaluate these alternatives for the corridor by focusing on operational impacts to the MBTA system, ridership analysis, capital and operating costs, community impacts, environmental impacts and cost/benefit analyses. Through fiscal year 1999, Congress has appropriated nearly $1,000,000 in section 5309 new starts funds for this effort. The accompanying bill provides $1,000,000 for fiscal year 2000.
Memphis, Tennessee Medical Center rail extension project- The Memphis Area Transit Authority (MATA), in cooperation with the City of Memphis, is proposing to build a 2.5-mile extension to its light rail system, from the current terminus at the Main Street Mall in the central business district to a new transit center near Cleveland and Claybrook Streets on the east (Medical Center). The proposed project would operate on-street in mixed traffic and would connect with the Main Street Trolley. Sixteen stops would be located along the route. The line will be designed to accommodate light rail vehicles but vintage rail cars would be used until a proposed regional LRT line is implemented and a fleet of modern LRT vehicles is acquired. This project is proposed to be the last segment of the downtown rail circulation system as well as the first segment of a regional light rail line. MATA estimates that this project will serve 4,200 riders daily by 2020. This project is included in the City of Memphis' capital improvement program, the Memphis MPO transportation improvement program, and the state transportation improvement program. A major investment study/environmental assessment was completed in May 1997. FTA approved entry into preliminary engineering in March 1998. The total capital cost of the project is estimated at $35,900,000. MATA estimates that the daily ridership of the proposed project would be 2,100 when it opens in 2002, and would increase to 4,200 by 2020. The Memphis Corridor was authorized for final design and construction by section 3030(a)(43) of TEA21. A total of $7,930,000 in section 5309 new starts funds has been appropriated for this project through fiscal year 1999. For fiscal year 2000, the Committee recommendation includes $5,000,000 for final design and construction.
Miami-Dade Transit east-west corridor project- The Miami-Dade Transit Agency is proposing a locally preferred alternative (LPA) including a set of multimodal improvements in the Route (SR 836) East-West corridor that will link the suburban area west of the Palmetto Expressway (SR 836) with the Miami International Airport (MIA), downtown Miami, and the Port of Miami seaport. The LPA includes an 11.2-mile minimum-operable-segment (MOS) of a heavy rail transit alignment that runs from just east of the Palmetto Expressway (SR 836) to the Port of Miami. There is an additional (0.7-mile) branch from MIA to the Miami Intermodal Center (MIC). The heavy rail line includes 8.2 miles of aerial guideway and 3.6 miles of bored tunnel with ten stations (six aerial and four underground). The LPA includes two buffer-separated HOV lanes, one in each direction, in the median of SR 836 from NW 107th Avenue to the SR 836/SR 112 Interconnector/(MIC). Capital costs estimates for the LPA (transit and roadway improvements) total $1,580,000,000 (1995 dollars). The rail portion of the project is estimated to cost $1,480,000,000 (1995 dollars) and $2,150,000,000 in escalated dollars. The new rail line is expected to carry 27,300 average weekday boardings on opening day and 31,400 average weekday boardings by the year 2020. Congress has appropriated $9,450,000 for this project through fiscal year 1999. For fiscal year 2000, the accompanying bill provides $3,000,000 for final design activities related to the project.
Miami-Dade Transit North 27th Avenue corridor project- The Miami-Dade Transit Agency (MDTA) is proposing a locally preferred alternative that will extend existing Metrorail service into north-central Miami-Dade County. The Miami-Dade County metropolitan planning organization (MPO) has selected a locally-preferred alternative (LPA), identifying a new heavy rail line along a 9.5-mile section of NW 27th Avenue between an existing Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Metrorail station and the Broward County line. Park-n-ride lots would be provided to intercept commuters in the corridor. The proposed heavy rail line along the Northwest 27th Avenue corridor would provide direct service to the Miami CBD and Medical Center as well as provide service to Miami Dade Community College--North Campus and the Pro Player Stadium. MDTA has estimated total project costs in year of expenditure (YOE) at $595,700,000; based on the assumed Federal/local share, the YOE section 5309 share is $405,400,000. Congress has appropriated $923,000 for the project to date. For fiscal year 2000, the Committee recommends $3,000,000 for final design activities related to this project.
Nashville, Tennessee commuter rail project- The Nashville Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA) and the local Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) are examining the feasibility of implementing a commuter rail system connecting the Downtown Nashville area with other areas in the Southeast Tennessee region. The Nashville Chamber of Commerce has created a task force to evaluate the prospect of commuter rail deployment. The MPO has also created a commuter rail task force. The Northeast Corridor to Hendersonville and the East Corridor to Mt. Juliet, with a spur to Opryland, have emerged in both processes as leading candidates for commuter rail. Early planning for eight intermodal commuter rail stations is beginning. Through fiscal year 1999, Congress has appropriated nearly $1,000,000 in section 5309 new starts funds for this effort. For fiscal year 2000, the Committee recommends $1,000,000.
New Jersey Hudson-Bergen project- The New Jersey Transit Corporation (NJ Transit) is constructing a 9.6-mile, 16-station light rail line along the Hudson River Waterfront in Hudson County, from the Hoboken Terminal to 34th Street in Bayonne and Westside Avenue in Jersey City. This line is intended as the first minimum operable segment (MOS) of a larger 21-mile, 30-station line extending from the Vince Lombardi park-and-ride lot in Bergen County to Bayonne, passing through Port Imperial in Weehauken, Hoboken, and Jersey City. The core of the completed system will serve the high-density commercial centers in Jersey City and Hoboken, and provide connections with NJ Transit commuter rail service, PATH trains to Newark and Manhattan, and the Port Imperial ferry from Weehauken to Manhattan. The initial operating segment is being constructed under a turnkey contract to design, build, operate, and maintain the system, which was awarded in October 1996. Construction began on the MOS in December 1996. This project is a major component of the Urban Core program of interrelated projects defined in ISTEA and TEA21, designed to enhance mobility significantly in the Northeastern New Jersey area. These projects were specifically exempt from the FTA New Starts evaluation criteria by ISTEA, and again by TEA21. The Department issued an FFGA on October 15, 1996 that commits $604,090,000 in section 5309 new starts funding for the MOS. Through fiscal year 1999, $228,304,000 has been appropriated for the project. The Committee recommends $99,000,000 that be provided in fiscal year 2000.
New Orleans Canal Street corridor project- The Regional Transit Authority (RTA) is developing a 4.7-mile streetcar project in downtown New Orleans. The Canal Streetcar Spine would extend along the median of Canal Street from the Canal Ferry at the Mississippi River in the Central Business District through the Mid-City neighborhood to two outer termini at the Cemeteries and City Park/Beauregard Circle. The capital cost estimate is $154,000,000 (escalated dollars). Ridership is estimated to be 31,600 passengers per day for the forecast year (2015). RTA completed a major investment study/alternatives analysis of the Canal Street corridor in March 1995. The regional planning commission, the metropolitan planning organization for New Orleans, has included the Canal Spine and Carrolton Spur to City Park in the transportation plan and transportation improvement program. The FTA approved the initiation of preliminary engineering and the preparation of a draft environmental impact statement (DEIS) in September 1995. The DEIS was published in March 1997 and the final environmental impact statement was published in July 1997. FTA issued a record of decision for the project on August 28, 1997. The RTA initiated final design on the Canal Streetcar Spine in September 1997. TEA21 section 3030(a)(51) authorizes the New Orleans Canal Streetcar project for final design and construction. Through fiscal year 1999, Congress has appropriated $54,199,000 in section 5309 New Starts funds for this project. For fiscal year 2000, the accompanying bill provides $2,000,000 for final design and construction.
Newark rail link MOS-1 project- The New Jersey Transit Corporation (NJ Transit) is planning an 8.8-mile, 16-station light rail system linking the cities of Newark and Elizabeth, New Jersey. The project will be advanced in threestages. The first Minimum Operable Segment (MOS) is a one-mile, five-station extension of the existing 4.3-mile Newark City Subway light rail line, running from Broad Street Station in Newark to Newark Penn Station. The second stage is a planned one-mile segment from Newark Penn Station to Camp Street in downtown Newark, and the third is the planned remaining 7-mile segment to Elizabeth, which includes a station serving Newark International Airport. The total capital cost of the MOS is estimated at $150,000,000, including associated stations, vehicles and a vehicle maintenance facility. The capital cost of the entire 8.8-mile project is estimated to be $694,000,000 ($1995). NJ Transit projects that the entire line will carry 24,900 riders per day in 2015. The draft environmental impact statement (DEIS) for all three stages of the full build alternative was completed in January 1997. The final environmental impact statement (FEIS), which addressed only the MOS, was completed in October 1998. The Federal Transit Administration signed a record of decision (ROD) for the MOS in November 1998. Environmental work on the other segments of the Newark-Elizabeth Rail Link awaits completion of an additional planning study. Section 3030(a)(57) of TEA21 authorized the New Jersey Urban Core Project, which consists of eight separate elements, including the Newark-Elizabeth Rail Link, for final design and construction. Through fiscal year 1999, Congress has appropriated $17,635,000 in section 5309 funds for the New Jersey Urban Core Newark-Elizabeth Rail Link Project. The Urban Core project, including the Newark Rail Link, was exempt from evaluation under the statutory project justification criteria by section 3031(c) of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA). This exemption continues under TEA21. However, NJ Transit has provided data to FTA for evaluation, which provides a basis for supporting a federal commitment and a funding recommendation for fiscal year 2000, the Committee recommends $6,000,000 for final design and construction
Norfolk-Virginia Beach corridor project- The Tidewater Transportation District Commission (TTDC) is planning an 18.3-mile double track light rail transit (LRT) line from the Oceanfront area in Virginia Beach to Downtown Norfolk. The proposed LRT alignment generally follows 14 miles of existing Norfolk Southern railroad right-of-way. The project is the first phase of a 30-mile alignment that includes an extension to the Norfolk Naval Base and the cities off Chesapeake and Portsmouth. This corridor serves an area of significant growth for the region including a large number of people who commute into Norfolk and Virginia Beach from outside those communities. Virginia Beach Boulevard and Route 44/I-264 are at or over capacity at many locations. In addition to capacity concerns, there are other important issues within the corridor, such as potential economic development opportunities and increased mobility for the residents of Hampton Roads. TTDC estimates that the LRT will cost $524,600,000 (escalated dollars) to construct, and will carry 14,740 new riders in the year 2018. The TTDC completed a major investment study (MIS) to evaluate transit/transportation improvements in the 30-mile corridor extending from Virginia Beach to Downtown Norfolk and the Norfolk Naval Base. TTDC selected the Light Rail Transit Alternative for the 18.3-mile segment from Virginia to Downtown Norfolk as the locally preferred alternative (LPA), which was endorsed by the Metropolitan Planning Organization on January 15, 1997. Development of the segment connecting to the Norfolk Naval Base will be considered in a later phase. Approval from the Federal Transit Administration to enter preliminary engineering/environmental impact statement (PE/EIS) was granted in April 1997. TTDC anticipates that the PE/EIS will be completed in February 1999. TEA21 Section 3030(a)(58) authorizes the Norfolk-Virginia Beach Corridor for final design and construction. Through fiscal year 1999, Congress has appropriated $9,933,000 in section 5309 new start funds to this project. For fiscal year 2000, the Committee recommends $1,000,000.
Northern Indiana south shore commuter rail project- The Committee recommends $4,000,000 for the Northern Indiana south shore commuter rail extension project. The Northern Indiana Commuter Transportation District (NICTD) operates the South Shore Line passenger service between South Bend, Indiana, and the Randolph Street Station in Chicago, Illinois. In order to meet the growing demand for commuter rail service in northern Indiana, appropriated funds to be matched local funds will be used for the purchase of additional passenger train cars. Through fiscal year 1999, the Congress has appropriated $7,461,000 for this project.
Oceanside-Escondido passenger rail project- The North County Transit District (NCTD) is planning the conversion of an existing 22-mile freight rail corridor into a commuter rail transit system running east from the coastal City of Oceanside, through the Cities of Vista, San Marcos, and unincorporated portions of San Diego County, to the City of Escondido. A proposed new alignment will serve the California State University San Marcos (CSUSM), including an additional 1.7 miles of new rail right-of-way. The proposed project is situated along the State Route 78 corridor, which connects Interstate Highways 5 and 15, the principal east-west corridor in Northern San Diego County. The proposed rail system would serve fifteen stations; four of these stations would be located at existing transit centers. Average daily weekday ridership in the year 2015 is projected to total 15,100 and daily new riders are projected to be 8,590. An environmental impact report (EIR) for the Oceanside-Escondido rail project and an EIR for the CSUSM alignment were published and certified in 1990 and 1991 respectively. A major investment study was not required based on concurrence from FTA, FHWA, the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG), Caltrans, the City of San Marcos, and NCTD. Advanced planning for the Oceanside-Escondido Rail Project, which resulted in 30 percent design, was completed in December 1995. The environmental assessment/subsequent environmental impact report (EA/SEIR), was completed in early 1997. The San Diego County Transit Development Board certified the SEIR in March 1997. FTA issued a finding of no significant impact in October 1997. Section 3030 (a)(77) authorizes the Oceanside-Escondido Rail Corridor for final design and construction. Through fiscal year 1999 Congress has appropriated $5,968,000 in section 5309 new start funds and for this project. For fiscal year 2000, the Committee recommends $2,000,000 for final design and construction activities related to this project.
Olympic transportation investments- The Committee recommendation includes $5,000,000 for transportation infrastructure investments related to the Salt Lake City 2002 Winter Olympic Games. These funds are to be allocated by the Secretary consistent with the approved transportation management plan for the Salt Lake City Olympic Games. The Committee directs, however, that none of these funds shall be available for planning or construction related to the Salk Lake City west-east light rail project, any segment thereof, or a downtown connector in Salt Lake City. The Committee's recommendation also includes a general provision, (section 344), which prohibits the use of funds in this Act to execute a letter of intent, letter of no prejudice or full funding grant agreement for the west-west light rail system, any portion thereof, or a downtown connector.
Orange County, California transitway project- The Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) is developing a 28-mile Transitway Corridor in central Orange County between Fullerton and Irvine. The proposed Transitway will connect major activity centers within the Corridor, including downtown Fullerton and the Fullerton Transportation Center, downtown Anaheim, the Anaheim Resort Area (including Disneyland, the Anaheim Convention Center, Edison Stadium and the Arrowhead Pond) downtown Santa Ana (and the county government center), John Wayne Airport, El Toro Marine Base (which is being converted to civilian use), and several hospitals and regional shopping, employment, cultural, and entertainment centers. The diversity of attractions throughout the corridor is expected to generate a significant number of bi-directional and non-peak trips. A preferred rail technology has not yet been specified. Several alternatives are being examined in preliminary engineering. Assuming a rail system which is 94 percent at-grade and 6 percent elevated, the project is estimated to cost $1,920,000,000 (escalated dollars) and to carry 55,800 riders per day. OCTA completed a major investment study (MIS) for the corridor in June 1997. The MIS led to the selection of a rail/bus project consisting of a 28-mile transitway and a 49% increase in bus service. The Transitway is included in the financially constrained and conforming regional transportation plan and transportation improvement program. In February 1998, FTA approved entry into the preliminary engineering (PE)/draft environmental impact statement (DEIS) phase of project development. The DEIS effort is expected to conclude in December 1999 with the selection of a locally preferred alternative (LPA), at which point OCTA will focus its remaining PE effort on the LPA. The Transitway project is included in the metropolitan planning organization's financially constrained and conforming regional transportation plan and transportation improvement program. TEA21 section 3030(a)(59) authorizes the Fullerton-Irvine Corridor for final design and construction. Through fiscal year 1999, Congress has appropriated $7,450,000 in section 5309 new starts funds. For fiscal year 2000, the Committee recommends $1,000,000.
Orlando/Lynx light rail (phase 1) project- The Central Florida Regional Transportation Authority (LYNX) in Orlando is proposing to construct a 16.3-mile, 20-station light rail system in the Interstate 4 (I-4) corridor between the Loch Haven/Princeton area in the north to the Central Florida Parkway in the south. LYNX plans to implement the system in two phases. The first minimum operable segment (MOS) is a 14.6-mile line along I-4 and a CSX railroad line, between downtown Orlando and a station to be located near the interchange between I-4 and the Central Florida Parkway. This line will connect the CBD and the International Drive tourist area, both of which are major trip generators. The total capital costs for the MOS are estimated at $600,100,000, with estimated daily ridership totaling 103,700 passengers in 2020. In addition to the light rail system, LYNX proposes to expand local bus and feeder bus service in the corridor. The Central Florida LRT project was included in a major investment study for the I-4 corridor, which was completed by the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) in the Fall of 1995. In December 1995, the Orlando and Volusia County MPOs adopted the I-4 MIS design concept and scope improvements as part of the Year 2020 long range transportation plans. LYNX and FDOT have completed preliminary engineering for the Central Florida LRT MOS. The final environmental impact statement (FEIS) has been signed, the record of decision (ROD) has been issued and FTA has approved entrance into final design. Section 3030(a)(60) of TEA21 authorizes the Orlando/I-4 central Florida light rail system for final design and construction. Through fiscal year 1999, Congress has appropriated $51,060,000 in new starts funds for this project. For fiscal year 2000, the Committee recommends $20,000,000.
Philadelphia-Reading SEPTA Schuykill Valley metro project- The Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (SEPTA) and the Berks Area Reading Transportation Authority (BARTA) are conducting an alternatives analysis study/draft environmental impact statement (AA/DEIS) for the Schuykill Valley Corridor. The proposed corridor extends approximately 62 miles and includes the City of Philadelphia, smaller cities of Reading, Norristown, Pottstown and Phoenixville. The corridor also includes suburban centers of King of Prussia and Great Valley, as well as regional activity centers and attractions including Center City, Art Museum, Philadelphia Zoo, King of Prussia Malls, Valley Forge National Park and Reading outlets. The proposed corridor also encompasses three transit authorities: SEPTA, BARTA and Pottstown Urban Transit (PUT) and two metropolitan planning regions: Delaware Valley and Berks County. The corridor is located along existing rail freight or commuter rail right-of-way and parallels major congested expressways: the Schuykill Expressway (Interstate 76), the US 422 Expressway and US Route 202. Alternatives currently under consideration include light rail and commuter rail. Total capital costs for the alternatives are estimated between $401,000,000 and $717,000,000. Through fiscal year 1999, Congress has provided $2,978,000 in section 5309 new starts funds for the proposed Schuykill Valley Corridor. The accompanying bill provides $1,000,000 for fiscal year 2000.
Phoenix metropolitan area transit project- The Regional Public Transportation Authority (RPTA) is planning a 22-mile at-grade light rail system to connect the cities of Phoenix, Tempe, and Mesa. A 13-mile minimum operating segment (MOS) from downtown Phoenix to the east side of Tempe including a 1.75-mile spur to serve the Rio Salado development along the Salt River in Tempe is proposed to be built first. The locally preferred alternative also includes an expanded bus and park-and-ride system. The MOS LRT is estimated to cost approximately $390,000,000 (escalated) and serve 18,600 daily riders. The improved regional bus system portion of the project includes a doubling of the RPTA's current bus revenue miles and is estimated to cost approximately $480,000,000 ($1998). The RPTA completed the Central Phoenix/East Valley major investment study (MIS) in the Spring of 1998. In September 1998, FTA granted RPTA permission to enter the preliminary engineering/environmental impact statement (PE/EIS) phase on 20 miles of the corridor. It is anticipated that PE/EIS will be completed in November 2000. The Maricopa Association of Governments (local MPO) adopted the CP/EV Corridor as a fixed guideway corridor and included the CP/EV LRT project in the long range transportation plan and the current regional transportation improvement plan. Section 3030(a)(62) of TEA21 authorizes the Phoenix fixed guideway project for final design and construction. Through fiscal year 1999, Congress has appropriated $8,950,000 for the project. For fiscal year 2000, the Committee recommends $7,000,000.
Pinellas County, Florida mobility initiative project- The Pinellas County Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) is currently engaged in the conduct of a major investment study, titled the Mobility Initiative, to identify multi-modal travel demands, needs and recommendations to develop solutions to the region's transportation needs. This effort is identified in the metropolitan planning organization's 2020 long range transportation plan. However, the Mobility Initiative will provide substantially more detailed analysis as to a specific transportation solution than is possible within the framework of the long range transportation plan. The accompanying bill provides $3,000,000 for this project in fiscal year 2000.
Portland Westside light rail transit project- On September 12, 1998 the Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District (Tri-Met) in Portland, Oregon officially opened the 17.7-mile extension of the MAX light rail system between downtown Portland and downtown Hillsboro. This line includes 20 new stations and nine park-and-ride lots. The route includes a 3-mile twin-tube tunnel under the West Hills, essentially paralleling the Sunset Highway. Service is provided by 42 low-floor light rail vehicles, the first to be placed in service in the United States. The original FFGA for this project was issued in September 1992, for a segment to S.W. 185th Avenue in Washington County, and was amended in December 1994 to include the remaining segment to Hillsboro. Consistent with Congressional authorization, it was amended again on November 1, 1996 to commit a total of $630,060,000 in section 5309 new starts funding to the entire `Westside-Hillsboro' project. Of this, $619,000,000 has been provided through fiscal year 1999. The Committee recommends that this final funding increment of $11,062,000 be provided in fiscal year 2000.
Puget Sound RTA Link light rail project- Sound Transit (Central Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority) is planning a 24-mile Central Link light rail transit (LRT) project running north to south from Northgate, through downtown Seattle, Southeast Seattle and the cities of Tukwila and SeaTac. At least 21 stations are planned, with six additional stations along the corridor under consideration. The system would utilize new right-of-way, except in the existing 1.6 mile Downtown Seattle Transit Tunnel. Sound Transit estimates a total of 155,200 daily riders, including 57,000 daily new riders, on the 24-mile system in 2020. Capital costs for the entire project are $2,900,000,000 (escalated dollars), with annual operating costs estimated at $44,400,000 (1997 dollars). Sound Transit is requesting a 50% section 5309 share of project costs. Sound Transit will break the system into a series of minimum operable segments as a means of implementing the project. The Link LRT system is one element of Sound Transit's voter-approved ten year, $3,914,000,000 Sound Move regional transit plan, which also includes implementation of a 2-mile LRT line in downtown Tacoma; an 82-mile Sounder commuter rail system operating between Lakewood and Everett; 20 new regional express bus routes; 14 High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) direct access ramps (providing access to over 100 miles of existing HOV lanes); 14 new park and ride lots and 9 transit centers; and other service improvements. The RTA Board adopted the Sound Move regional transit plan in May, 1996. Voters approved $3,914,000,000 in local funding for implementation of the plan in November, 1996. A major investment study of Sound Move's services was completed in March 1997. Sound Move is included in the Puget Sound Regional Council's (the area's MPO) transportation plan and regional transportation improvement program (TIP). FTA approved initiation of preliminary engineering on the Link LRT in July 1997. A draft environmental impact statement was scheduled for publication in December 1998. Sound Transit will examine minimum operable segments (MOS) of the project in the preliminary engineering phase of project development. TEA21 section 3030(a)(85) authorizes the Seattle Sound Move Corridor, of which Link is one element, for final design and construction. Through fiscal year 1999, Congress has appropriated $16,910,000 for the Link light rail project. For fiscal year 2000, the Committee recommends $2,000,000 for final design and construction.
Puget Sound RTA Sounder commuter rail project- Sound Transit (Central Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority) plans to implement an 8-station 40-mile Sounder commuter rail line between Tacoma and Seattle, Washington. The project would provide peak-period, bi-directional commuter rail service between downtown Tacoma and Seattle on existing Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) tracks. Planned improvements along the BNSF line will allow increased passenger rail speed and minimize conflicts with existing freight and Amtrak traffic. Express and local feeder bus service will provide access between commuter rail stations and other regional transportation facilities, including light rail, monorail, and ferry terminals. Sound Transit estimates approximately 12,300 average weekday riders on the Seattle-Tacoma Sounder line in 2020. Capital costs are estimated at approximately $401,000,000 (escalated dollars), and annual operating costs are estimated to total $11,400,000 (escalated dollars). The Tacoma-to-Seattle line is Phase 1 of what Sound Transit proposes to be a 14-station, 82-mile commuter rail system. Phase 2 would extend the system south from Tacoma to Lakewood (8.2 miles) and north from Seattle to Everett (34.5 miles). Sound Transit estimates 18,800 riders on the full system in 2020. Commuter rail itself is only one element of Sound Transit's voter-approved ten year, $3,914,000,000 (1995 dollars) Sound Move regional transit plan, which also includes implementation of a 23-mile light rail transit line between Seattle and SeaTac Airport; a 2-mile LRT line in downtown Tacoma; 20 new regional express bus routes; 14 high occupancy vehicle (HOV) direct access ramps (providing access to over 100 miles of existing HOV lanes); 14 new park and ride lots and 9 transit centers; and other service improvements. The RTA Board adopted the Sound Move regional transit plan in May 1996. Voters approved $3,914,000,000 in local funding for implementation of the plan in November, 1996. A major investment study of Sound Move's services was completed in March 1997. Sound Move is included in the Puget Sound Regional Council's (the area's MPO) transportation plan and transportation improvement program (TIP). Sound Transit's request to enter into preliminary engineering on the full 82-mile Everett-to-Lakewood commuter rail corridor was approved by FTA in March 1998. In 1993, the Regional Transit Authority (now known as Sound Transit) received a $1,900,000 grant to conduct an environmental assessment (EA) on the 40-mile Tacoma-to-Seattle segment (Phase 1) of the line. The EA was completed and FTA issued a finding of no significant impact (FONSI) in June 1998. Sound Transit received FTA approval to enter final design in December 1998. Sound Transit is currently in the process of procuring locomotives and passenger coaches. Sound Transit plans to initiate revenue service on the Sounder Tacoma-to-Seattle line in late 1999. Sound Transit is continuing PE and undertaking a final environmental impact statement on the Lakewood-Tacoma and Seattle-Everett segments of the Sounder commuter rail project Sound Transit is anticipating a record of decision on these segments in the fall of 1999. TEA21 section 3030(a)(85) authorizes the Seattle Sound Move Corridor, of which Sounder is one element, for final design and construction. Through fiscal year 1999, Congress has appropriated $55,490,000 in section 5309 new starts funding for this project. For fiscal year 2000, the accompanying bill provides $12,000,000 for final design activities related to the project.
Railtran (Trinity Railway Express), Fort Worth, Texas- The Committee remains supportive of the planned Trinity Railway Express, formerly Railtran, commuter rail service between Dallas and Fort Worth, Texas. However, the Committee has become aware of the City of Fort Worth's desire to further review the suitability of the current, planned location for the downtown bus transfer center at 9th and Jones Streets. Accordingly, the Committee directs the Federal Transit Administration to suspend approval of any funding for the construction of the 9th Street bus transfer center until the City of Fort Worth has reviewed and considered the final recommendations of the Lancaster Steering Committee. The Committee also directs the Federal Transit Administration to permit, without penalty, the use of additional federal funding for bus center and rail station design, should the City approve a change of location.
Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill triangle transit project- The Triangle Transit Authority (TTA) in Raleigh, North Carolina is planning a regional commuter rail system that will link the three counties--Wake, Durham, and Orange--in the Triangle Region of North Carolina. TTA plans to implement this system in three phases. Phase I is a 35-mile, 16-station line between the cities of Raleigh and Durham, which will follow existing North Carolina Railroad and CSX rail corridors to connect Duke University, downtown Durham, Research Triangle Park, RDU Airport, Morrisville, Cary, North Carolina State University, downtown Raleigh, and North Raleigh. TTA proposes to use diesel multiple unit (DMU) rail vehicles to provide service on this corridor. Projected ridership for Phase I is estimated at 14,000 riders a day by the year 2020. The capital cost estimate for Phase I totals $284,000,000; this includes final design activities, acquisition of right-of-way and rail vehicles, station construction, park and ride lots, and construction of storage and maintenance facilities. The Regional Rail system emerged from the local planning process as the result of TTA's Triangle Fixed Guideway Study, which was completed in 1995. The Authority's Board of Trustees has adopted the study's recommendations to put into place a regional rail system, and resolutions of support have been received from all major units of local government, chambers of commerce, universities, and major employers in the Triangle. The two metropolitan planning organizations within whose jurisdiction the rail service will operate have incorporated the study recommendations into their fiscally constrained long-range plans. Phase I of the regional rail project is included in the two local 1998-2004 TIPs and the STIP. FTA approved Phase I for entry into preliminary engineering in January 1998, and TTA initiated the preparation of an environmental impact statement. Negotiations with the railroads for access and station location planning are underway. TTA expects to complete preliminary engineering and obtain a record of decision on the EIS by January 2000. Section 3030(a)(68) of TEA21 authorized the `Raleigh-Durham regional transit plan' for final design and construction. Through fiscal year 1999, Congress has appropriated $23,880,000 in section 5309 new starts funds for this project. To continue this project, the Committee recommends $12,000,000 to be available for final design activities.
Sacramento south corridor LRT project- The Sacramento Regional Transit District (RT) is developing an 11.3-mile light rail project in the South Sacramento Corridor. The system will follow existing Union Pacific right-of-way from downtown Sacramento to Calvine/Auberry. To maximize the use of available State and local capital funds, RT will implement this project in several phases. The first phase, a 6.3-mile minimum operable segment (MOS), would operate between downtown Sacramento and Meadowview Road. Population and employment in this corridor are expected to grow at rates faster than the regional average, resulting in severe congestion on the two major highways in the corridor. Final design activities commenced on July 1, 1997, and construction is expected to begin in late 1999. The project is projected to open for revenue service by September 2003. On June 20, 1997, an FFGA was issued for the 6.3-mile MOS, committing a total of $111,200,000 in federal new starts funding. This does not include $1,980,000 in prior year funds that were obligated before the FFGA was issued, which brings the total amount of section 5309 new starts funding to $113,180,000. A total of $53,459,000 has been appropriated through fiscal year 1999. The Committee recommends $25,000,000 in fiscal year 2000, as specified in the FFGA, for this project.
San Bernardino, California Metrolink project- The Committee provides $1,000,000 for the San Bernardino Metrolink project in fiscal year 2000. The Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA) is proposing a series of improvements to its commuter rail service within an existing railroad right-of-way. These improvements include the construction of sidings in the Interstate 10 Corridor, an upgrade of siding at Marengo and the double tracking of a line between the existing Pomona and Montclair stations. These improvements will result in an increase in service frequency, a reduction of commuter rail train delays, and an improvement to the schedules of counter-flow trains on the San Bernardino Line. The San Bernardino Line has the highest ridership of all Metrolink lines. There are currently 26 daily train trips in the corridor serving 8,200 daily commuter rail trips. The estimated capital cost for the proposed project is $31,400,000. Through fiscal year 1999, Congress has appropriated $1,989,000 in section 5309 funds for this project.
San Diego Mid-Coast corridor project- The Metropolitan Transit Development Board (MTDB) is planning to construct a 10.7-mile light rail line and improve two commuter rail stations in the Mid-Coast Corridor. The corridor extends approximately 12 miles along I-5, from I-8 near Old Town, north to the vicinity of the University of California at San Diego, University City, and Carmel Valley. The proposed light rail extension includes 9 stations. The line would connect the existing Blue LRT line serving Mission Valley, Downtown San Diego, South Bay communities and the border with Mexico, as well as with the Coaster Commuter Rail line at the Old Town Transit Center. MTDB is pursuing section 5309 new starts funding on an initial 3.4-mile phase, the Balboa Extension from Old Town to Balboa A Avenue. The estimated project cost is $104,60,000 (escalated). The commuter rail improvements consist of the construction of a new station and the implementation of pedestrian enhancements to the existing Sorrento Coaster Commuter Rail Station. The Mid Coast locally preferred alternative was selected in October 1995. FTA approved the MTDB's request to enter preliminary engineering (PE) for the 3.4-mile initial phase of the LRT extension in September 1996 and for the Coaster commuter rail station improvements in May 1997. The Mid Coast projects were included in the long range plan and transportation improvement plan in 1996. The Coaster stations and the Phase I Balboa Light Rail Transit Extension are being combined into one initial project, and are proceeding through PE and the final environmental impact statement (FEIS) together, scheduled to be completed in January 1999. An environmental assessment is being prepared for the addition of parking to the existing commuter rail station and is also scheduled for completion in January 1999. TEA 21 section 3030(a)(75) authorizes the Mid Coast LRT Corridor for final design and construction. Through fiscal year 1999, Congress has appropriated $6,418,000 in section 5309 new start funds to the project. For fiscal year 2000, the accompanying bill provides $7,000,000 for final design activities.
San Diego Mission Valley East light rail line- The Metropolitan Transit Development Board (MTDB) is planning a 5.9-mile light rail extension from east of Interstate 15 to the City of La Mesa, where it would connect to the existing East LRT Line (now referred to as the Orange Line) near Baltimore Drive. The Mission Valley East line will serve four new and two existing stations, and would include elevated, at-grade, and tunnel portions. The project includes two park and ride lots and a new access road between Waring Road and the Grantville Station. The total project capital cost is $361,000,000. The system is expected to serve approximately 10,800 daily riders in the corridor by 2015. The major investment study/draft environmental impact statement (DEIS) was completed in May 1997. The locally preferred alternative was selected by the metropolitan transit development board in October 1997 with concurrence from the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG). FTA approved entry into preliminary engineering in March 1998, and preliminary engineering was completed in July 1998. This abbreviated schedule was made possible by the extensive public involvement and detailed analyses undertaken during the planning stages, streamlining much of the work that would traditionally be undertaken during preliminary engineering and preparation of the final environmental impact statement (FEIS). The FEIS is complete, the record of decision (ROD) was issued in August 1998, and approval to enter final design was granted by FTA in October 1998. This project was authorized for final design and construction by section 3030(a)(76) of TEA 21. Through fiscal year 1999, Congress has appropriated $2,490,000 in section 5309 new starts funds for this project. For fiscal year 2000, the Committee recommends $23,000,000.
San Francisco BART extension to the airport project- Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) in San Francisco and the San Mateo County Transit District (SamTrans) are implementing an 8.2-mile, 4-station extension of the BART rapid transit system to serve San Francisco International Airport. The project consists of a 7.4-mile mainline extension from the existing BART station at Colma, through Colma, south San Francisco, and San Bruno, terminating at the Millbrae Avenue BART/CalTrain Station. An additional 0.8-mile spur from the main line north of Millbrae will take BART trains directly into the airport, to a station adjoining the new international terminal. The San Francisco International Airport is a major partner in this project. All structures and facilities to be constructed on airport property, and installation of related equipment, are being funded, designed and constructed by the airport for BART. This project is also participating in the FTA turnkey demonstration program to determine if the design/build approach will reduce implementation time and cost. On July 24, 1997, the first contract was awarded for site preparation and utility relocation associated with this project. Bids for the main contract for construction of the line, trackwork and related systems were opened on November 25, 1997. On June 30, 1997, FTA entered into an FFGA for the BART-SFO extension, committing a total of $750,000,000 in Federal new starts funds to the project. Through fiscal year 1999, a total of $153,429,000 has been allocated to this project. The Committee recommends that $84,000,000 be available for this project in fiscal year 2000.
The Committee is concerned about continuing schedule slippages and cost increases on the San Francisco BART to the airport project. While the current FFGA calls for a September 2001 opening date, the project management oversight consultant review indicates that it could be as late as July 2002. Originally estimated to cost $1,167,000,000, the sponsor suggests that costs may rise to $1,483,000,000, an increase of 27 percent. Of this amount, BART attributes $109,000,000 to (1) higher than expected bids on three contracts caused by a `superheated' Bay area economy (these claims are more anecdotal than substantiated); (2) added contingencies to address potential high bids on other contracts; and (3) a variety of scope changes, low initial estimates for systems work, change orders due to unexpected conditions, and additional finance costs. This cost estimate may still rise by as much as another $83,000,000 to reflect cost increases associated with station work at the San Francisco International Airport and additional contingency amounts. BART has also proposed to delete a $100,000,000 purchase of 28 train cars and replace it with $70,000,000 worth of shop improvements at four of its maintenance facilities. These changes, BART suggests, would enable BART to expand the capacity of its maintenance shops and thus allow BART to reduce the amount of time cars are out of service. With these improvements, BART believes that it can use its existing fleet to provide the vehicles needed to operate on the new extension, thereby foregoing any new train cars for the extension that were assumed in the full funding grant agreement. BART then plans to use the $30,000,000 left over from the vehicles budget to cover construction cost increases. The Committee is skeptical of such a proposal and fears that costs-to-complete continue to be underestimated.
Therefore, the Committee directs that none of the funds provided in this Act shall be available until (1) the project sponsor produces a finance plan that clearly delineates the full costs-to-complete as identified by the project management oversight contractor and the manner in which the sponsor expects to pay those costs; (2) the FTA conducts a final review and accepts the plan and certifies to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations that the fiscal management of the project meets or exceeds accepted U.S. government standards; (3) the General Accounting Office and the Department of Transportation's Inspector General conduct an independent analysis of the plans and provide such analysis to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations within 60 days of FTA accepting the plan; and (4) the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations have concluded their review of the analysis within 60 days of the transmittal of the analysis to the Committees. Lastly, the Committee directs the FTA to conduct ongoing, continual financial management reviews of this project.
San Jose Tasman West light rail project- The Santa Clara County Transit District (SCCTD) is planning a 12.4-mile light rail system from northeast San Jose to downtown Mountain View, connecting with both the Guadalupe LRT in northern Santa Clara County and the Caltrain commuter rail system. The project is proceeding in two phases: the Phase 1 West Extension will connect the northern terminus of the Guadalupe Light Rail System in Santa Clara with the Caltrain Commuter Rail station in downtown Mountain View, a distance of 7.6 miles; the future Phase 2 East Extension will complete the remaining 4.8 miles. An FFGA was issued for Phase 1 of this project on July 2, 1996, providing a total of $182,750,000 in section 5309 new starts funding. A total of $150,880,000 has been provided through fiscal year 1999. The Committee recommendation includes $20,000,000 for fiscal year 2000.
San Juan Tren Urbano project- The Puerto Rico Department of Transportation and Public Works (DTPW) is constructing a 10.7-mile, 16-station rapid rail line between Bayamon Centro and the Sagrado Corazon area of Santurce in the San Juan metropolitan area. The system consists of a double-track line operating over at-grade and elevated rights-of-way with a short below-grade segment, and a maintenance facility. When complete, this system is expected to carry 113,300 riders per day by 2010. This project has been selected as one of FTA's turnkey demonstration projects, which incorporates contracts to design, build, operate, and maintain the system. This type of procurement is expected to expedite the implementation of the project and develop the institutional capability needed to operate the system. During 1996 and 1997, seven contracts were awarded under the turnkey procurement. On March 13, 1996, FTA entered into an FFGA committing $307,410,000 in section 5309 new starts funds to this project, out of a total project cost of $1,250,000,000. This did not include $4,960,000 in federal new starts funding provided prior to fiscal year 1996, which brings total federal new starts funding for this project to $312,370,000. A total of $53,233,000 has been allocated to the Tren Urbano project through fiscal year 1999. In accordance with the FFGA, the Committee recommends $82,000,000 be provided to this project in fiscal year 2000.
As of May 1999, the current cost to complete the Tren Urbano project is estimated to be $1,676,000,000, an increase of $426,000,000, or 34 percent, over the original estimate of $1,250,000,000 contained in the March 1996 full funding grant agreement. The project revenue operations date is May 2002, ten months behind schedule, in part due to hurricane delays. The estimate excludes $478,300,000 in additional costs related to the planned Minellas extension. Primary factors contributing to this increase include the addition of two stations; alignment changes, station enhancements, an enhanced fare collection system, an expanded system integration and quality assurance program; and low initial engineer's estimates. The Committee is very troubled by recent findings of the financial management oversight contractor that indicate that the current finance plan does not demonstrate clearly that the grantee has the financial capacity for its current capital plans and that it may be unable to build and maintain the project without adversely impacting the area's other transportation requirements.
Therefore, the Committee directs that none of the funds provided in this Act shall be available until (1) the project sponsor produces a finance plan that clearly delineates the full costs-to-complete and manner in which the sponsor expects to pay those costs; (2) the FTA and FHWA conducts a final review and accepts the plan and certifies to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations that the fiscal management of the project meets or exceeds accepted U.S. government standards; (3) the General Accounting Office and the Department of Transportation's Inspector General conduct an independent analysis of the plans and provide such analysis to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations within 60 days of FTA accepting the plan; and (4) the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations have concluded their review of the analysis within 60 days of the transmittal of the analysis to the Committees. Lastly, the Committee directs the FTA to conduct ongoing, continual financial management reviews of this project.
South Boston piers transitway- The Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) is developing an underground transitway to connect the existing transit system with the South Boston Piers area. The Piers area, which is connected to the central business district (CBD) by three local bridges, is slated for significant future development. A 1.5-mile tunnel, to be constructed in two phases, will extend from the existing Boylston Station to the World Trade Center; five underground stations will provide connections to the MBTA's Red, Orange, and Green Lines. Dual-mode trackless trolleys will operate in the transitway tunnel and on surface routes in the eastern end of the Piers area. Phase 1 of this project consists of a 1-mile, three-station bus tunnel between South Station and the World Trade Center, with an intermediate stop at Fan Pier. Part of the construction is being coordinated with the Central Artery highway project. South Station serves the existing MBTA Red Line, as well as Amtrak and commuter rail and bus service. The total estimated cost of Phase I is $413,400,000, though this does not include recently calculated cost increases. Any escalation of the total project cost is the responsibility of local project sponsors. Phase II would extend the transitway to Boylston Station on the Green Line and the Chinatown Station on the Orange Line. Section 3035(j) of ISTEA directed FTA to enter into an FFGA for this project. On November 5, 1994, an FFGA was issued for Phase 1, committing a total of $330,730,000 in section 5309 new starts funding. Through fiscal year 1999, a total of $241,880,000 has been provided for this project. For fiscal year 2000, the Committee recommends an appropriation of $53,962,000.
The Committee is concerned about significant cost increases on the South Boston Piers transitway project. Originally estimated to cost a total of $413,400,000, the project is now estimated to cost $528,500,000, an increase of 28 percent. These cost increases are primarily the result of schedule delays and the fact that the original baseline cost estimate was not based on a final design but rather on conceptual engineering. Factors contributing to the construction delays include coordination problems with the joint Central Artery construction contracts, complications with the design for the relocation of utilities, and differing site conditions. Land acquisition costs have also been higher than anticipated. According to the FTA and the project management oversight consultant, other issues could increase the project's costs even further by an additional $80,000,000. These issues include: (1) potentially higher than anticipated contract costs to construct the last major segment of the transitway tunnel; (2) the decision of whether to build a new vehicle maintenance facility or expand an existing one; (3) capital participation for eight vehicles by a local agency; (4) a higher than anticipated unit-cost for the vehicles, and (5) potential additional land acquisition costs. To pay for these cost increases, the project sponsor expects to use federal formula funds and other resources, such as state bond funds.
In light of these significant cost increases and the uncertainty of the financial capacity of the grantee to complete the project, the Committee directs that none of the funds available in this Act shall be available until (1) the project sponsor produces a finance plan that clearly delineates the full costs-to-complete and manner in which the sponsor expects to pay those costs; (2) the FTA conducts a final review and accepts the plan and certifies to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations that the fiscal management of the project meets or exceeds accepted U.S. government standards; (3) the General Accounting Office and the Department of Transportation's Inspector General conduct an independent analysis of the plans and provide such analysis to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations within 60 days of FTA accepting the plan; and (4) the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations have concluded their review of the analysis within 60 days of the transmittal of the analysis to the Committees. Lastly, the Committee directs the FTA to conduct ongoing, continual financial management reviews of this project.
South DeKalb-Lindberg, Georgia corridor project- The Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority (MARTA) is conducting a major investment study (MIS) to examine transportation options in a proposed 15-mile corridor extending from the South campus of the Georgia Perimeter College, north to the Emory University area. The proposed corridor also includes the Centers for Disease Control and medical center complex, and continues on to the existing Lindbergh Center Station on MARTA's North Line. Phase I of the MIS is projected for completion in May 1999. Through fiscal year 1999, Congress has appropriated $2,646,000 in section 5309 new starts funds for this effort. For fiscal year 2000, the accompanying bill provides $1,000,000.
Spokane, Washington South Valley corridor light rail project- The Spokane Regional Transportation Council has conducted a major investment study (MIS) to examine the impacts of high capacity transportation on a proposed 16-mile corridor between the central business district of Spokane, Washington and Liberty Lake. The proposed corridor would connect major residential and employment centers within the Spokane Valley. Spokane has been classified as a `serious' nonattainment area for carbon monoxide. Trips along the corridor nearly double based on the population and employment forecasts between the years 1990 and 2020. The MIS considered three alternatives including: high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes, express busways, and light rail transit (LRT). Based on the results of the MIS, LRT was selected as the preferred alternative with strong public support. The MIS was included in the region's long-range metropolitan transportation plan in November 1997. It is anticipated that the project sponsor(s) will complete an environmental assessment in early 1999 and will request to initiate preliminary engineering (PE) in mid 1999. The total estimated cost for the LRT, including local, state and federal funding, ranges between $200,000,000 and $300,000,000. Through fiscal year 1999, Congress has appropriated nearly $1,000,000 in section 5309 new starts funds for this effort. The accompanying bill provides $3,000,000 to continue this project in fiscal year 2000.
St. Louis, Missouri Metrolink cross county corridor project- The East-West Gateway Coordinating Council (EWGCC), the local metropolitan planning organization, (MPO) and the Missouri Highway and Transportation Department (MoDOT) have completed a major investment study (MIS) in the Cross County Corridor including St. Louis City and County. The east-west corridor connection is through Clayton, Missouri to the existing Metrolink system. The study evaluated transportation alternatives such as light rail transit (LRT), busway, highway, transportation systems management (TSM) and a no-build alternative. Phase I of the MIS was completed in March 1997. A locally preferred alternative (LPA), which included highway and transit improvements, was selected in September 1997. The transit component of the LPA is a 28.8-mile LRT line that extends Metrolink west in the City of St. Louis through downtown Clayton in St. Louis County, and then south from Clayton beyond the Interstate 55/Interstate 270 interchange in southeast St. Louis County and north from Clayton to beyond the Interstate 170/Interstate 270 interchange in North St. Louis County. Total estimated capital cost range from $1,000,000,000 to $1,200,000,000. For fiscal year 2000, the bill includes an appropriation of $3,000,000.
St. Louis-St. Clair County Metrolink light rail (phase II) extension project- The Bi-State Development Agency (Bi-State) is developing a 26-mile extension of the Metrolink light rail line from downtown East St. Louis, Illinois to the Mid America Airport in St. Clair County. A 17.4-mile Minimum Operable Segment (MOS) will extend from the current Metrolink terminal in downtown East St. Louis to Belleville Area College. This segment consists of eight stations, seven park-and-ride lots, 20 new light rail vehicles, and a new maintenance facility in East St. Louis. The route makes extensive use of abandoned railroad rights-of-way. Right-of-way and real estate acquisition is proceeding as scheduled, and revenue service is scheduled to begin in May 2001. On October 17, 1996, FTA and Bi-State entered into an FFGA that commits a total of $243,930,000 in section 5309 new starts funding to complete the 17.4-mile MOS. This does not include $8,485,000 in federal new starts funding provided prior to fiscal year 1996, which brings total federal funding for this project to $252,410,000 under the new starts program. Through fiscal year 1999, a total of $112,835,000 has been appropriated for this project. The accompanying bill provides $50,000,000 for the project in fiscal year 2000.
Tampa Bay regional rail project- The Hillsborough Area Regional Transit Authority (HART), in cooperation with the Hillsborough and Polk Counties metropolitan planning organizations (MPO) and the cities of Lakeland and Tampa, are proposing to implement the Tampa Bay Regional Rail System. The first stage of the project is a 28.5-mile minimum operable segment (MOS), and is one component of a multimodal `early action plan' to implement the locally preferred strategy. The MOS would provide rail service along an 18.5-mile, 19-station Northeast/Southwest Corridor and a 10-mile, 6-station West Corridor. Capital cost estimates for the 28.5-mile segment total $575,000,000 (in 1997 dollars). HART has estimated total project costs in year of expenditure (YOE) at $726,300,000; a corresponding YOE section 5309 share is $363,150,000. Annual operating costs are estimated at $15,300,000 (in 1997 dollars). HART estimates 22,000 daily boardings in 2015 on the proposed 28.5-mile segment. The complete proposed project is a 39-station, 71-mile system and is part of a $4,000,000,000 locally preferred strategy for implementing a regionwide package of multimodal transportation investments. The regional rail system would utilize both diesel multiple unit (DMU) rail technology commuter rail service (25 miles) throughout Hillsborough County and a portion of Polk County, including the cities of Tampa, Lakeland, and Plant City. HART estimates 44,000 total daily boardings for the complete 71-mile Regional Rail System in 2015. Current capital cost estimates for the system total $1,090,000,000, while annual operating and maintenance costs are estimated at $40,000,000 (both in 1997 dollars). HART is planning for completion of the full 71-mile regional rail system by 2015. A major investment study (MIS) to address alternatives for enhancing mobility throughout Tampa, Hillsborough County, Lakeland, and Polk County was completed in April 1998, with the selection by local stakeholders of the multimodal locally preferred strategy, including the 71-mile regional rail system. The MIS also identified 28.5 miles of rail investment in the Northeast/Southwest and West Corridors to be included in the regional early action plan. The 2020 long-range transportation plan, which incorporates both the early action plan and locally preferred strategy, was formally adopted by the Hillsborough Metropolitan Planning Organization Board in November 1998. FTA has approved (in January 1999) initiation of the preliminary engineering/environmental impact statement phase for the two corridors in the early action plan. TEA21 section 3030(a)(89) authorized the Tampa Regional Rail System for final design and construction. Through fiscal year 1999, Congress has appropriated $4,965,000 in section 5309 new starts funds for this project. For fiscal year 2000, the accompanying bill provides $1,000,000 for this project.
Twin Cities Transitways projects- The bill provides $5,433,000 for preliminary engineering on the Riverview, Northstar and Red Rock corridors of the Twin Cities Transitways system.
Twin Cities Transitways--Hiawatha corridor project- The bill provides $46,000,000 for final design and construction of the 12.2 mile Hiawatha corridor light rail transit line, which will link downtown Minneapolis with the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport and the Mall of America. Through fiscal year 1999, Congress has appropriated $28,830,000 for Twin Cities transitways projects (including Hiawatha corridor).
Utah north/south light rail project- The Utah Transit Authority (UTA) is constructing a 15-mile light rail transit (LRT) line from downtown Salt Lake City to the southern suburbs. The system will operate on city streets downtown (2 miles) and then follow a lightly-used railroad alignment owned by UTA to the suburban community of Sandy (13 miles). This project is one component of the Interstate 15 corridor improvement initiative, which includes reconstruction of a parallel segment of I-15. Construction is underway, with an estimated completion date of December 2000. On August 2, 1995, FTA issued an FFGA for this project that commits a total of $237,390,000 in federal new starts funding. This does not include $6,600,000 in prior year funds that were provided before the FFGA was issued, which brings the total amount of section 5309 new starts funding to $243,990,000. A total of $206,065,000 has been appropriated through fiscal year 1999. For fiscal year 2000, the accompanying bill provides $37,928,000 for this project.
The Committee directs the FTA to re-negotiate the full funding grant agreement for this project to include $6,000,000 in additional costs relating to the expansion of park and ride lots necessary for the temporary and permanent requirements of the Wasatch front communities and the Salt Lake City 2002 Winter Olympic Games. The FTA is further directed when re-negotiating the full funding grant agreement not to include additional rail cars that are unnecessary to meet the load factors already assumed in the existing full funding grant agreement and would otherwise be used on the yet-to-be built west-east light rail line.
Virginia Railway Express Woodbridge station improvements project- The Committee has provided $2,000,000 for the Virginia Railway Express (VRE) Fredericksburg to Washington commuter rail project. Through fiscal year 1999, $6,960,000 has been appropriated for this project.
Washington County, Oregon commuter rail- The Committee is informed of a commuter transportation problem between the south and west suburbs in the Portland region of Oregon. Commuter rail may help alleviate some of the rapidly growing congestion in the area and enhance the transportation goals of the region by connecting to the Westside light rail line. The Committee encourages the FRA and the FTA to work with the state of Oregon, Washington County, Oregon, and METRO regarding commuter rail connecting Wilsonville, Oregon, to Washington County, Oregon.
West Trenton, New Jersey rail project- The New Jersey Transit Corporation (NJ Transit) conducted a study to examine the potential of restoring passenger rail service on an active freight rail line spanning central New Jersey, beginning in Ewing Township located along the Delaware River and traveling northeast to a connection with NJ Transit's Raritan Valley Line at Bound Brook. The study, which was completed in April 1994, examined the potential station sites and western terminus options along the proposed alignment. In January 1998, NJ Transit began a feasibility assessment, which is scheduled for completion in early 1999. An environmental assessment will be conducted depending on the results of the current feasibility study. Through fiscal year 1999, Congress has appropriated $1,490,000 in section 5309 new starts funds for this effort. For fiscal year 2000, the accompanying bill provides $1,000,000.
Whitehall terminal reconstruction project- The New York City Department of Transportation (NYCDOT) is undertaking the reconstruction of the Staten Island-Whitehall Street Ferry Intermodal Terminal. The terminal, located at the southern tip of Manhattan was mostly destroyed by fire in 1991 and ferry service has been operating out of interim facilities since then. Reconstruction of the terminal will include improved connections with the New York City Transit subway system and several bus routes. The Staten Island to New York Ferry System moves over 60,000 riders daily. A draft environmental assessment has been developed and is currently under review. A finding of no significant impact (FONSI) is anticipated to be issued in the Spring of 1999. Final design and engineering are scheduled for completion shortly thereafter. The project is estimated to cost approximately $100,000,000. Through fiscal year 1999, Congress has appropriated $11,000,000 in section 5309 new starts funds for this project. For fiscal year 2000, the committee recommendation includes $3,000,000.
DISCRETIONARY GRANTS
(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)
(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)
----------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 1 ($2,000,000,000)
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 (1,500,000,000)
Recommended in the bill (1,500,000,000)
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 (-500,000,000)
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 (-------------)
----------------------------------------------------
This liquidating cash appropriation covers obligations incurred under contract authority provided for activities previously funded under the discretionary grants program. The Committee recommends $1,500,000,000 in liquidating cash for discretionary grants. This appropriation is mandatory and has no scoring effect.
JOB ACCESS AND REVERSE COMMUTE GRANTS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriation (General fund) Limitation on obligations (Trust fund)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 $35,000,000 $40,000,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 1 15,000,000 135,000,000
Recommended in the bill 15,000,000 60,000,000
Bill compared to:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 -20,000,000 +20,000,000
Budget request, fiscal year 1999 -75,000,000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 3037 of TEA21 established the jobs access and reverse commute grants program. For fiscal year 2000, the program is funded at a total level of $75,000,000, with no more than $15,000,000 derived from the general fund and $60,000,000 derived from the mass transit account of the highway trust fund. These funds are guaranteed under the transit funding category.
The program is to make competitive grants to qualifying metropolitan planning organizations, local governmental authorities, agencies, and non-profit organizations in urbanized areas with populations greater than 200,000. Grants may not be used for planning or coordination activities. No more than $10,000,000 may be provided for reverse commuter grants.
The Committee recommends the following allocations of job access and reverse commute grant program funds in fiscal year 2000:
| Project | Amount |
| Atlanta regional commission, Georgia | $1,000,000 |
| Chicago-DuPage area, Illinois | 100,000 |
| District of Columbia | 1,250,000 |
| DuPage County, Illinois | 120,000 |
| Hillsborough area regional transit authority, Florida | 500,000 |
| JOBLINKS | 1,000,000 |
| Kansas City, Kansas JOBLINKS | 850,000 |
| Kentucky human services transportation delivery system (including Hardin County, Owensboro, Barren River, central Kentucky community action agency, Audubon area community services organization, Kentucky River Foothills express, Blue Grass Ultra-transit services, Lexington-Fayette county area), Kentucky | 2,500,000 |
| Lafayette, Indiana | 200,000 |
| Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transit Authority, California | 1,000,000 |
| Loudon County, Virginia | 300,000 |
| Lynchburg, Virginia | 100,000 |
| Mariba, Kentucky | 125,000 |
| Miami-Dade Transit Authority, Florida | 1,100,000 |
| Minnespolis/St. Paul, Minnesota | 1,500,000 |
| National Welfare to Work Center at the University of Illinois, Illinois | 1,000,000 |
| Northern Tier community transportation, Massachusetts | 550,000 |
| Palm Beach County, Florida | 500,000 |
| San Bernardino, California | 600,000 |
| San Diego metropolitan transit development board, California | 650,000 |
| State of Louisiana, small urbanized and rural areas | 1,250,000 |
| State of Tennessee, small urban areas | 1,300,000 |
| Transportation opportunities training, Chicago, Illinois | 1,000,000 |
| Westchester County, New York job access support centers | 1,000,000 |
| Wichita, Kansas | 725,000 |
Northern Tier, Massachusetts community transportation.--The bill includes $550,000 for coordination and capital for Northern Tier community transportation in Massachusetts.
SAINT LAWRENCE SEAWAY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
The Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation's operations program consists of lock and marine operations, maintenance, dredging, planning and development activities related to the operation and maintenance of that part of the Saint Lawrence Seaway between Montreal and Lake Erie within the territorial limits of the United States.
The Committee maintains a strong interest in maximizing the commercial use and competitive position of the Saint Lawrence Seaway. The general language under this heading is the same as the language provided last year. Continuation of this language in addition to that under the operations and maintenance appropriation will provide the Corporation the flexibility and access to available resources needed to finance costs associated with unanticipated events, which could threaten the safe and uninterrupted use of the Seaway. The language permits the corporation to use sources of funding not designated for the harbor maintenance trust fund by Public Law 99-662, but which have been historically set aside for non-routine or emergency use-cash reserves derived primarily from prior-year revenues received in excess of costs, unused borrowing authority, and miscellaneous income.
OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE
(HARBOR MAINTENANCE TRUST FUND)
------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 $11,496,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2000
Recommended in the bill 12,042,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 +546,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2000 +12,042,000
------------------------------------------------
On March 4, 1996, the Vice President announced plans to restructure eight federal agencies into performance-based organizations (PBOs). The Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation (Seaway) was one of the agencies chosen for the conversion to a PBO. Others include the Department of Commerce seafood inspection; Patent and Trademark Office; National Technical Information Service; Defense Commissary Agency; Federal Housing Administration mortgage insurance services; Government National Mortgage Association, the U.S. Mint; and Federal retirement benefit services.
Legislation and a financial plan for the Seaway's PBO was submitted to Congress in July 1996; however, it was not acted upon. The PBO legislation was resubmitted to Congress in May 1997; however, no action occurred prior to the end of fiscal year 1998. Although the Seaway plans to submit a legislative proposal during the first session of the 106th Congress, none has been submitted to or acted upon by Congress.
A key element of the PBO initiative is to provide the Seaway with a five-year, stable funding source to enhance the corporation's long-range planning for capital projects. As a PBO, the Seaway's primary funding mechanism would change from yearly Congressional appropriation to mandatory formula-based payments. Due to the PBO proposal, the Seaway is not requesting an appropriation in fiscal year 2000, but instead is seeking a mandatory payment from the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund of $12,042,000.
The bill includes an appropriation of $12,042,000 instead of the mandatory funding requested. Establishing the Seaway as a PBO has not been authorized and it is not within this Committee's jurisdiction to do so. Neither the Committee nor the department is aware of any current or pending Congressional action on PBO authorizing legislation. Until authorization is enacted, the Committee will continue funding the Seaway according to current law. The Committee recommendation in no way presumes that the Seaway's status will change to a PBO.
RESEARCH AND SPECIAL PROGRAMS ADMINISTRATION
The Research and Special Programs Administration (RSPA) was originally established by the Secretary of Transportation's organizational changes dated July 20, 1977. The agency received statutory authority on October 24, 1992. RSPA has a broad portfolio. Its diverse jurisdictions include hazardous materials, pipelines, international standards, emergency transportation, and university research. As the department's only multimodal administration, RSPA provides research, analytical and technical support for transportation programs through headquarters offices and the Volpe National Transportation Systems Center.
SUMMARY OF FISCAL YEAR 2000 PROGRAM
The Committee recommends $82,953,000 in new budget authority to continue the operations, research and development, and grants-in-aid administered by the Research and Special Programs Administration. This is a 12.5 percent increase over the fiscal year 1999 enacted level. The following table summarizes fiscal year 1999 program levels, the fiscal year 2000 program requests, and the Committee's recommendations:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Program Fiscal year 1999 enacted Fiscal year 2000 estimate Recommended in the bill
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Research and special programs 1 $29,280,000 $33,340,000 $32,361,000
Hazardous materials user fee --- -4,575,000 ---
Pipeline safety 2 33,248,000 38,187,000 2 , 3 36,092,000
Emergency preparedness grants 200,000 200,000 200,000
Limitation on obligation (11,000,000) --- (14,300,000)
Total 73,728,000 67,152,000 82,953,000
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RESEARCH AND SPECIAL PROGRAMS
------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 1 $29,280,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2000 33,340,000
Recommended in the bill 32,361,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 +3,081,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2000 -979,000
------------------------------------------------
RSPA's research and special programs administers a comprehensive nationwide safety program to: (1) protect the nation from the risks inherent in the transportation of hazardous materials by water, air, highway and railroad; (2) oversee the execution of the Secretary of Transportation's statutory responsibilities for providing transportation services during national emergencies; and (3) coordinate the department's research and development policy, planning, university research, and technology transfer activities. Overall policy, legal, financial, management and administrative support to RSPA's programs also is provided under this appropriation. The total recommended program level for research and special programs $32,361,000, which is a 10.5 percent increase over the 1999 enacted level. Budget and staffing data for this appropriation are as follows:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 1999 enacted Fiscal year 2000 estimate Recommended in the bill
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hazardous materials safety $16,063,000 $18,213,000 $17,813,000
(Positions) (129) (131) (129)
Hazardous materials safety user fees -4,575,000
Research and technology 3,676,000 3,547,000 3,547,000
(Positions) (13) (11) (11)
Emergency transportation 997,000 1,459,000 1,459,000
(Positions) (7) (9) (9)
Program support 8,544,000 10,121,000 9,542,000
(Positions) (48) (48) (48)
Total, Research and Special Programs 29,280,000 28,765,000 32,361,000
(Positions) (197) (199) (197)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Committee recommends the following changes to the budget request:
| Deny funding for 3 new positions | -$150,000 |
| Delete contract funds for safe food program | -300,000 |
| Continue funding Garrett Morgan program in-house | -200,000 |
| Delete funds for human resource information system | -329,000 |
New staff positions.--The Committee has deleted funding for three new staff positions: the chief information officer and two sanitary food liaisons (-$150,000). Only two large agencies within the department have a chief information officer (CIO) and the department has had difficulty filling these positions. It is unclear why this small modal administration needs a CIO. The Committee believes that RSPA can better use its current information resources staff to manage its information technology requirements without a new CIO position.
In 1991, the department was directed to implement the Sanitary Food Act. Since then, the department has undertaken a variety of activities in this area while trying to reassign these responsibilities to the Food and Drug Administration and the Department of Agriculture. While the reassignment of responsibilities has not occurred, it underscores the point that these activities are outside of RSPA's primary areas of responsibility and that it can contribute little to enhance food safety. Since RSPA staff have been working on food safety issues, albeit to a limited degree, for the past eight years, it is unclear why two additional staff are necessary at this time.
Safe foods contract funds.--The Committee has denied funding for the new safe foods contract program for the same reasons that it has denied funding for the new staff positions (-$300,000).
Garrett Morgan program.--Consistent with last year's conference action, the Committee has deleted additional funding for the Garrett Morgan program because these activities are currently being funded within RSPA's base program and by all other modes within the department. It is unclear why additional funding is necessary. (-$200,000).
Human resource information center.--The Committee has not provided any funding for the human resource information center throughout the department (-$329,000). Additional discussion of this recommendation can be found under the office of the secretary, office of the assistant secretary for administration.
User fees.--The Committee disagrees with the budget request to begin funding the hazardous materials safety program from user fees. On April 15, 1999, RSPA issued a notice in the Federal Register that proposed a change in its current registration and fee assessment program for persons who transport or offer for transport certain categories and quantities of hazardous materials. The proposed change would increase the number of persons required to register and increase the annual registration fee for shippers and carriers which are not small businesses. These fees are intended to raise additional funds to enhance support for the national hazardous materials emergency preparedness grant program. However, within the notice, RSPA states that if Congress provides authority to fund RSPA's hazardous materials safety program from the registration fee, RSPA will need to initiate additional rulemaking actions to collect $18,200,000. These fees would be above those anticipated for emergency preparedness grants. Currently, this new fee is not authorized. Any new fee being imposed and collected should be reviewed on a case-by-case basis before specifically being authorized. RSPA has not made a case as to why the fee should be expanded to include the hazardous materials safety program. Further, the Committee is concerned about raising fees twice on a small segment of the transportation industry. While the Committee is generally supportive of increasing the funds available for emergency preparedness training and grants, it is unwilling to have the same segment of the industry fully fund the Federal Government's entire hazardous materials safety program.
PIPELINE SAFETY
(PIPELINE SAFETY FUND)
(OIL SPILL LIABILITY TRUST FUND)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Pipeline safety fund) (Oil spill liability trust fund)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 1 $29,000,000 $4,248,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2000 33,939,000 4,248,000
Recommended in the bill 30,598,000 5,494,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 +1,598,000 +1,246,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2000 -3,341,000 +1,246,000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The pipeline safety program is responsible for a national regulatory program to protect the public against the risks to life and property in the transportation of natural gas, petroleum and other hazardous materials by pipeline. The enactment of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 also expanded the role of the pipeline safety program in environmental protection and resulted in a new emphasis on spill prevention and containment of oil and hazardous substances from pipelines. The office develops and enforces federal safety regulations and administers a grants-in-aid program to state pipeline programs.
The bill includes $36,092,000 to continue pipeline safety operations, research and development, and state grants-in-aid in fiscal year 2000. The bill specifies that, of the total appropriation, $5,494,000 is to be derived from the oil spill liability trust fund and $30,598,000 from the pipeline safety fund. In addition, the Committee has included language that permits the office of pipeline safety to use $1,300,000 from its reserve fund for one-call notification grants, emergency notification, damage prevention and public education activities.
The following table summarizes the Committee's recommendation by budget activity and funding source:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Budget activity Pipeline safety fund Oil spill liability trust fund 1 Reserve fund Total
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Personnel, compensation, and benefits $8,013,000 $906,000 $8,919,000
Administrative expenses 3,920,000 45,000 3,965,000
Contracts:
Information and analysis 800,000 400,000 1,200,000
Risk assessment and technical studies 500,000 800,000 1,300,000
Compliance 200,000 100,000 300,000
Training and information dissemination 821,000 200,000 1,021,000
Emergency notification ($100,000) (100,000)
Damage prevention and public education (200,000) (200,000)
Oil pollution act 2,443,000 2,443,000
Research and development 1,944,000 1,944,000
Grants:
State grants 12,900,000 600,000 13,500,000
Risk management 500,000 500,000
One-call (1,000,000) (1,000,000)
Damage prevention 1,000,000 1,000,000
Total 30,598,000 5,494,000 (1,300,000) $37,392,000
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oil spill liability trust fund.--The budget request sought $4,248,000 from the oil spill liability trust fund. The Committee has increased this amount to $5,494,000 because there are a number of activities that could be more suitably funded from this source instead of funded by new user fees. These changes are reflected in the table above.
Administrative expenses.--RSPA requested a 24 percent increase for administrative expenses. The Committee has held these expenses to a 15 percent increase (-$296,000).
Other reductions.--The Committee has made a number of small reductions to the request due to budgetary constraints. These reductions were made to the following programs: risk assessment and technology studies; training and information dissemination; risk management and program evaluation; research and development; and state grants. The majority of these reductions occurred because it has taken longer than originally anticipated to bring companies into the pipeline risk management demonstration program. As such, some of the increases that the administration sought will not be needed in their entirety. These reductions will not impact activities already underway.
EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS GRANTS
(EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FUND)
---------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 $200,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2000 200,000
Recommended in the bill 200,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2000
---------------------------------------------
The Hazardous Materials Transportation Uniform Safety Act of 1990 (HMTUSA) requires RSPA to: (1) develop and implement a reimbursable emergency preparedness grant program; (2) monitor public sector emergency response training and planning and provide technical assistance to states, political subdivisions and Indian tribes; and (3) develop and update periodically a mandatory training curriculum for emergency responders.
The bill includes $200,000, the same amount requested for fiscal year 2000, for activities related to emergency response training curriculum development and updates, as authorized by section 117(A)(i)(3)(B) of HMTUSA.
LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS
Bill language is included that limits the obligation of emergency preparedness training grants to $14,300,000 in fiscal year 2000, up from $11,000,000 in fiscal year 1999. This increase will ensure that hazardous material response training is provided to a larger segment of the response community, give grantees the option to provide compliance assistance to small businesses, and help address undeclared shipments of hazardous materials.
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL
------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 1 $43,495,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 2 44,840,000
Recommended in the bill 2 44,840,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 +1,345,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 ---
------------------------------------------------
The Inspector General's office was established in 1978 to provide an objective and independent organization that would be more effective in: (1) preventing and detecting fraud, waste, and abuse in departmental programs and operations; and (2) providing a means of keeping the Secretary of Transportation and the Congress fully and currently informed of problems and deficiencies in the administration of such programs and operations. According to the authorizing legislation, the Inspector General (IG) is to report dually to the Secretary of Transportation and to the Congress.
The Committee recommendation provides $44,840,000 for activities of the Office of Inspector General, an increase of $1,345,000 (3.1 percent) above the fiscal year 1999 enacted level and the same as the administration's request. The Committee continues to value highly the work of the Office of Inspector General in oversight of departmental programs and activities.
Audit reports.--The Committee requests the Inspector General to continue forwarding copies of all audit reports to the Committee immediately after they are issued, and to continue to make the Committee aware immediately of any review that recommends cancellation or modifications to any major acquisition project or grant, or which recommends significant budgetary savings.
SURFACE TRANSPORTATION BOARD
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
-------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 1 $16,000,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2000 2 17,000,000
Recommended in the bill 3 17,000,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 +1,000,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2000 ---
-------------------------------------------------
The Surface Transportation Board was created on January 1, 1996 by P.L. 104-88, the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) Termination Act of 1995. Consistent with the continued trend toward less regulation of the surface transportation industry, the Act abolished the ICC; eliminated certain functions that had previously been implemented by the ICC; transferred core rail and certain other provisions to the Board; and transferred certain other motor carrier functions to the Federal Highway Administration. The Board is specifically responsible for regulation of the rail and pipeline industries and certain non-licensing regulations of motor carriers and water carriers. The new law empowers the Board through its exemption authority to promote deregulation administratively on a case-by-case basis and continues intact the important rail reforms of the Staggers Rail Act of 1980, which have helped substantially improve rail service and the profitability of the railroad industry.
The Committee recommends a total appropriation of $17,000,000, an increase of $1,000,000 over the 1999 enacted level, and the same as the Board requested. Included in this total is an estimated $1,600,000 in user fees, which will offset the appropriated funding. At this level, the Board will be able to accommodate 140 full-time equivalent positions.
User fees- The Committee disagrees with the budget request to fund the entire operation of the Surface Transportation Board, or $17,000,000, from the collection of user fees. Current statutory authority, under the Independent Offices Appropriations Act (31 U.S.C. 9701), grants the Board the authority to collect user fees, but, not to the level provided in the budget estimate.
Instead of fully funding the Board through user fees, the Committee believes that $1,600,000 is a reasonable sum, based on current collections and carryover balances of $940,617 from fiscal years 1997 and 1998. Language is included in the bill allowing the fees to be credited to the appropriation as offsetting collections, and reducing the general fund appropriation on a dollar-for-dollar basis as the fees are received and credited. This language simplifies the tracking of the collections and provides the Board with more flexibility in spending its appropriated funds.
The Committee has deleted bill language, carried for the previous two years, which allowed any fees received in excess of the amount specified in the bill to remain available until expended but not available for obligation until the following fiscal year. Since the Board is permitted to offset its appropriation with user fees, it is no longer necessary to utilize fees from prior year filings during periods of shortfall.
Union Pacific/Southern Pacific merger- The Committee is aware that the Board has continuing jurisdiction over the Union Pacific/Southern Pacific merger in connection with the STB Finance Docket No. 32760. If it becomes necessary for the Board to issue a rule regarding the environmental mitigation study for Wichita, Kansas, the Board shall base its final environmental mitigation conditions for Wichita on verifiable and appropriate assumptions. If there is any material change in the bases of the assumptions on which the final mitigation for Wichita is imposed, the Committee expects the Board to exercise that jurisdiction by reexamining the final environmental mitigation measures. Also, if the Union Pacific Corporation, its divisions, or subsidiaries materially change or are unable to achieve the assumptions upon which the Board based its final mitigation measures, then the Board should reopen Finance Docket 32760, if requested, and prescribe additional mitigation properly reflecting these changes, if shown to be appropriate.
TITLE II
RELATED AGENCIES
ARCHITECTURAL AND TRANSPORTATION BARRIERS COMPLIANCE BOARD
----------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 $3,847,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2000 4,633,000
Recommended in the bill 4,633,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 +786,000
Budget request, fiscal year 2000
----------------------------------------------
The Committee recommends $4,633,000 for operations of the Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board, an increase of $786,000 over the 1999 enacted level, and the same level as the budget request.
The activities of the Board include: ensuring compliance with the Architectural Barriers Act; ensuring that public conveyances, including rolling stock, are readily accessible to and usable by physically handicapped persons; investigating and examining alternative approaches to the elimination of architectural, transportation, communication and attitudinal barriers; determining what measures are being taken to eliminate these barriers; developing minimum guidelines and requirements for accessibility standards; and providing technical assistance to all programs affected by Title V of the Rehabilitation Act.
NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
-----------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 $53,473,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2000 1 , 2 57,000,000
Recommended in the bill 57,000,000
Bill compared with:
Appropriation, fiscal year 1999 +3,527,000
Budget estimate, fiscal year 2000
-----------------------------------------------------
Under the Independent Safety Board Act, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) is responsible for improving transportation safety by investigating accidents, conducting special studies, developing recommendations to prevent accidents, evaluating the effectiveness of the transportation safety programs of other agencies, and reviewing appeals of adverse actions involving airman and seaman certificates and licenses, and civil penalties issued by the Department of Transportation.
The bill includes an appropriation of $57,000,000 for salaries and expenses of the NTSB, an increase of $3,527,000 over the fiscal year 1999 enacted level. The Committee denies the request to begin funding accident investigation costs through the collection of $10,000,000 in user fees.
The following table summarizes the fiscal year 1999 program level, the President's fiscal year 2000 request, and the Committee's recommendations:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Program Fiscal year 1999 enacted Fiscal year 2000 estimate Recommended in the bill
Staff years Budget authority Staff years Budget authority 1 Staff years Budget authority
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Policy and direction 97 $13,097,000 97 $13,945,000 97 $13,945,000
Aviation safety 139 19,491,000 139 20,640,000 139 20,640,000
Surface transportation 90 12,041,000 90 12,750,000 90 12,750,000
Research and engineering 66 7,469,000 66 8,209,000 66 8,209,000
Administrative law judges 10 1,375,000 10 1,456,000 10 1,456,000
Total 402 53,473,000 402 57,000,000 402 57,000,000
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Committee expects to be advised if the Board proposes to deviate in any way from the staff year allocations or by more than five percent from the funding allocations listed above.
AMTRAK REFORM COUNCIL
The Committee recommendation includes an appropriation of $750,000 for the Amtrak Reform Council, the same level as the budget request, and an increase of $300,000 over the fiscal year 1999 enacted level. The appropriation for the Amtrak Reform Council is contained in section 330 of the general provisions.
TITLE III
GENERAL PROVISIONS
(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)
The Committee concurs with the general provisions that apply to the Department of Transportation and related agencies as proposed in the budget with the following changes:
The Committee does not approve the requested deletion of the following sections, all of which were contained in the fiscal year 1999 Department of Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriations Act (section numbers are different):
Section 314 prohibits the use of funds to award multi-year contracts for production end items that include certain specified provisions.
Section 317 prohibits funds to compensate in excess of 320 staff years under the federally funded research and development center contract between the Federal Aviation Administration and the Center for Advanced Aviation Systems Development. The fiscal year 1999 Act prohibited funds to compensate in excess of 350 staff years.
Section 318 reduces funding for activities of the Transportation administrative service center of the Department of Transportation and limits obligation authority of the center to $147,965,000. The fiscal year 1999 Act limited obligation authority of the center to $109,124,000.
Section 320 prohibits funds to be used to prepare, propose, or promulgate any regulation pursuant to title V of the Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act prescribing corporate average fuel economy standards for automobiles as defined in such title, in any model year that differs from standards promulgated for such automobiles prior to enactment of this section.
Section 324 requires compliance with the Buy American Act.
Section 326 prohibits funds to implement or enforce regulations that would result in slot allocations of international operations to any carrier at O'Hare International Airport in excess of the number of slots allocated to and scheduled by that carrier as of October 31, 1993, if that slot is withdrawn from an air carrier under existing regulations.
Section 331 authorizes the Secretary of Transportation to transfer funds appropriated for any office of the Office of the Secretary to any other office of the Office of the Secretary as long as no appropriation shall be increased or decreased by more than 12 per centum.
Section 332 prohibits funds to be used to issue a final standard under docket number NHTSA 98-3945 (relating to State-Issued Drivers Licenses and Comparable Identification Documents (section 656(b) of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Responsibility Act of 1996)).
The Committee included the following general provisions as requested with modifications:
Section 305 prohibits funds in this Act for salaries and expenses of more than 100 political and Presidential appointees in the Department of Transportation and includes a provision that prohibits political and Presidential personnel to be assigned on temporary detail outside the Department of Transportation.
Section 319 allows funds received by the Federal Highway Administration, Federal Transit Administration, and Federal Railroad Administration from States, counties, municipalities, other public authorities, and private sources for expenses incurred for training to be credited to the respective accounts except for State rail safety inspectors.
Section 321 provides that funds received from the sale of data products of the Bureau of Transportation Statistics may be credited to the Federal-aid highways account for reimbursing the Bureau for such expenses and that such funds shall be subject to the obligation limitation for federal-aid highways and highway safety construction.
Section 325 allows receipts collected from users of fitness centers of the Department of Transportation to be available to support the operation and maintenance of those facilities.
Section 327 limits the number of communities in the 48 contiguous States that receive essential air service subsidies.
Section 328 credits to appropriations of the Department of Transportation rebates, refunds, incentive payments, minor fees and other funds received by the Department from travel management centers, charge card programs, the subleasing of building space, and miscellaneous sources. Funds shall remain available until December 31, 2000.
The Committee included the following new provisions:
Section 334 prohibits funds for the aircraft purchase loan guarantee program. The funding prohibition was provided under a separate heading under the Federal Aviation Administration in fiscal year 1999.
Section 335 prohibits funds to carry out the functions and operations of the office of motor carriers within the Federal Highway Administration.
Section 336 provides that grants for operating assistance in fiscal years 1999 and 2000 under section 5307 of title 49, United States Code, for certain urbanized areas may not be more than 80 percent of the net project cost.
Section 337 amends section 130(f) of title 23, United States Code, regarding the federal share for projects for the elimination of hazards of railway-highway crossings.
Section 338 amends section 3030(b) of Public Law 105-178 to authorize the Dane County Corridor-East-West Madison Metropolitan Area project.
Section 339 provides that funds provided for the Griffin light rail project in Public Law 104-205 shall be available for alternative analysis and environmental impact studies for other transit alternatives in the Griffin corridor from Hartford, Connecticut, to Bradley International Airport.
Section 340 amends section 3030(c)(1)(A)(v) of Public Law 105-178 by deleting `light rail' from the authorization for the Hartford City light rail connection.
Section 341 provides that the federal share of projects funded under the over-the-road bus accessibility program shall be 90 percent of the project cost.
Section 342 authorizes the Secretary of Transportation to make expenditures and investments for aviation insurance activities out of the aviation insurance revolving fund and authorized under chapter 443 of title 49, United States Code, within the limits of funds made available pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 44307. This authorization was provided under a separate heading under the Federal Aviation Administration in fiscal year 1999.
Section 343 allows the Federal Aviation Administration to issue recommended airport improvement grants if the office of the Secretary of Transportation has not acted after 15 days of receiving such recommendations.
Section 344 prohibits the expenditure of funds to execute a letter of intent, letter of no prejudice, or full funding grant agreement for the West-East light rail system, or any segment thereof, or a downtown connector in Salt Lake City, Utah.
Section 345 provides that $10,000,000 of the additional funding in this bill is only for the Coast Guard Mackinaw replacement vessel and is available until September 30, 2005.
Section 346 pertains to conveyed lands by the United States to the City of Safford, Arizona, for use by the city for airport purposes.
Section 347 restricts the Coast Guard from expending funds appropriated in this Act for the issuance of a waiver to allow a vessel to be reconfigured for the purpose of extending its scheduled phase-out date under section 3703a of title 46, United States Code (Oil Pollution Act of 1990).
The Committee has not included provisions proposed in the budget:
(1) regarding the distribution of the Federal-aid highways limitation on obligations; (2) prohibiting funds other than those appropriated to the Surface Transportation Board or fees collected by the Board to be used for conducting activities of the Board; (3) allowing transfer authority of not more than $50,000,000 of funds appropriated to make up any shortfall in fees collected for the Essential Air Service Program; (4) amending section 104 of title 23, United States Code, to allow transfers of such sums as necessary to the Department of Transportation Office of Inspector General for highway audits and investigations; and (5) authorizing new railroad safety fees.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES REPORT REQUIREMENTS
The following items are included in accordance with various requirements of the Rules of the House of Representatives:
CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY
Clause 3(d)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives states:
Each report of a committee on a bill or joint resolution of a public character, shall include a statement citing the specific powers granted to the Congress in the Constitution to enact the law proposed by the bill or joint resolution.
The Committee on Appropriations bases its authority to report this legislation from clause 7 of section 9 of Article I of the Constitution of the United States of America which states:
No money shall be drawn from the Treasury but in consequence of Appropriations made by law . . . .
Appropriations contained in this Act are made pursuant to this specific power granted by the Constitution.
TRANSFERS OF FUNDS
Pursuant to clause 3(f)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the following statement is submitted describing the transfers of funds provided in the accompanying bill.
The Committee recommends the following transfers:
Under Coast Guard, Reserve training: Provided, That no more than $23,000,000 of funds made available under this heading may be transferred to Coast Guard `Operating expenses' or otherwise made available to reimburse the Coast Guard for financial support of the Coast Guard Reserve.
Under Federal Transit Administration, Administrative expenses: Provided further, That of the funds in this Act available for the execution of contracts under section 5327(c) of title 49, United States Code, $800,000 shall be transferred to the Department of Transportation Inspector General for costs associated with the audit and review of new fixed guideway systems.
Under the general provisions:
Sec. 316. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any funds appropriated before October 1, 1999, under chapter 53 of title 49 U.S.C., that remain available for expenditure may be transferred to and administered under the most recent appropriation heading for any such section.
Sec. 331. The Secretary of Transportation is authorized to transfer funds for any office of the Office of the Secretary to any other office of the Office of the Secretary: Provided, That no appropriation shall be increased or decreased by more than 12 per centum by all such transfers.
COMPLIANCE WITH RULE XIII, CL. 3(E) (RAMSEYER RULE)
- In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new matter is printed in italic, existing law in which no change is proposed is shown in roman):
SECTION 110 OF THE ARCTIC RESEARCH AND POLICY ACT OF 1984
COORDINATION AND REVIEW OF BUDGET REQUESTS
- SEC. 110. (a) * * *
- (b)(1) * * *
- (2) The Office of Management and Budget shall seek to facilitate planning for the design, procurement, maintenance, deployment, and operations of icebreakers needed to provide a platform for Arctic research [Struck out->]
[ by allocating all funds necessary to support icebreaking operations, except for recurring incremental costs associated with specific projects, to the Coast Guard ][<-Struck out] .-
SECTION 312 OF THE ARCTIC MARINE LIVING RESOURCES CONVENTION ACT OF 1984
SEC. 312. FEDERAL AGENCY COOPERATION.
- (a) * * *
* * * * * * *
- [Struck out->]
[ (c) ICEBREAKING- The Department of Transportation shall facilitate planning for the design, procurement, maintenance, deployment, and operation of icebreakers needed to provide a platform for Antarctic research. All funds necessary to support icebreaking operations, except for recurring incremental costs associated with specific projects, shall be allocated to the United States Coast Guard. ][<-Struck out]-
TRANSPORTATION EQUITY ACT FOR THE 21ST CENTURY
* * * * * * *
TITLE III--FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION PROGRAMS
* * * * * * *
SEC. 3027. APPORTIONMENT OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR FORMULA GRANTS.
- (a) * * *
* * * * * * *
- `(e) Government Share for Operating Assistance to Certain Smaller Urbanized Areas- Notwithstanding 49 U.S.C. 5307(e), a grant of the Government for operating expenses of a project under 49 U.S.C. 5307(b) in fiscal years 1999 and 2000 to any recipient that is providing transit services in an urbanized area with a population between 128,000 and 128,200, as determined in the 1990 census, and that had adopted a five-year transit plan before September 1, 1998, may not be more than 80 percent of the net project cost.'.
* * * * * * *
SEC. 3030. PROJECTS FOR NEW FIXED GUIDEWAY SYSTEMS AND EXTENSIONS TO EXISTING SYSTEMS.
- (a) * * *
- (b) ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS AND PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING- The following projects are authorized for alternatives analysis and preliminary engineering for fiscal years 1998 through 2003 under section 5309(m)(1)(B) of title 49, United States Code:
- (1) Atlanta--Georgia 400 Multimodal Corridor.
* * * * * * *
- (71) Dane County Corridor--East-West Madison Metropolitan Area.
- (c) PROJECT AUTHORIZATIONS-
- (1) IN GENERAL- Of the total amount made available by or authorized under section 5338(b) of title 49, United States Code, to carry out section 5309(m)(1)(B) for fiscal years 1998 through 2003:
- (A) $3,000,000,000 shall be available for the following projects (even if the project is not listed in subsection (a) or (b)):
- (i) * * *
* * * * * * *
- (v) Hartford City [Struck out->]
[ Light Rail ][<-Struck out] Connection to Central Business District, $33,000,000.* * * * * * *
-
SECTION 130 OF TITLE 23, UNITED STATES CODE
Sec. 130. Railway-highway crossings
- (a) * * *
* * * * * * *
- (f) APPORTIONMENT- Twenty-five percent of the funds authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section shall be apportioned to the States in the same manner as sums are apportioned under section 104(b)(2) of this title, 25 percent of such funds shall be apportioned to the States in the same manner as sums are apportioned under section 104(b)(6) of this title, and 50 percent of such funds shall be apportioned to the States in the ratio that total railway-highway crossings in each State bears to the total of such crossings in all States. The Federal share payable on account of any project financed with funds authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section shall be [Struck out->]
[ 90 ][<-Struck out] 100 percent of the cost thereof.* * * * * * *
CHANGES IN THE APPLICATION OF EXISTING LAW
Pursuant to clause 3(f)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the following statements are submitted describing the effect of provisions in the accompanying bill which directly or indirectly change the application of existing law.
The bill provides that appropriations shall remain available for more than one year for a number of programs for which the basic authorizing legislation does not explicitly authorize such extended availability.
The bill includes limitations on official entertainment, reception and representation expenses for the Secretary of Transportation and the National Transportation Safety Board. Similar provisions have appeared in many previous appropriations Acts.
The bill includes a number of limitations on the purchase of automobiles, motorcycles, or office furnishings. Similar limitations have appeared in many previous appropriations Acts.
Language is included in several instances permitting certain funds to be credited to the appropriations recommended.
Language is included under Office of the Secretary, `Assistant Secretary for Aviation and International Affairs,' which would allow crediting the account with up to $1,250,000 in user fees.
Language is included that limits operating costs and capital outlays of the Transportation Administrative Service Center of the Department of Transportation and limits special assessments or reimbursable agreements levied against any program, project or activity funded in this Act to only those assessments or reimbursable agreements that are presented to and approved by the House and Senate Appropriations Committees.
Language is included under the Coast Guard, `Operating expenses' which specifies that none of the funds appropriated shall be available for pay or administrative expenses in connection with shipping commissioners.
Language is included under the Coast Guard, `Operating expenses' that limits the use of funds for yacht documentation to the amount of fees collected from yacht owners.
Language is included under the Coast Guard, `Operating expenses' that specifies that the Commandant shall reduce both military and civilian employment levels to comply with Executive Order No. 12839.
Language is included under the Coast Guard, `Operating expenses' that prohibits funds to plan, finalize, or implement any regulation that would promulgate new maritime user fees not specifically authorized by law after the date of enactment of this Act.
Language is included under the Coast Guard, `Acquisition, construction, and improvements' that credits funds from the disposal of surplus real property by sale or lease.
Language is included under the Coast Guard, `Acquisition, construction, and improvements' that requires the Secretary of Transportation to transmit a comprehensive capital investment plan for the United States Coast Guard.
Language is included under Coast Guard, `Reserve training' that limits funds available for transfer to `Operating expenses' to no more than $23,000,000 to reimburse the Coast Guard for financial support of the Coast Guard Reserve.
Language is included under Coast Guard, `Reserve training' that prohibits funds by the Coast Guard to assess direct charges on the Coast Guard Reserves for items or activities which were not so charged during fiscal year 1997.
Language is included under the Coast Guard, `Research, development, test, and evaluation' that credits funds received from state and local governments and other entities for expenses incurred for research, development, testing, and evaluation.
Language is included under the Federal Aviation Administration, `Operations,' that prohibits funds to plan, finalize, or implement any regulation that would promulgate new aviation user fees no specifically authorized by law.
Language is included under the Federal Aviation Administration, `Operations,' that provides $5,000,000 for the contract tower cost-sharing program and $600,000 for the Centennial of Flight Commission.
Language is included under the Federal Aviation Administration, `Operations,' permitting the use of funds to enter into a grant agreement with a nonprofit standard-setting organization to develop aviation safety standards.
Language is included under the Federal Aviation Administration, `Operations' that prohibits the use of funds for new applicants of the second career training program.
Language is included under the Federal Aviation Administration, `Operations' that prohibits the use of funds for premium pay unless an employee actually performed work during the time corresponding to the premium pay.
Language is included under the Federal Aviation Administration, `Operations' that prohibits funds from being used to operate a manned auxiliary flight service station in the contiguous United States.
Language is included under the Federal Aviation Administration, `Operations' that limits FAA's contribution to the Transportation Administrative Service Center, and prohibits funds for conducting and coordinating activities on aeronautical charting and cartography through the Center.
Language is included under Federal Aviation Administration, `Operations' that prohibits multiyear leases greater than five years in length or greater than $100,000,000 unless specifically authorized and contingent liabilities fully funded.
Language is included under Federal Aviation Administration, `Operations' that prohibits funds for FAA to sign a lease for satellite services related to the global positioning system wide area augmentation system until the FAA administrator certifies in writing that such lease will result in the lowest overall cost to the agency.
Language is included under Federal Aviation Administration, `Facilities and equipment' that allows certain funds received for expenses incurred in the establishment and modernization of air navigation facilities to be credited to the account.
Language is included under Federal Aviation Administration, `Facilities and equipment' that requires the Secretary of Transportation to transmit a comprehensive capital investment plan for the Federal Aviation Administration.
Language included under Federal Aviation Administration, `Facilities and Equipment' that prohibits the Federal Aviation Administration from entering into a capital lease agreement unless appropriations have been provided to fully cover the Federal Government's contingent liabilities at the time the lease agreement is signed.
Language is included under Federal Aviation Administration, `Research, engineering, and development,' that allows certain funds received for expenses incurred in research, engineering and development to be credited to the account.
The bill includes a limitation on administrative expenses and transportation research of the Federal Highway Administration.
Language is included under National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, `Operations and research' prohibiting the planning or implementation of any rulemaking on labeling passenger car tires for low rolling resistance.
Language is included under National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, `Highway traffic safety grants' limiting obligations for certain safety grant programs.
Language is included under Federal Railroad Administration, `Safety and Operations' authorizing the Secretary to receive payments from the Union Station Redevelopment Corporation, credit them to the appropriation charged with the first deed of trust, and make payments on the first deed of trust.
Language is included authorizing the Secretary to issue fund anticipation notes necessary to pay obligations under sections 511 through 513 of the Railroad Revitalization and Regulatory Reform Act.
Language is included under Federal Railroad Administration, `Rhode Island rail development' that specifies that the federal contribution shall be matched on a dollar-for-dollar basis.
Language is included under Federal Transit Administration, `Administrative expenses' that transfers funds to the Inspector General for audit and review of new fixed guideway systems.
Language is included under Federal Transit Administration, `Capital Investment Grants,' specifying the distribution of funds for new fixed guideway systems in this Act.
Language is included under Federal Transit Administration, `Capital Investment Grants, Olympic transportation infrastructure investments' that specifies that funds shall be allocated by the Secretary of Transportation based on the Salt Lake City 2002 Winter Olympic Games approved transportation management plan and prohibits funds for the Salt Lake City west-east light rail project or a downtown connector in Salt Lake City, Utah.
Language is included under Research and Special Programs Administration, `Research and special programs,' which would allow up to $1,200,000 in fees collected under 49 U.S.C. 5108(g) to be deposited in the general fund of the Treasury as offsetting receipts.
Language is included under Research and Special Programs Administration, `Research and special programs,' that credits certain funds received for expenses incurred for training and other activities.
Language is included under Research and Special Programs Administration, `Pipeline safety' that allows up to $1,300,000 for one-call notification grants, emergency notification, damage prevention and public education activities to be funded from amounts previously collected and held in a reserve account.
Language is included under Research and Special Programs Administration, `Emergency preparedness grants,' specifying the Secretary of Transportation or his designee may obligate funds provided under this head.
Language is included under Surface Transportation Board, `Salaries and expenses' allowing the collection of $1,600,000 in fees established by the Chairman of the Surface Transportation Board; and providing that the sum appropriated from the general fund shall be reduced on a dollar-for-dollar basis as such fees are received.
Language is included under `Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board, Salaries and expenses,' that provides that funds received for publications and training may be credited to the appropriation.
The bill contains a number of general provisions that place limitations or funding prohibitions on the use of funds in the bill and which might, under some circumstances, be construed as changing the application of existing law.
The bill contains a number of general provisions that allow for the redistribution of previously appropriated funds.
Section 308 authorizes the Secretary of Transportation to enter into grants, cooperative agreements, and other transactions relative to the Technology Reinvestment Project and provides that such authority may be exercised without regard to section 3324 of title 31, United States Code.
Section 313 allows airports to transfer to the Federal Aviation Administration instrument landing systems which conform to FAA specifications and the purchase of such equipment was assisted by a federal airport aid program.
Section 318 reduced funding for activities of the transportation administrative service center of the Department of Transportation and limits obligation authority of the center to $147,965,000.
Section 319 provides that funds received for training from States, counties, municipalities, other public authorities, and private sources by the Federal Highway Administration, Federal Transit Administration, and Federal Railroad Administration to be credited to each respective agency except for State rail safety inspectors participating in training pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 20105.
Section 320 prohibits funds to be used to prepare, propose, or promulgate any rule under title V of the Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act prescribing corporate average fuel economy standards for automobiles.
Section 321 allows funds received by the Bureau of Transportation Statistics from the sale of data products be credited to the Federal-aid highways account for the purpose of reimbursing the Bureau for such expenses.
Section 322 prohibits funds for any type of training which: (a) does not meet needs for knowledge, skills, and abilities bearing directly on the performance of official duties; (b) could be highly stressful or emotional to the students; (c) does not provide prior notification of content and methods to be used during the training; (d) contains any religious concepts or ideas; (e) attempts to modify a person's values or lifestyle; or (f) is for AIDS awareness training, except for raising awareness of medical ramifications of AIDS and workplace rights.
Section 325 allows receipts, in amounts determined by the Secretary, collected from users of Department of Transportation fitness centers to be available to support the operation and maintenance of those facilities.
Section 327 limits the number of communities that receive essential air service funding.
Section 328 credits to appropriations of the Department of Transportation rebates, refunds, incentive payments, minor fees and other funds received by the Department from travel management centers, charge card programs, the subleasing of building space, and miscellaneous sources.
Section 329 authorizes the Secretary of Transportation to allow issuers to redeem or repurchase preferred stock sold to the Department of Transportation.
Section 333 amends the Arctic Research and Policy Act of 1984 and the Arctic Marine Living Resources Convention Act of 1984 as it pertains to Coast Guard icebreaking operations.
Section 334 prohibits funds for aircraft purchase loan guarantees.
Section 335 prohibits funds to carry out the functions and operations of the Office of motor carriers within the Federal Highway Administration.
Section 336 provides that grants for operating assistance in fiscal years 1999 and 2000 under section 5307 of title 49, United States Code, for certain urbanized areas may not be more than 80 percent of the net project cost.
Section 337 amends section 130(f) of title 23, United States Code, regarding the federal share for projects for the elimination of hazards of railway-highway crossings.
Section 338 amends section 3030(b) of Public Law 105-178 to authorize the Dane County Corridor--East-West Madison Metropolitan Area project.
Section 339 provides that funds provided for the Griffin light rail project in Public Law 104-205 shall be available for alternative analysis and environmental impact studies for other transit alternatives in the Griffin corridor from Hartford, Connecticut, to Bradley International Airport.
Section 340 amends section 3030(c)(1)(A)(v) of Public Law 105-178 by deleting `light rail' from the authorization for the Hartford City light rail connection.
Section 341 provides that the federal share of projects funded under the over-the-road bus accessibility program shall be 90 percent of the project cost.
Section 342 authorizes the Secretary of Transportation to make expenditures and investments for aviation insurance activities out of the aviation insurance revolving fund and authorized under chapter 443 of title 49, United States Code, within the limits of funds made available pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 44307.
Section 343 allows the Federal Aviation Administration to issue recommended airport improvement grants if the Secretary of Transportation has not acted after 15 days of receiving such recommendations.
Section 346 provides that the Secretary of Transportation may waive any term contained in the deed of conveyance dated April 3, 1956, as it pertains to the city of Safford, Arizona, use of conveyed land for airport purposes as long as such waiver does not result in the closure of an airport.
Section 347 prohibits the Coast Guard from expending funds appropriated in this Act to review or issue a waiver for a vessel deemed to be equipped with a double bottom or double sides.
APPROPRIATIONS NOT AUTHORIZED BY LAW
Pursuant to clause 3(f)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the following lists the agencies in the accompanying bill which contain appropriations that are not authorized by law:
United States Coast Guard
Federal Aviation Administration
Federal Railroad Administration
Research and Special Programs Administration
Surface Transportation Board
COMPARISON WITH THE BUDGET RESOLUTION
Clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives requires an explanation of compliance with section 308(a)(1)(A) of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-344), as amended, which requires that the report accompanying a bill providing new budget authority contain a statement detailing how that authority compares with the reports submitted under section 302 of the Act for the most recently agreed to concurrent resolution on the budget for the fiscal year from the Committee's section 302(a) allocation. This information follows:
[In millions of dollars]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
302(b) allocation This bill
Budget authority Outlays Budget authority Outlays
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Discretionary 1 $12,700 $43,544 $12,700 $43,544
Mandatory 721 717 721 717
Total 13,421 44,261 13,421 44,261
--------------------------------------------------------------------
The bill provides new spending authority as defined under section 401(c)(2) of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-344), as amended, as follows:
Under Federal Railroad Administration, Railroad rehabilitation and improvement program, authority is provided to issue notes necessary to pay obligations under section 511 through 513 of the Railroad Revitalization and Regulatory Reform Act. This provision has been included at the request of the administration because the government's financial obligations under this program are difficult to determine in advance and may require immediate expenditures of funds. The Committee has received no indication to date that this authority will be used in fiscal year 2000. Similar provisions have been included in many previous appropriations Acts.
FIVE-YEAR OUTLAY PROJECTIONS
In compliance with section 308(a)(1)(B) of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-344), as amended, the following table contains five-year projections associated with the budget authority provided in the accompanying bill as provided to the Committee by the Congressional Budget Office:
[In millions of dollars]
--------------------------------
--------------------------------
Budget authority $14,580
Outlays:
2000 1 18,172
2001 16,715
2002 7,531
2003 3,516
2004 and future years 3,588
--------------------------------
FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS
In accordance with section 308(a)(1)(C) of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-344), as amended, the Congressional Budget Office has provided the following estimates of new budget authority and outlays provided by the accompanying bill for financial assistance to state and local governments:
[In millions of dollars]
--------------------------------
--------------------------------
Budget authority $1,156
Fiscal year 2000 outlays 8,381
--------------------------------
RESCISSIONS
Pursuant to clause 3(f)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the following table is submitted describing the rescissions recommended in the accompanying bill:
No rescissions are recommended in this bill.
FULL COMMITTEE VOTES
Pursuant to the provisions of clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the results of each rollcall vote on an amendment or on the motion to report, together with the names of those voting for and those voting against, are printed below:
There were no rollcall votes.
|
|
|
|
|
| 1 of 1 |
